Though analysts are impressed with Microsoft Surface (MSFT +3.7%), few see it as a huge threat to the iPad (AAPL +0.6%). Jefferies' Peter Misek thinks Microsoft will need to "significantly undercut" the iPad on pricing (something that's unlikely given its specs) to be competitive, and argues the iPad's 225K+ apps set it apart. However, Forrester's David Johnson believes Windows RT's management features, user interface, and Office support will appeal to enterprise users. (more) [View news story]
I intend to buy a Surface tablet about 6 to 12 months after it becomes available to use side-by-side with my BlackBerry Playbook. I want to make sure all the kinks have been ironed out before buying. It looks pretty good especially with the keyboard cover, I hate the way other tablets use on-screen keyboards to input whatever you need to type in. It just feel very un-natural to me. I started out using Apple II's in the early 1980s but switch to IBM PC's when that became available. I have never looked back ever since and do not like Apple and all the hype that goes with it at all.
And by the way, where I live we have great and highly profitable publicly listed companies that pay out 40% to 60% of their net annual profits in dividends to shareholders, and there are no capital gains tax and limited dividend tax to pay to the government. North American companies will do well if they emulate the practice of great companies in our part of the world in terms of sharing profits with shareholders and not only for company officers and other employees. After all, it is the shareholders who invested their money and take the risks. If the prevailing cash dividend tax is high then pay dividends in shares by splitting the shares every year or every other year. Share buybacks is a joke as far as I am concerned and serves only to cover up the share options that are being given away for free to company officers and employees.
Silver Wheaton: This $25 Stock Will Boost Your Portfolio Now [View article]
Wait until SLW's price falls below $20 and we shall revisit the stock. The direction of the prices of gold and silver is down at the moment and for the foreseeable future.
Westport Innovations: The Capital Efficient Business Model, Part 2 [View article]
A nicely written piece on WPRT but I disagree with the so-called capital-efficient business model as described. It may apply to electronics firms like Apple and others who operates as "fabless" manufacturers by sub-contracting out all their manufacturing to others while keeping the design-control functions. Westinghouse Electric Co. is a prime example of a once-mighty electric machinery manufacturer that decided to outsource much of their manufacturing activites to other suppliers and thus became a "shell" company that concentrated itself in design control and marketing activities. Today, Westinghouse Electric Co. is extinct as an electirc machinery company.
WPRT does not operate like Apple or Coca-Cola. WPRT designs natural gas fuel systems around other manufacturers' engines and either produce these additional components themselves or procure some of them form other suppliers and "engineer" the various components to work together within the specs of the original engine.
This has been done by distributors and dealers of major engine manufacturers countless times when they have an opportunity to sell a limited number of engines to smaller so-called "dealer or distributor OEM accounts" that needed custom-shop modifications to be done on the original engine packages to fit the specific requirements of the OEM accounts. The same applies to repowering opportunities.
This type of work is usually done by the larger dealers and/or distributors who have in-house technical and engineering capabilities in place to do the reconfiguration work and required testings afterwards. You may be surprised that most of these "larger" dealers and distributors are far bigger than WPRT in terms of annual revenues. Some of them are privately held while others are listed in major stock exchanges worldwide.
Having partnerships with engine suppliers provide some assurance that WPRT will have access to the engine models where they are doing or have done their "special engineering" work for the projects that they are or have undertaken. However, it does not assure WPRT that the engine OEMs will not do their own product development work to compete with WPRT once the market opportunity grows to a point where they consider it to be economically feasible to produce and sell their own engine packages. The major engine manufacturers are no dummies. They dominate the markets and will want to continue that way.
Remember, the same engine OEMs already sell various engine models in their product ranges to all of the major N. A. on-highway truck manufacturers. Therefore, if they have equivalent ot better products to offer to their existing customers that compete with WPRT's offerings, guess whose products will the OEM customer choose?
And there is no assurance that WPRT will continue to have access to a particular engine manufacturer's engines once that manufacturer start offering their own competing products in the market. Contracts always have exit clauses and can be modified or cancelled after a specified period of notification. And the engine manufacturers can always increase their selling prices to WPRT to such an exptend that it makes their end products uncompetitve. The truck engine business is a cut-throat business and has been that way for a long, long time.
I think the author is confusing the different issues that exist between the electronics industry and the smoke-stack engine and machinery industry. They are simply incomparable. Remember what Jack Welch wrote in one of his best selling books -- control your destiny or others will. WPRT's business will cease to exist if their engine suppliers decided to go after the markets that WPRT is competing in. WPRT certainly does not "rule the markets."
