Seeking Alpha

Bryce_in_TX

Bryce_in_TX
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Bryce_in_TX's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Omega Healthcare's Shares Look Cheap [View article]
    We'll see Pendragon. Those are my thoughts. Let's see how it plays out. I have made enough currently off the capital appreciation to give me a good cushion to be on the sidelines. It is clear at present that interest rates are headed higher in the near future, the next 12 months, IMO.

    If rates don't head higher, then we as a nation are in deep, deep trouble, and it will be the first time that I am aware of that pattern has been broken.

    "Interesting you are so certain of that given that the actual fundamentals of the company have not changed to support that."

    I am not "certain" but think that the probability of the stock going lower in the next 24 months is greater than it going higher, given the direction of overall interest rates in that time frame.

    Based upon that probability, I plan to get back in at $33 or below. If that doesn't pan out, I'll adjust my plan.
    Jun 8, 2015. 05:59 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Omega Healthcare's Shares Look Cheap [View article]
    Pendragon Y,

    The FMV of the stock has dropped from $42 and change to now below $35, and it will go lower before it stabilizes. Yes, currently there would be loss of appreciation. I'll get back in at $33 or below and make more money than if I had held it. Getting back in at $33, that is a $9 difference, $9 which I didn't lose since I sold it at $42. That means I can lose $9 in dividends before it would have been more beneficial to continue to hold it. That gives me 3 years I can wait. It won't be near that long, IMO.

    There aren't a lot of times when things are this clear, in my 35 year experience with interest rates. I like OHI, it just didn't make sense to me to continue to hold it given the probability, not certainty, that its stock price will decline as interest rates rise.

    I have no problem if someone wants to hold it. However, whether we'll see $42 again in the next 5 years is less probable, IMO, than seeing the price fall to $33 or below in the next two. Interest rates may stabilize and behave more "normally" going forward. If that happens it will take longer for OHI to reach $42.

    The price is getting attractive, but the probability of higher interest rates keeps me on the sidelines, currently.
    Jun 6, 2015. 02:30 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Omega Healthcare's Shares Look Cheap [View article]
    I sold at $42 and change and will buy back in a starting position at $33 or lower. Makes no difference to me if you call me a trader. Making capital appreciation when you can makes more sense to me than holding it and watching that appreciation disappear. The amount of loss in dividends by not holding it currently is minor in comparison to the capital appreciation loss I would have suffered by continuing to hold it. Buy low, sell high.
    Jun 5, 2015. 10:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Buying Realty Income At A 17x FFO Multiple And A 5% Dividend Yield Is A No-Brainer [View article]
    I sold "O" at $50 and change and will buy back in when it reaches $42 or below, depending on the price action at $42. Makes no sense to me to buy at $47 or $45 when there is the high probability of it going much lower than that. Long term you are ok, but why lose capital appreciation when you can get it and KNOW you can buy in at least 15% lower and make more that way than staying vested in the stock? I like the stock but I have watched interest rates and the resulting affect they have on bonds and bond like investments over 30 years. Taking capital appreciation is a no brainer to me.
    Jun 5, 2015. 10:07 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Linn Energy Needs A Deal Announcement To Move The Value Needle [View article]
    @jayhawkfan247,

    Just listen to Kirby. It is being paid down, according to him. The Facts say otherwise, however.
    Jun 4, 2015. 06:01 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Linn Energy Needs A Deal Announcement To Move The Value Needle [View article]
    "Looks to me that Linn will start having some suiters- IMHO"

    If the energy prices stay about where they are at, impairment writedowns will make the assets worth just a little more than the debt. I wouldn't want to buy a company that is so mired in debt versus the FMV of its assets. It makes no economic sense. Buying the assets and not the company is the only thing that makes sense to me.
    Jun 3, 2015. 07:59 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Linn Energy Needs A Deal Announcement To Move The Value Needle [View article]
    Long term debt has increased about $102 million from Dec. 31, 2014 to Mar. 31, 2015. There has been no paying down of debt. Look at it yourself:

    Dec. 31, 2014, page 79:
    http://1.usa.gov/1QqlQEj

    Mar. 31, 2015, page 1:
    http://1.usa.gov/1S465X4

    Look at the cash flow from financing activities for 1st Qtr 2015. Yes, $280 million was paid on debt, but $395 million was borrowed.

    LINE has not reduced its long term debt. It has increased.

    Those are facts, not spin.

    LINE doesn't earn enough to pay distributions AND pay down debt.
    Jun 3, 2015. 05:03 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Linn Energy Needs A Deal Announcement To Move The Value Needle [View article]
    Kirby,

    I'd suggest doing an analysis of free cash flow (operating cash flow minus capital expenditures) since the time LINE went public. I don't think it's a pretty picture. They keep accumulating debt without paying it down. If assets don't increase in value commensurate to the debt increase, you are looking at a probable collapse at some point. There are likely going to be huge impairment write down of assets this year and that will likely impact their ability to borrow. I'd anticipate FMV of assets approaching the amount of debt they have. If that happens, what will they be able to use to borrow against for cash? I think LINE is highly risky.

