Don-n-ABQ

Cobra Electronics: Risk and Reward in the Spotlight

PS: That doesn't mean that Timothy Stabosz can't manipulate this stock up to $3'ish, but that has nothing to do with the fundamentals of the company.

Cobra Electronics: Risk and Reward in the Spotlight

Breaker, breaker, good buddy,

This was a value play, but you already did that with the $1.10 to $1.60-1.70 move.

You said: "The company has a strong presence in the niche market of professional drivers, and it possibly would be worth more as an acquisition than it is as an independent company."

But how do they get beyond that "niche market"?

And, what do they have that a competitor couldn't replicate without buying the company other than the name and logo?

These guys are stuck in that "niche market."

What is going to break them out to a new market? What will propel them to new revenues? I don't see this agreement with a "major manufacturer of mobile phone and navigation products to include the AURA data-base" adding anything significant to either the top or bottom line.

They need something new, something a new "niche market" thinks is hip. Something that is hard to get somewhere else.

So, unless Will Smith is playing the part of "Bandit" and James Gandolfini is "Smokey Bear" (but this time he is evil and not funny) in the big-blockbuster remake of Smokey and the Bandit, this time filmed Siberia and they are hauling vodka; and Brad Pitt, Angela Jolee, and Tommy Lee Jones are doing the major remake of Convoy, I have to look somewhere else.

Until I see something new and exciting, this company is 10-100.

Buy Shares of Imaging3 in Anticipation of Future FDA Approval

1) Regulatory sites:
A) Edgar in the U.S.
edgar.sec.gov/edgar/se...
B) Sedar in Canada
www.sedar.com/search/s...
C) ASIC in Australia
www.search.asic.gov.au...
D) UKLA (FSA) in the U.K.
www.fsa.gov.uk/ukla/of...
E) other:
International Organization of Securities Commissions
www.iosco.org/lists/

2) Company websites and conference calls

3) Industry specific websites and publications

4) Equity conferences

5) Compare thesis with top analysts


On Nov 17 03:24 PM b3rkut wrote:

> so other where do u get your analysis info from?

Buy Shares of Imaging3 in Anticipation of Future FDA Approval

If you listen to anybody who uses Yahoo! Finance (or Google Finance, AOL Finance, etc., etc.,) to get data from, well, they are either trying to spin something or their due-diligence is not worth listening too.

I can look at almost any stock on these services, especially small and mid-caps, and find an error within about 10 minutes or less. Many of them get their data dump from the same vendors, like Reuters, so if the data service provider (DSP) enters the wrong number (hasn't updated) it is wrong on many of these services.

This statement says it all:

"I usually do not buy penny stocks due to their vulnerability to manipulation etc."

Sounds like somebody is trying to sell their position doesn't it?

If you people are willing to buy on this, have I got a deal for you...

Taiwan Semiconductor and Brocade Are on Sale

Yes, back on Mar. 1 of this year Intel contracted TSMC to build the ATOM, which was a big move for Intel because they normally don't outsource. It signaled a new move for Intel.

GlobalFoundries (Advanced Technology Investment Co., or ATIC) says they are going after TSMC over the next few years, so we will see how TSMC responds.

Thinning margins will need to offset with more volume, manufacturing improvements, and new products.



On Nov 16 10:20 AM Old Trader wrote:

> Despite the fact that its products are being reduced to almost commodity
> status, I understand that TSM is THE low cost producer of chips of
> various types, which is a heck of a moat. I also seem to recall they
> entered some sort of venture with INTC, a few months back.

Time for the U.S. Economy to Reindustrialize

Who is "Mr. Armstrong"?


On Nov 15 10:32 AM Mrudula Shah wrote:

> A very good, appropriate and timely thought expressed by Mr. Armstrong,
> which with a bit more sophistication can be good enough to be published
> in magazines like Forbes and The Economist. This is what we need
> to do. Exactly how will be the next step to think and implement.