Bullish Case For Westport Innovations [View article]
WPRT is one of the most hyped stocks in recent months and years. This company is basically a natural gas engine fuel system manufacturer and supplier. The natural gas engines that they "manufacture" are really engines manufactured and produced by others (e.g. Cummins) that they adapted for use with compressed natural gas as fuel. Such fuel systems accounts for no more than 3 to 5% of the toal value of the engines that go through their doors. Thus they may report big annual sales volume but little or no profit because there is limited profit margins to be made in the fuel system alone. Most of the profits are being made by the real engine manufacturer. Most of the so-called experts and analysts writing glowing reports about WPRT do not really understand the dynamics of the natural gas engine industry. All they do is look at financials and touch on the surface of the company and the macro industry outlook. As an industry insider and having been deeply involved in the diesel and natural gas engines manufacturing, sales and marketing operations of one of the foremost engine producers in the world, I want to say that natural gas engines and their fuel system is nothing new in terms of products or technology. My former employer have been producing diesel engines and later on adapted for use with natural gas, since the begining of the 1900's and have sold them in almost all countries around the world. They produce hundreds of thousands of big and small engines annually which are used in all kinds of appllications. They are the premier and leading supplier of diesel and natural gas engines for different applications in the oil and natural gas industry worldwide. Once compressed natural gas becomes more widely available throughout the USA I am sure companies like them can and will easily be able to produce suitable natural gas engines for use in on-highway truck and bus applications quickly because they already have state-of-the-art fuel systems technology available in-house. They do not have to go to a company like WPRT for such simple fuel system components. They already have several large state-of-the-art fuel system manufacturing facility (much larger than WPRT's) producing parts and build-up components for their own present line of engines in place. Other world-class companies in the engine industry like Cummins is also in the same situation. They have in fact started to manufacture their own natural gas engines in their own factories in addition to having small volumes assembled by one of their major distrubutors as well as WPRT. I am sure they will discontinue their present practice of having WPRT involved and start producing all of their natural gas engines in-house once the compressed natural gas truck engine market takes off because, for them, it is such a minor and relatively easy part of their total engine manufacturing and production processes. By then what do you think will happen to WPRT if that situation becomes a reality? Go figure!
Apple: How To Admit You're Out Of Ideas [View article]
I agree wholeheartedly with what the author wrote here. To me, the primary objectives of a "for-profit" company is to make money in it's operations and return a reasonable portion of those profits to shareholders in the form of cash or stock dividends after setting aside reasonable amount of funds for business expansion, re-investments and taxes.
The practice of share buy-backs to me is the dumbest form of sharing profits with shareholders, especially when you consider the amount of "free shares" that are being awarded to officers and employees of the companies. These type of shenanigans must stop.
Let me make it clear here once and for all. It is the shareholders who are taking the risks investing their hard-earned money in the company, not the employees. Any and all profits should therefore accrue to the shareholders on a pro-rata basis. Employees work for the company and are paid for their services and time. It is as simple as that.
Employees are entitled to decent levels of pay for the services that they render for the company. Some cash bonuses may be awarded to them for exemplary services rendered over and beyond what would have been normally expected of them. But the levels of pay being awarded to officers in U.S. companies are getting beyond ridiculous, they are obscene!
In my own companies I make it a policy of rewarding shareholders for the risks that they took in investing in the company on a monthly basis with regular dividend distributions. Employees are also rewarded adequately through their regular pay plus performance-linked and year-end bonuses, but if they are not shareholders they are not entitled to any dividends or share/stock awards.
Lastly, I despise Apple and other companies that evade paying taxes by hiding profits overseas thus depriving the U.S. government of their rightful tax revenues and Americans the employment opportunities that would have been created if those funds were put to good use in the U.S. economy. For this reason and for the fact that Apple overcharges consumers for their products and services I have never owned any Apple products and never will.
For many years I worked for a truly big and well-managed company with it's world headquarters located in the Midwest whose share price gyrates between about $30 and over $100 with great regularity because it operates in cyclical industries. If one looks closely at the many industries the company serves one will notice that the company is either number 1 or number 2 in those individual industries worldwide.
This company has a policy of splitting its share whenever the share price goes up to above $90 and also pays a regular and increasing dividend year after year. It does not give away free stock options to officers and employees, but all officers are expected to invest in the company's stocks as a show of their commitment to the growth of the company and the welfare of it's employees and stockholders.
