tc1

Three Medical Stocks Set for Healthy Gains

Joe, you've given us some great leads, here. Thank you!

Just wondering, though, if any of these companies' growth rates could be lessened by Medicare reimbursement cuts or any other govt interventions to reduce profitability?

Nokia: What's It Worth?

I agree-- a fine, thorough article on valuing NOK-- i especially appreciate your sifting through various scenarios for a range of values.

But the big question i'm left with is this: can one reasonably expect NOK to come down from its $24-$25/share level (mid-2009 price) all the way to $19 as that "entry point" for a longterm investor?

10 Green Energy Gambles for 2009: Q2 Performance Update

Raser's continued fall after the close over a week ago of its recent dilutive stock offering is a matter of some concern. Normally a company would begin to recover after such a close of revenue-raising through this means-- the fact that RZ's shareprice has plunged further is NOT a good sign. But then this is a company that has so many detractors and shorters piling on in bearish fashion...

David Phillips just wrote a devastating hatchet job on RZ the other day at 10qdetective.blogspot..... While we need such candid assessments of a company's financial picture, it also appears that Phillips ignored the fact that RZ may get a DOE loan guarantee and ignored the further fact that some prominent Utah political leaders are promoting RZ and, who knows, may step up to help it out of its present heavily indebted condition.

RZ is in dire straits, but could surprise all its critics if it can hang on long enough to get one or two more plants up and running.

This is a high-wire act and makes for interesting times for any investor (i finally got in long at $2.75, after the fall from the high $3s level, but didn't wait long enough to get it at its present <$2).

As for CPTC.OB, who can explain its one-time jump several weeks ago up to $0.48 and then its plunge back down to half of that?

IBM's Potential U.K. Goldmine

Wow, great news for a company that is exploring all sorts of new areas for digitizing "dumb" networks to create intelligent info flows. Wouldn't doubt that the U.S. would be next in line to utilize this technology from IBM.

Interview: Journalist Matt Taibbi

Read Michael Lewis' exceptionally good article "The End" in the Dec. 08 issue of Conde Nast Portfolio (grab it while it's still online, b/c Portfolio has gone out of business), and you'll have a very informative supplement to Taibbi's article on G.S.

We need not compare who's more insightful and indepth in their reporting-- we need Lewis, Taibbi, and as many muckrakers as we can get!

And Taibbi's line about need for serious CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM sums up the essential way out of this mess.

As long as the financial, ag, telecom and other sectors have "bought and paid for" too many members (a majority!) of our congressmen/women and White House, we won't have justice or fairness or equal opportunity in the USA.

Pump Up Your Portfolio with Flowserve

Paul, thank you for an extremely informative article for such relatively short length.

I wish other authors would take the time to fill their posts at S.A. with not only 1) such insightful current and several-year financial info on a company, but also 2) such multi-leveled approaches to investing in the stock.

I've signed on as one of your followers and will find time to peruse some of your past posts.

Disclosure: much more of an investor than a trader (i'm not seasoned enough yet for the latter), i took a big "long" position in FLS just yesterday after watching it for three months. I missed out on getting into FLS at $62 in the early Spring; watched it zoom to $84 in late May / early June and would have "killed" to get it sometime again at $68 (seeing how FLS will likely go to ~$100 if/when eventually oil goes to $85/barrel). And now, with oil's precipitous recent slide, FLS falls into our laps as a great discounted pearl in the low $60s. Yes, it may fall lower if oil's price plunges further (below $60), but i'm in FLS for the long haul.

Though i'm mainly interested in FLS for its increasing role in WATER-flow infrastructure and now its big role in desalination worldwide (with the purchase of Calder), it's obvious that FLS's price movement is VERY dependent on the oil/gas industry.

Moreover, FLS was finally added to the S&P this Spring and now its price-moves will, in part, be dependent on the ups and downs of this index-- though, like most folks, i surmise that FLS will greatly outperform the S&P into 2010 and beyond, given the unfortunate realities (great for investors) of the double whammy of Peak Oil and Peak Water.