Taiwan Semiconductor and Brocade Are on Sale

UBS downgraded TSM on Oct. 7 and MorganStanley SB did the same on Nov. 3. (Of course they may have been just looking to flip their inventory from $10'ish to $9'ish.)

Even the Chairman, the CEO, and the predisdent of TSMC have said that their legacy business is going to slow down in the coming years. They have stated that their future lies with solar cells and LEDs.

Maybe Windows 7 and the expected capex in corporate spending for hardware will give the company a nice boost in the short term?

I hope they make an announcement soon about solar and LED, if they could do to those two markets what they have done in their standard integrated circuits wafer business, that would be something.

(Long TSM)

Cramer's Mad Money - Five Safety Stocks (10/29/09)

RE: "However, some legislators are starting to get the message about natural gas. Oklahoma Congressman Dan Boren (Democrat)..."

That is like saying: "A Colombian politician takes a bribe from the cocaine cartel."

You can't get elected in Oklahoma if you don't believe in natural gas.

Things will only change for natural gas when the congressmen and woman from New York and California get on board. Two years ago this would have been impossible, but now the Marcellus Shale discovery might get New York, Pennsylvania and Ohio on board, and California's budget problem and all the NG in the Santa Barbara Channel might get them on board.

If the federal government and California opened up the SB Channel, the state of California could probably obtain $500 billion in financing against leases and royalties payments.

But, that probably won't happen unless we are both in a recession and the price of oil is $150.00 per-barrel and NG is $13.00...

The Secret Paulson-Goldman Meeting

1) Robert E. Rubin, before his government service, he spent 26 years at Goldman Sachs.

2) Lawrence H. Summers, "Harvard academic"

3) Paul O'Neill was chairman of the RAND Corporation,

4) Alan Greenspan disciple of Ayn Rand

5) John W. Snow chairman of Cerberus Capital Management.

6) Henry Paulson at Goldman Sachs for 32 years.

7) Paul Volcker, Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Chase Manhattan Bank.

8) Timothy Geithner, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, He was Under Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs (1998–2001) under Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers. Summers was his mentor, but other sources call him a Rubin protégé.

Until this (if ever) "New York City/Harvard" chain is broken, nothing will change.

We need a man from middle-America, a Warren Buffett (Warren are you sure you can't do both jobs?), a banker from middle-America who knows what it is like to lend money to a farmer, a small auto repair shop, a small grocery store, etc. Maybe a banker from the Saint Louis or Minneapolis Fed?

Until we hire bankers from middle-America who lend money to people who actually make things or provide a service that involves physical labor (and not just push paper credit default swaps around) I see no change in policy.

Okay, I am going to start holding my breath now...

IPO Windfall Coming for Blackstone Group?

Could you list the IPOs?

Also, I wonder that because BX is public, and thus must make earnings, that they will harvest investments before they are really ready or the timing is more optimal? They may make some decisions based on their stock price and not what might be best for the individual portfolio company?

Cramer's Stop Trading! Costco Comes Back (10/7/09)

The reason COP went up was because they said that they were going to sell $10 billion in assets and cut the exploration and capital expenditures budget to pay down debt. Their are trying to fix their balance sheet, which is not as attractive as the other big boys. The increase in the dividend is to retain investors from fleeing to higher quality and maybe attract some new investors looking for dividend yield.

Yield investors are usually longer term investors, so the company is trying to attract long term investors who want a better balance sheet, but a slower growth rate (they will grow slower by giving up some of their assets and cap-ex budget).


On Oct 08 08:35 AM CFO wrote:

> COP already started such a massive cost & asset reduction plan.
> Wonder what is the logic behind dividend increase?

Cramer's Stop Trading! The Best Strategy on Earth (10/9/09)

If the Middle-Eastern SWFs buy up the top 10 American banks (or even 25%-40% of each), then the banks lend money, we spend the money, which means their return comes back to them in the form of oil consumption.

It is called "priming the pump" and it is a great idea (short term). The price of oil goes through the roof, the banks rally from the earnings they make from fees, SWFs make money off of the fees and then the oil. They get a double-barreled blast of windfall.