This is what I would call a good company when compared to companies that are so stingy with their shareholders but give away a lot of money in high pay and stock options to their employees. Yes, employees are entitled to living wages but they are not the "investors" in the company and they are not entitled to outsized pay and benefits packages at the expense of the stockholders, who are the ultimate owners of the company.
Companies make money first and foremost for the benefit of the owners and investors.
China: Crashing Economic Data Creates Great Investment Opportunity [View article]
To the author of this article, please do all of us readers here a favor by checking the spelling and grammar of your articles before publishing. We would all like to understand what you are writing about without any confusion. You have good information in your articles so please just deliver your message in as clear a manner as possible. Thank you for sharing.
5 Companies That Prosper As Natural Gas Prices Remain Low [View article]
The following are not related to what the author wrote but concerns WPRT. One hype that I keep seeing and reading on WPRT is that "Westport Innovation is the "global leader" in natural gas engines. We have set the standard for engineering expertise, global partnership strategies, and market knowledge for CNG, LNG, and LPG technologies." This is what is being shown in WPRT's website.
Now, give me a break, how long has natural gas engines been in existence? Since before Professor Philip Hill and David Demers were born! What defines "global leadership"? Please explain. I have been selling natural gas engines (heavy-duty diesel engines converted for use with natural gas as fuel) since the early 1970s into many different applications, and the company I worked for at that time developed these engines for commercial use since a long time before that.
That company is a Dow 30 company and is still one of the few true leaders in natural gas engines, and diesel engines for that matter. They manufacture the engines themselves in several big factories around the world, unlike WPRT who fit their fuel systems onto other people's engines.
The other hype that I have seen being repeated time and time again by so-called experts and experienced analysts is that Westport Innovations "produce" natural gas engines. Since when did Westport started to manufacture their own engines? Where is their manufacturing plant for these engines? How many models of natural gas engines do they produce? In what HP sizes? For what applications other than on-highway trucks? Please provide me with details, and don't give me the bullshit about their "capital efficient" business model!
Get serious. We need to put WPRT in their rightful place, and that is Westport is a designer and manufacturer of natural gas engine fuel systems. These systems are adapted for use in engines manufactured and produced by other manufacturers such as Cummins, Weichai, etc. All Westport produce and sell are the natural gas engine fuel systems. They are doing the engineering, fit-up and testing work to adapt their fuel systems for use in diesel engines produced by other manufacturers, and always with the engine manufacturers’ sharing in the cost of research and development. That's Westport's business model.
There is no such thing as a true "Westport" engine. They may put their nameplate on the engines that they modify but those are not Westport engines. Those are other manufacturers' engines. Westport is in the fuel system business, not the engine business. And they are not the only manufacturer and seller of natural gas engine fuel systems either. There are many CNG fuel system suppliers worldwide, particularly in Europe and Asia.
In the future, when natural gas as truck engine fuel takes off in popularity in North America, all Westport Innovations are going to sell are their fuel systems, not the whole engine. The engine OEMs will see to that, and WPRT better not play hardball with them regarding their HPDI LNG fuel injection system patent.
In terms of dollar amount, the fuel system accounts for perhaps 10 to 15 percent of the price of the engine, depending on how many on- and off- engine components are supplied. Westport may or may not manufacture all of these components either, so their revenue base will not be all that much on a per engine basis. With their annual huge expense levels they need to sell A LOT of fuel systems to be able to break even, not to speak of making any profit!
So, spare us the hype and stick to the facts. I have no idea why any normal and sensible people would want to invest in companies that do not make any profits and have no idea when they will start doing so. Only gamblers will do that. There are a lot of much better companies to invest in out there, not only in North America but also worldwide.
5 Companies That Prosper As Natural Gas Prices Remain Low [View article]
On WPRT, the author wrote "While not presently earning a profit, the company has seen revenues grow from $143.2 million in December 2009 to $212.6 million in December 2011." This is precisely the kind of hype that I keep reading so-called experts and experienced analysts keep churning out in SA and other blog sites.
How long has WPRT been in business? How long will it take them to "earn a profit" from their business? While growing revenues is important,, earning a profit from those revenues is even more important, specially for a 16-year old company. Westport Innovations was formed in 1995 by David Demers and Prof. Philip Hill of the University of British Columbia out of research done on natural gas as an alternative fuel for diesel engines done at the university under the supervision of Prof. Hill.