    See page 20 and 21 in link:
    "Each of our Credit Facilities is subject to scheduled redeterminations of its borrowing base, based primarily on reserve reports using lender commodity price expectations at such time, semi-annually in April and October. Additionally the lenders under the LINN Credit Facility have the ability to request an interim redetermination of the borrowing base once per calendar year and the lenders under the Berry Credit Facility have the ability to request an interim redetermination of the borrowing base once between scheduled redeterminations. If current low commodity prices continue through such redetermination events, the borrowing base under either Credit Facility may be reduced. Upon any such potential reduction, any outstanding indebtedness in excess of the new borrowing base may become due within a short time span or we must pledge other properties as additional collateral. We currently have limited unpledged properties.

    In particular, because the Berry Credit Facility is effectively fully drawn, any such reduction in the Berry Credit Facility’s borrowing base may require Berry and us to make mandatory prepayments under the Berry Credit Facility to the extent existing indebtedness under the Berry Credit Facility exceeds the new borrowing base, or we may choose to post restricted cash on Berry’s behalf, reducing our liquidity position. If we are required to repay indebtedness under either of our Credit Facilities earlier than anticipated due to a borrowing base redetermination, it may be necessary to use cash that would otherwise be available for capital expenditures or distributions to our unitholders to repay such indebtedness. As a result of this, future distributions to our unitholders may be reduced, suspended or eliminated. In addition, any failure to repay indebtedness in excess of our borrowing bases would constitute an event of default under the Credit Facilities, and could cause a cross-default under our other outstanding indebtedness."

    http://1.usa.gov/1QqlQEj

    Add to that the $7 billion in notes which are due from 2019 to 2022. There is just too much debt and LINE doesn't have the earnings to pay it down and pay distributions also, IMO. They have used the increase in value of assets to fund the debt increases. Now that strategy is backfiring on them.

    Has any one at the conference calls asked about borrowing base redeterminations and how that will affect them in the short term? Is LINE keeping investors fully informed on this or letting it slide until October?
    Jun 3, 2015. 03:38 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Vs. Porsche - Tales Of Growth [View article]
    10 days is acceptable. As I said, it doesn't have to be exact. But updating every several weeks, and being off by more than a couple of weeks would not be ok with me. They could go fish, I'd ask for a refund, and buy elsewhere.
    May 31, 2015. 05:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Vs. Porsche - Tales Of Growth [View article]
    "To robiniv, bryce, try getting that from any auto major on custom ordered cars. Also my question still stands, why are you guys holding Tesla to a far higher standard with their first volume car than established 100 year old companies? "

    Let me rephrase, I would want a fairly accurate estimate as to when the car would be delivered. If you can't provide me with that, I may choose to look elsewhere for a vehicle. I am not expecting an exact date, but some estimate of when it can be delivered. I don't see how that is unreasonable, and I would want that from any car manufacturer, not just Tesla.

    That's all I have to say. You don't like that, there is nothing I can do about it. If Tesla's info is out of date, then that portion of their website is useless.
    May 29, 2015. 08:15 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Vs. Porsche - Tales Of Growth [View article]
    I have to agree with robin on this one. Tesla sells their cars via the internet and if I order one today and make a deposit, I want a fairly accurate time frame of when I will receive it. I think the website would need daily updating for that info. Someone updating it every few weeks really makes no sense at all. I don't see how website development plays into this. An employee inputs the info, like a data entry clerk. They don't need to understand how to program etc.
    May 29, 2015. 01:43 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Vs. Porsche - Tales Of Growth [View article]
    Tesla buster eh? I don't buy a car for the infotainment. I'm an odd one, no doubt, but I prefer to navigate the old fashion way, with paper maps and my ability to read them. I buy a car for TRANSPORTATION, performance, style, mpg, and comfort. If it has an infotainment system, ok, but that is last on my list. I would argue that having this "stuff" in the car will increase wrecks by being a distraction. Tesla buster. Damn, people are desperate, it sounds like to me. Another reason for not buying a GM. Gimmicks.
    May 28, 2015. 03:29 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Turns Out A Tesla Supercharger Costs 2 Or 3 Times What Elon Musk Said [View article]
    The FIRST EVER recommendation from CR came in the first article you cite. Since it was the first recommendation, they included input from 2012 and 2013 owners. That survey was based on some 600 plus owners. Then in 2014, the second recommendation came from a survey base of 1300 plus owners. Reliability is not declining and Tesla is not "right on the cusp of pushing CR over the edge". Your statements are BS.
    May 26, 2015. 09:46 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Turns Out A Tesla Supercharger Costs 2 Or 3 Times What Elon Musk Said [View article]
    @TES,

    I believe CR bases each year's reliability scores based on their subscriber base of actual users, not averaging two years together. Without a link to what you are saying I just don't find it credible.
    May 25, 2015. 02:39 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Turns Out A Tesla Supercharger Costs 2 Or 3 Times What Elon Musk Said [View article]
    Also note in the link that the reliability rating, based on actual user experience, was average for 2013, not below average, as you state. Your statements are not credible.
    May 23, 2015. 10:33 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
3,810 Comments
5,574 Likes