Of course, somewhere down the road, we still have to go to rehab. This is the same business model of the crack dealer giving away the first few bags to the customer for free. It only prolongs the inevitable of actually fixing the problem and getting help. That means less "toys" and more savings.

But, by then the markets rally for the next ten years and the SWFs and Cramer make an absolute ton of money.

Hey man, need a fix?

How Much Natural Gas Remains in the USA?

A couple more thoughts:

1) Lets get large government (federal, state, county, and city) fleets to mandate the use of CNG and LNG with electric first before looking at the general public's use of it. It is easier to install the fueling apparatus at a government yard than it will be for the retail consumer, both physically and through all of the red tape and discussions that it will cause. Then move to very large commercial fleets, like UPS and FedEx. Do this in steps please.

2) If you listen to or quote T. Boone Pickens, remember where he is coming from. He is self-serving and wants the price of NG to go to $25.00. If he didn't have an interest in NG or wind or water, I might take him more seriously. But, lets face it, he wants to make money, lots of it. And that is fine, but don't forget that part of it.

How Much Natural Gas Remains in the USA?

Are you sure that is what you want?

At $2.00 to $3.00 do we really want the District of Columbia opening up new areas of drilling?

I bet if you ask guys like Pickens they might say something different right now?

Even if Washington said that drilling would be allowed in offshore Carolina, at this price, would anybody do it?

Shouldn't we focus on demand right now and not supply?


On Oct 05 09:43 PM OilFinder wrote:

>Keep your fingers crossed that Obama and Salizer allow drilling off the coast of the Carolinas. I bet there's lots of goodies down there.

How Much Natural Gas Remains in the USA?

Mark,

How much did that well cost to drill and maintain?

How much would it cost to drill that well today?

I already know the answers to these questions, but you apparently do not. This well was very profitable. Check it out and get back to the readers.

Also, some people have already touched on this: I am more interested in the price at which it is profitable to explore for and produce natural gas. You left that out of your article and to me, it is the most important part. If some of these unproven and undiscovered reserves cost X, Y, and Z, and we are at A, this needs to be taken into account.

We need an article that shows how of the much of the unproven and undiscovered NG is profitable at $2.50, $5.00, $10.00, and $20.00. That would really be an article that is helpful.

In searching the Internet I came across a 2008 article by Allen Brooks, Managing Director of Parks Paton Hoepfl & Brown. In this article he tries to compare rig counts from the 1950s, 1970s, and 2000s. I never finished reading the article because I instantly found a hole in his thesis large enough to park a rig on:

You can't compare apples-to-apples rigs of 2009 with those of 1949 or even 1979.

We will never see the rig count numbers of the 1950s because one rig now can out drill and be moved faster than 10 of 1955. Mr. Brooks never even brings up the differences in technology that have occurred over the years. When comparing the past, people like Mr. Brooks and you, must take into account the changes that have occurred over the intervening period. There are things being done with drilling now that would have been laughed at in 1955 or even 1985 (especially offshore).

But, back to my other thought: How much will it cost to get it out of the ground and to my house. That is what I really want to know.


On Oct 04 12:54 PM Mark Anthony wrote:

> "In 1969 GHK, and its partners drilled a well over 24,000 feet deep
> in the Anadarko Basin. The well has produced 21 Bcf of natural gas
> (the equivalent of 3.6 million barrels of oil) and is still producing
> today. "
>
> That's an very expensive well to drill, 24000 feet deep. Over the
> 40 years what investment return did it bring to the investor? 21
> BCF natural gas is 21 million TCF, at roughly $2 or less per TCF
> averaged over the past 40 years, it brings in a revenue of $42M.
> The oil equivalent of 3.6M barrel, if averaged at about $15 per barrel
> in the 40 years, is roughly $54M. The initial drilling cost, inflation
> adjusted, plus the maintenance and operation cost over the 40 years,
> must far exceed the product revenue over the 40 years. This is an
> absolutely losing investment.