16 years is a long, long time for a company to grow up, develop and become profitable, no matter how you cut it. Investors should not be expected to wait and hope forever for the company to turn around and start making profits and pay dividends.
Apple: How To Admit You're Out Of Ideas [View article]
Skippalmer, yes we all have our own powers of observation. I do that a lot as part of evaluating business prospects and economic conditions whenever and wherever I can.
You have to recognize that Apple may still be "king of the heap" in America but it certainly is not in other parts of the world, and it's position in America will erode over time as long as it maintains its stiff neck and arrogant attitudes, with products that are driven by fad more than anything else.
I will be visiting several cities in China this coming June to July for meetings and market evaluations, and from what I heard Apple products are not faring well over there, despite all the market hypes.
With the U.S. government actively discriminating against Chinese companies like Huawei and others, the same fate will fall on Apple and other American products in China, king or no king. Perhaps not orchestrated by the PRC Government, but the consumers in China have their own eyes and ears, and the Internet as well. That is just natural. Who says people have to follow every wish of the corrupt powers-to-be in Washington, D.C.?
Too big to fail, anyone? Who cares about iOS when BB and Android devices are far more superior and practical in every respect.
Apple: How To Admit You're Out Of Ideas [View article]
Sorry Jack. As a Canadian I use BlackBerry smartphones, ASUS tablet PCs, and IBM-Lenovo laptops, most of which are, in my opinion, equal or better than comparable Apple products at a fraction of the super-hyped Apple prices.
Let's face it, all of these products are made by Taiwanese companies operating factories in China using more or less the same or even identical parts and components. Apple is just a fab-less "shell company" like many other "computer companies" in North America whose products are made by others but branded with their trademarks. And they call that INNOVATION! What a farce!
The BlackBerry is the exception but it offers much better security features and is powered by a much better software to boot. I do not need tons of stupid and ridiculous apps like Angry Birds, etc., only those that I need to run my businesses efficiently and profitably. And I refuse to be held captive by any company that produce gadgets that I buy and use. So, buying Apple products is entirely out of the question.
Actually, I do not blame the businesses who LEGALLY avoid paying taxes. The practice may be LEGAL but I believe it is IMMORAL. It is the corrupt officials in Washington, D.C. who should be castrated for passing stupid laws with so many loopholes it makes the U.S. corporate taxation system such a sham and the laughing stock of the world. Just make those loopholes illegal and see what happens.
A bit of wishful thinking by the author here. Caterpillar is a cyclical stock as he mentioned, and one must therefore examine the price actions of it's stock based on a long-term perspective. It is obvious that for the short-term the price of CAT stock will move up and down and be affected by both positive and negative news.
Looking at the long-term, however, one can observe the stock price moves with the ups and downs of the general economic picture of it's major markets and those of the different industries that it serves. Unless one believes that the mining, energy and construction industries are all going to be moving up in short order, I believe investors will be better served by betting their money short-term on other higher momentum driven stocks with good fundamentals to make short-term gains while keeping an eye on CAT.
Eventually, when the signs are confirmed that the major industries that the company serves are moving up then it will be the time to consider investing in CAT once again. Yes, I agree that CAT is one of the more consistently, conservatively better-managed companies in America, and CAT can serve as a long-term, anchor stock in any portfolio. However, I also believe that the concept of "buy and hold" died a long time ago and it is better to look at other techniques to better manage the return on investment of our portfolios.
Apple's Money Back: A Desperate Act? [View article]
What kind of nonsense is the author writing about? In our part of the world the best, most successful and most admired publicly-listed companies pays a regular cash dividend to stockholders year after year like clockwork that is equivalent to between 40% and 60% of annual net income. It is the stockholders who invested their hard-earned money in the enterprise and they are entitled to a decent return for that investment and for taking the risks of losing their money in the company. This is in addition to the appreciation of the stock price in the market.
I fail to understand this stupid foolishness of admiring companies that are so stingy when it comes to rewarding the actual owners of the enterprise while lavishing hundreds of millions of dollars each year in bonus awards and stock options to their senior management. There ought to be a law forbidding this greediness. These people are not the owners of the company. They are also employees just like everybody else and are not entitled to outsized compensation packages. They are already paid very well based o their regular pay packages, and if they do a good job they get to keep their jobs. Period!
