Peter W's Comments

Zinc Producer Horsehead Appears Very Undervalued

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:43:17 -0400

I applaud the young man's effort but simply stating the equity is undervalued and citing a few simple calculations from the balance sheet is NOT evidence of an undervalued company. There's a lot of sloppy analysis done in the investing world and this is more evidence of it. If the author wants to be taken seriously, he will explain whether he used an intrinsic or relative valuation technique and then detail what he feels to be the most important assumptions in his valuation. As an analyst at a hedge fund, if this was my pitch to the PM I'd get fired.

Zinc Producer Horsehead Appears Very Undervalued

Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:19:14 -0400

Interesting idea but if the company is not earning a positive spread on its projects over its cost of capital the market may have the proper valuation. Based on my research, the market heavily discounts cash when it believes management will go on destroying shareholder value.

What are your estimates for ZINC's return on capital and cost of capital and how are you computing them?

Fannie & Freddie Are Here to Stay

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:32:58 -0400

"A lesson I learned from the Bear Stearns (BSC) fallout was that if you get into a stock when it hits rock-bottom, your investment can only go up. While I was a little late with the Bear Stearns opportunity (when it briefly traded at $2 and change); I see a potential opportunity for me (and like minded investors) to make good on the now notorious: Freddie and Fannie."

All I can say is hahahaha. Stockerati once again did not do his homework and anyone listening to him lost their shirt.

It's nice to see he stopped posting garbage here.

Apple Is Biting Off More Than It Can Chew

Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:07:06 -0400

Hilarious, just another typical childish remark from a hack analyst. The only reason I come on SA now is to read your "analysis." Since you have been so "respectful" of my feedback, I continue to provide it. I'm simply pointing out how shallow/worthless your analysis is. It's nice to see plenty of others are seeing it as well.

"I do wonder what people to think of" <-- NICE grammar

Looking forward to your valuation of Apple

Apple Is Biting Off More Than It Can Chew

Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:42:55 -0400

I"m with KenC, mollytjm, Brewer (especially him), bsclatza, digivision, 123pescao, scooter_smd, Tommo_UK & aaplnow.

Looks like I'm not the only one who can't stand this blogger. I'm really looking forward to see his "analysis" of Apple equity. Another cut/paste along with an outlandish price target he can't defend perhaps?

Advanced Battery Technologies: A Steal of a Stock

Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:03:17 -0400

I hold an MBA from a top 10 B-School and work as an equity analyst for a ~$1B HF. I have learned from world-class professors as well as portfolio managers with decades of experience. You're a hack investor pretending to the job of an equity analyst.

I have done hundreds of valuations which involve a little more than simply cut/paste my "analysis." I back up my conclusions with realistic assumptions through thorough due diligence. A DCF valuation is the model which attempts to uncover intrinsic value, so your claim of using a "variant of intrinsic value and DCF analysis" is hilarious.

Additionally, you claim to have a proprietary method for evaluating stocks but in your bio you note, "He believes in complete TRANSPARENCY and shares all his research and conclusions with the world" What a contradiction you are. Someone who has never worked in the investment management wants his readers to assume he has an expertise in valuation but refuses to share his most basic assumptions.

Advanced Battery Technologies: A Steal of a Stock

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:40:07 -0400

Answer the question. You're presenting this stock as a steal based upon a "fair value" of $9-$13, a possible 100%+ return. It's reasonable that you should be able to back up how you calculated that number. All I'm asking is that you share how you got that number.

If you consider that heckling then you should stop putting out "fair value" you can not back up.

Advanced Battery Technologies: A Steal of a Stock

Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:22:25 -0400

I think the idea is interesting but could any of you (Stockerati preferred) actually back-up your idea with numbers? What basic assumptions are you making going forward to value this company? What model or reasonable multiple backs up such a bullish price target? Why is the market so far off on the value of this company?

Simply cut/pasting the company profile and financials does not qualify as analysis.

Lawrence Roulston: Gold Prices Will Trend Higher

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:11:56 -0400

Excellent insights, great interview!

4 Exceptional Stocks Defying the Downturn

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:08:00 -0400

So you ran a screener which anyone could run and now you have four ideas that have outperformed looking back. Two ideas which are essentially trading at their all-time highs. Simply b/c these companies have outperformed in the past means nothing. Paultaut was right, you need to be looking forward rather than running basic screens.
No one should be celebrating you pointing out stocks that have likely already made their run.

Advanced Battery Technologies: A Steal of a Stock

Mon, 14 Jul 2008 11:36:50 -0400

Could you share with us what valuation method you are using to calculate your "fair value" of $9-$13?

5 Sectors That Do Well in a Shrinking Economy

Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:50:55 -0400

I don't write articles. I perform real analysis with real numbers for a fund. If you ever write anything that is more than simpleton assertions I will be shocked.

For example, this is how real analysts do their homework. You could have gone back to past recessions and demonstrated using real numbers how those sectors you've highlighted have historically outperformed the market. Furthermore, you could've done some simple relative value analysis (PE, EV/EBTIDA, Cash Flow multiples, I'm sure I've already lost you) and shown the particular equities you've highlighted are undervalued.

But that would have required real analysis, something I'm sure you are in capable of. Go on making assertions without any backing and posting childish responses, I'm sure you're going to have a long career as a blogger.

Is Lundin Mining Misunderstood?

Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:41:26 -0400

Just a quick valuation question. You value the current operating assets at $10/share, could you briefly explain how you get that number? Are you using an intrinsic (DCF, NAV) or relative value?

Thanks

Gold's Golden Run All Set to Continue

Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:40:37 -0400

Stockerati makes a number of assertions with zero analysis. Speculators are the reason for the run-up in crude? Have you taken a look at the COT? Non-commercials are nowhere near record longs. Oil is in a bubble but will settle in the $125-$140 range? What? If you think there's a bubble you should feel oil is overvalued. Just claiming inflation is rampant means nothing to readers. Back up your assertions with some numbers. "Historically, whenever the market is down investors turn to gold to secure their investments" This is factually wrong.