Is the Black Gold Rally Over?

I agree with many of the posters that, because of Peak Oil, we must expect a higher price for oil, though perhaps not for the short term as a price correction on oil sets in due to this recession. But supply is already being pressured in some quarters, so i see the correction as very short term.

In any case, one should beware taking too seriously these "historical ratios," such as the "gold-oil ratio."

Circumstances change with differernt eras, and we are now on the precipice of Peak Oil, made even more problematic the last dozen years by the MASSIVE new oil demand from the two fast-developing and over-populated China and India.

Everything is different. Historical ratios like "gold-oil" can no longer be reliable measuring devices.

Exploring Gold Miner Stocks: Mid-Year 2009 Analysis

I recall motley fool poster TMFSimchiruna's remark:
"P/E is not a useful valuation metric in the mining industry. Relative discounts to NAV or Enterprise Value to Reserves ratios are more useful indicators of relative value for this industry."

Comments, anyone?
Btw, i appreciate the political and logistical contexts that author and readers are providing here.

Sustainable Bio-Fuel Aviation Performs Well

James, thank you for this very comprehensive (even exhilarating!) update on the biofuels' success story for aviation--a story i'd been following here and there over the many months. This is wonderful news and you've reported it comprehensively.

Silver Wheaton: A Hidden Gem

I, too, am long SLW, and i thank you for your positive views about the company and its highly profitable prospects.

Yet there are some big assumptions here:
Assumption #1: 1970s style inflation by 2012 (are you aware that some very fine economists foresee only minimal inflation and lots of deflationary trends, and that the US govt's printing of all that money is not affecting the wider money supply, only being absorbed by banks' balance sheets?)

Assumption #2: "65 is a good number" (for silver's price). That silver's price is going to peak at $65 seems unlikely and, anyway, is a non-sequitur following from your prior sentence ("we will assume it only increased 2- to 3-fold").
I'd be quite happy to see silver reach into the low $20s and stay there, up from its current ~$14.

SLW would be handsomely profitable at that price.


>"Assuming we experience the inflation of the late 70's (which is very conservative), silver will trade between $30-40/oz if the money supply had not changed. But to make it simple, we will assume it only increased 2- to 3-fold. 65 is a good number. So $65-$5 = $60 profit per ounce. SLW will produce approximately 32-35M oz. So $60*$30M = $1.8 billion. If the company has a current market cap of around $2.4 billion and should make at least a billion dollars (to be conservative) over the next decade, then wow! Of course I expect $65/oz to be the peak as was $50/oz in the 70’s. More important is the long term silver price, which I think will be at least $20/oz, likely in the $22-$28/oz range."

What Really Backs the U.S. Dollar?

Thank you, Digger, for a very provocative piece, though i've given a few caveats and "corrections" to a few (IMO) overstatements in your article.

But first let me say that your article and many of the interesting responses by readers have squarely addressed fundamental issues that virtually no one is openly talking about in the supposedly "serious" circles of our society.

I was concerned by a few of your premises; for instance, when you state:

>For the U.S. presently:
>C [private consumption] is down to nothing with high unemployment and people struggling just to pay bills.
>I [the sum of all the country’s businesses spending on capital] is down to nothing (especially now that lending has dried up)

Digger, these are misleading over-statements. Yes, people are saving more, but OBVIOUSLY people are STILL SPENDING on all sorts of things, not as much as a year ago, but it's not down to "nothing." And businesses have not stopped spending on capital--look at GE, for instance, which is making all sorts of loans and amping up its R&D budget (as is IBM, Siemens, and many other businesses large and small).

You also wrote:
>government spending is all that is running the show for the most part. Does anyone think that adding more debt to debt is in the long run a healthy thing to do?