Though analysts are impressed with Microsoft Surface (MSFT +3.7%), few see it as a huge threat to the iPad (AAPL +0.6%). Jefferies' Peter Misek thinks Microsoft will need to "significantly undercut" the iPad on pricing (something that's unlikely given its specs) to be competitive, and argues the iPad's 225K+ apps set it apart. However, Forrester's David Johnson believes Windows RT's management features, user interface, and Office support will appeal to enterprise users. (more) [View news story]
Further Signs Of Demand Weakness Now Hit The iPad Mini [View article]
Apple: Do You Hear The Crickets? [View article]
Silver Wheaton: This $25 Stock Will Boost Your Portfolio Now [View article]
Westport Innovations: The Capital Efficient Business Model, Part 2 [View article]
WPRT does not operate like Apple or Coca-Cola. WPRT designs natural gas fuel systems around other manufacturers' engines and either produce these additional components themselves or procure some of them form other suppliers and "engineer" the various components to work together within the specs of the original engine.
This has been done by distributors and dealers of major engine manufacturers countless times when they have an opportunity to sell a limited number of engines to smaller so-called "dealer or distributor OEM accounts" that needed custom-shop modifications to be done on the original engine packages to fit the specific requirements of the OEM accounts. The same applies to repowering opportunities.
This type of work is usually done by the larger dealers and/or distributors who have in-house technical and engineering capabilities in place to do the reconfiguration work and required testings afterwards. You may be surprised that most of these "larger" dealers and distributors are far bigger than WPRT in terms of annual revenues. Some of them are privately held while others are listed in major stock exchanges worldwide.
Having partnerships with engine suppliers provide some assurance that WPRT will have access to the engine models where they are doing or have done their "special engineering" work for the projects that they are or have undertaken. However, it does not assure WPRT that the engine OEMs will not do their own product development work to compete with WPRT once the market opportunity grows to a point where they consider it to be economically feasible to produce and sell their own engine packages. The major engine manufacturers are no dummies. They dominate the markets and will want to continue that way.
Remember, the same engine OEMs already sell various engine models in their product ranges to all of the major N. A. on-highway truck manufacturers. Therefore, if they have equivalent ot better products to offer to their existing customers that compete with WPRT's offerings, guess whose products will the OEM customer choose?
And there is no assurance that WPRT will continue to have access to a particular engine manufacturer's engines once that manufacturer start offering their own competing products in the market. Contracts always have exit clauses and can be modified or cancelled after a specified period of notification. And the engine manufacturers can always increase their selling prices to WPRT to such an exptend that it makes their end products uncompetitve. The truck engine business is a cut-throat business and has been that way for a long, long time.
I think the author is confusing the different issues that exist between the electronics industry and the smoke-stack engine and machinery industry. They are simply incomparable. Remember what Jack Welch wrote in one of his best selling books -- control your destiny or others will. WPRT's business will cease to exist if their engine suppliers decided to go after the markets that WPRT is competing in. WPRT certainly does not "rule the markets."
Bullish Case For Westport Innovations [View article]
Most of the so-called experts and analysts writing glowing reports about WPRT do not really understand the dynamics of the natural gas engine industry. All they do is look at financials and touch on the surface of the company and the macro industry outlook.
As an industry insider and having been deeply involved in the diesel and natural gas engines manufacturing, sales and marketing operations of one of the foremost engine producers in the world, I want to say that natural gas engines and their fuel system is nothing new in terms of products or technology.
My former employer have been producing diesel engines and later on adapted for use with natural gas, since the begining of the 1900's and have sold them in almost all countries around the world. They produce hundreds of thousands of big and small engines annually which are used in all kinds of appllications. They are the premier and leading supplier of diesel and natural gas engines for different applications in the oil and natural gas industry worldwide.
Once compressed natural gas becomes more widely available throughout the USA I am sure companies like them can and will easily be able to produce suitable natural gas engines for use in on-highway truck and bus applications quickly because they already have state-of-the-art fuel systems technology available in-house.
They do not have to go to a company like WPRT for such simple fuel system components. They already have several large state-of-the-art fuel system manufacturing facility (much larger than WPRT's) producing parts and build-up components for their own present line of engines in place.
Other world-class companies in the engine industry like Cummins is also in the same situation. They have in fact started to manufacture their own natural gas engines in their own factories in addition to having small volumes assembled by one of their major distrubutors as well as WPRT. I am sure they will discontinue their present practice of having WPRT involved and start producing all of their natural gas engines in-house once the compressed natural gas truck engine market takes off because, for them, it is such a minor and relatively easy part of their total engine manufacturing and production processes. By then what do you think will happen to WPRT if that situation becomes a reality?
Go figure!
-- Industry Insider
Apple: How To Admit You're Out Of Ideas [View article]
The practice of share buy-backs to me is the dumbest form of sharing profits with shareholders, especially when you consider the amount of "free shares" that are being awarded to officers and employees of the companies. These type of shenanigans must stop.
Let me make it clear here once and for all. It is the shareholders who are taking the risks investing their hard-earned money in the company, not the employees. Any and all profits should therefore accrue to the shareholders on a pro-rata basis. Employees work for the company and are paid for their services and time. It is as simple as that.
Employees are entitled to decent levels of pay for the services that they render for the company. Some cash bonuses may be awarded to them for exemplary services rendered over and beyond what would have been normally expected of them. But the levels of pay being awarded to officers in U.S. companies are getting beyond ridiculous, they are obscene!
In my own companies I make it a policy of rewarding shareholders for the risks that they took in investing in the company on a monthly basis with regular dividend distributions. Employees are also rewarded adequately through their regular pay plus performance-linked and year-end bonuses, but if they are not shareholders they are not entitled to any dividends or share/stock awards.
Lastly, I despise Apple and other companies that evade paying taxes by hiding profits overseas thus depriving the U.S. government of their rightful tax revenues and Americans the employment opportunities that would have been created if those funds were put to good use in the U.S. economy. For this reason and for the fact that Apple overcharges consumers for their products and services I have never owned any Apple products and never will.
Apple: Do You Hear The Crickets? [View article]
This company has a policy of splitting its share whenever the share price goes up to above $90 and also pays a regular and increasing dividend year after year. It does not give away free stock options to officers and employees, but all officers are expected to invest in the company's stocks as a show of their commitment to the growth of the company and the welfare of it's employees and stockholders.
This is what I would call a good company when compared to companies that are so stingy with their shareholders but give away a lot of money in high pay and stock options to their employees. Yes, employees are entitled to living wages but they are not the "investors" in the company and they are not entitled to outsized pay and benefits packages at the expense of the stockholders, who are the ultimate owners of the company.
Companies make money first and foremost for the benefit of the owners and investors.
China: Crashing Economic Data Creates Great Investment Opportunity [View article]
5 Companies That Prosper As Natural Gas Prices Remain Low [View article]
Now, give me a break, how long has natural gas engines been in existence? Since before Professor Philip Hill and David Demers were born! What defines "global leadership"? Please explain. I have been selling natural gas engines (heavy-duty diesel engines converted for use with natural gas as fuel) since the early 1970s into many different applications, and the company I worked for at that time developed these engines for commercial use since a long time before that.
That company is a Dow 30 company and is still one of the few true leaders in natural gas engines, and diesel engines for that matter. They manufacture the engines themselves in several big factories around the world, unlike WPRT who fit their fuel systems onto other people's engines.
The other hype that I have seen being repeated time and time again by so-called experts and experienced analysts is that Westport Innovations "produce" natural gas engines. Since when did Westport started to manufacture their own engines? Where is their manufacturing plant for these engines? How many models of natural gas engines do they produce? In what HP sizes? For what applications other than on-highway trucks? Please provide me with details, and don't give me the bullshit about their "capital efficient" business model!
Get serious. We need to put WPRT in their rightful place, and that is Westport is a designer and manufacturer of natural gas engine fuel systems. These systems are adapted for use in engines manufactured and produced by other manufacturers such as Cummins, Weichai, etc. All Westport produce and sell are the natural gas engine fuel systems. They are doing the engineering, fit-up and testing work to adapt their fuel systems for use in diesel engines produced by other manufacturers, and always with the engine manufacturers’ sharing in the cost of research and development. That's Westport's business model.
There is no such thing as a true "Westport" engine. They may put their nameplate on the engines that they modify but those are not Westport engines. Those are other manufacturers' engines. Westport is in the fuel system business, not the engine business. And they are not the only manufacturer and seller of natural gas engine fuel systems either. There are many CNG fuel system suppliers worldwide, particularly in Europe and Asia.
In the future, when natural gas as truck engine fuel takes off in popularity in North America, all Westport Innovations are going to sell are their fuel systems, not the whole engine. The engine OEMs will see to that, and WPRT better not play hardball with them regarding their HPDI LNG fuel injection system patent.