Well, Digger and fellow readers, sometimes it IS absolutely necessary and QUITE HEALTHY to wisely borrow anew on top of stupid forms of earlier debt if that money can then be used for a sound business enterprise to MAKE a lot MORE INCOME, wipe out one's earlier stupid debt, and generate lots of profits.

For example, think of a college student who runs up a huge gambling debt on his credit card of $50k. Should he no longer borrow ANY MONEY whatsoever from his parents or the govt to finish his college education since he is "already in debt"? No. The funds to finish his education can then land him a decent paying job (we assume he's in a field where living wage jobs are still available, e.g., a nursing job paying $70k, or an engineering job paying $100k), and in time he'll pay off his gambling debt and begin to save some of his salary each year.

It's the same with our country-- for three decades, too many hawks and big-spenders of our tax monies bankrupted us on defense projects (the biggest single form of government agency waste and unused products/services) , instead of investing the tax monies, R&D brainpower, etc., into peacetime technology and sustainable development-- like renewable energy, high-speed public transport, more competitive educational institutions, living-wage job-creation and job-training, etc.

Now there is a move in this country, spearheaded by progressives and with moderates in alignment, to SPEND MORE INTELLIGENTLY and SPEND NOW so as to create a viable economy with a "healthy GDP" based on greentech, better healthcare, etc.

The CEO's of some of the biggest cap companies all finally "get it" and are getting on the bandwagon to a healthier, saner, more productive and stronger manufacturing USA.

I have a fair amount of gold and silver (and other commodity) investments in my portfolio, but i'm also betting on companies like GE and a host of renewable energy firms to do it right and make us once again an exceedingly STRONG manufacturing economy, a strong producer of valued goods and services (not fancy financial instruments of debt) and an abundance of living wage jobs that will make ours once again a relatively healthy economy with a strong middle-class and far less poverty and wealth stratification.

GO USA and GO WORLD!

(Natural) Gas Pains and UNG

I bought UNG once a few weeks ago just to get in on some of the volatile action and fortunately "escaped" with a $2.5k gain (10%). I don't think i'll do it again anytime soon and I wouldn't recommend the trade to anyone now....

Dr. Reddy's: Benefit from Obama and India with One Stock

Unless it has a lot of further growth quite sooner than later, this Dr. Reddy's (RDY), in zooming up over the $15 price level from its lows, looks like it has ALREADY captured most of its upside potential.

I'd wait for it to consolidate its recent big rebound gains, that is, i'd wait for a significant dip to $12 or $13 before considering buying RDY.

Pending FDA Decisions: 20 Extreme Trades

Wow, Mike, a big thank you for pulling together all of this data on so many companies and their pharmaceutical offerings. Beyond the potential big gains for investors, I hope all these products wind up being safe, sound and reliable for the sake of alleviating the intense suffering of so many human beings!

Natural Gas: Long-Term Bull, Short-Term Bear (Part 2)

Hey HTL, thank you for sharing so much great info with folks on S.A. I do hope you'll write further on this topic for S.A. and perhaps (if you've the time and inclination) also post on some of your OTHER investment-research areas.

If one is playing UNG, this is MOST DEFINITELY just a trading vehicle, get in and out quick, do NOT try buy-and-hold. All your arguments are quite cogent. I was lucky to make $2.5k on a $25k investment 8 to 4 days ago. I'm not sure i want to mess around with UNG any more-- there are too many variables involved.

Beyond what you've already covered in your 2-part article (written mainly in early June and there's been so much news since then) is the fact that the UNG's ETF status is itself now under criticism as being a dubious financial instrument because of having reached a limit of purchasable shares. There have been sober reports on this and also Jim Cramer has evidently recently ranted to his hordes of viewers against buying UNG for this very reason. There's even talk of how ETFs that have experienced such overbuying in the past needed to be temporarily shut down in certain cases.

Bottom line: an investment in UNG is very precarious right now.