In terms of dollar amount, the fuel system accounts for perhaps 10 to 15 percent of the price of the engine, depending on how many on- and off- engine components are supplied. Westport may or may not manufacture all of these components either, so their revenue base will not be all that much on a per engine basis. With their annual huge expense levels they need to sell A LOT of fuel systems to be able to break even, not to speak of making any profit!
So, spare us the hype and stick to the facts. I have no idea why any normal and sensible people would want to invest in companies that do not make any profits and have no idea when they will start doing so. Only gamblers will do that. There are a lot of much better companies to invest in out there, not only in North America but also worldwide.
5 Companies That Prosper As Natural Gas Prices Remain Low [View article]
How long has WPRT been in business? How long will it take them to "earn a profit" from their business? While growing revenues is important,, earning a profit from those revenues is even more important, specially for a 16-year old company. Westport Innovations was formed in 1995 by David Demers and Prof. Philip Hill of the University of British Columbia out of research done on natural gas as an alternative fuel for diesel engines done at the university under the supervision of Prof. Hill.
16 years is a long, long time for a company to grow up, develop and become profitable, no matter how you cut it. Investors should not be expected to wait and hope forever for the company to turn around and start making profits and pay dividends.
Apple: How To Admit You're Out Of Ideas [View article]
You have to recognize that Apple may still be "king of the heap" in America but it certainly is not in other parts of the world, and it's position in America will erode over time as long as it maintains its stiff neck and arrogant attitudes, with products that are driven by fad more than anything else.
I will be visiting several cities in China this coming June to July for meetings and market evaluations, and from what I heard Apple products are not faring well over there, despite all the market hypes.
With the U.S. government actively discriminating against Chinese companies like Huawei and others, the same fate will fall on Apple and other American products in China, king or no king. Perhaps not orchestrated by the PRC Government, but the consumers in China have their own eyes and ears, and the Internet as well. That is just natural. Who says people have to follow every wish of the corrupt powers-to-be in Washington, D.C.?
Too big to fail, anyone? Who cares about iOS when BB and Android devices are far more superior and practical in every respect.
Apple: How To Admit You're Out Of Ideas [View article]
Let's face it, all of these products are made by Taiwanese companies operating factories in China using more or less the same or even identical parts and components. Apple is just a fab-less "shell company" like many other "computer companies" in North America whose products are made by others but branded with their trademarks. And they call that INNOVATION! What a farce!
The BlackBerry is the exception but it offers much better security features and is powered by a much better software to boot. I do not need tons of stupid and ridiculous apps like Angry Birds, etc., only those that I need to run my businesses efficiently and profitably. And I refuse to be held captive by any company that produce gadgets that I buy and use. So, buying Apple products is entirely out of the question.
Actually, I do not blame the businesses who LEGALLY avoid paying taxes. The practice may be LEGAL but I believe it is IMMORAL. It is the corrupt officials in Washington, D.C. who should be castrated for passing stupid laws with so many loopholes it makes the U.S. corporate taxation system such a sham and the laughing stock of the world. Just make those loopholes illegal and see what happens.
Buy Caterpillar On 25% Pullback [View article]
Looking at the long-term, however, one can observe the stock price moves with the ups and downs of the general economic picture of it's major markets and those of the different industries that it serves. Unless one believes that the mining, energy and construction industries are all going to be moving up in short order, I believe investors will be better served by betting their money short-term on other higher momentum driven stocks with good fundamentals to make short-term gains while keeping an eye on CAT.
Eventually, when the signs are confirmed that the major industries that the company serves are moving up then it will be the time to consider investing in CAT once again. Yes, I agree that CAT is one of the more consistently, conservatively better-managed companies in America, and CAT can serve as a long-term, anchor stock in any portfolio. However, I also believe that the concept of "buy and hold" died a long time ago and it is better to look at other techniques to better manage the return on investment of our portfolios.
Apple's Money Back: A Desperate Act? [View article]
I fail to understand this stupid foolishness of admiring companies that are so stingy when it comes to rewarding the actual owners of the enterprise while lavishing hundreds of millions of dollars each year in bonus awards and stock options to their senior management. There ought to be a law forbidding this greediness. These people are not the owners of the company. They are also employees just like everybody else and are not entitled to outsized compensation packages. They are already paid very well based o their regular pay packages, and if they do a good job they get to keep their jobs. Period!