tchannon

$125 Oil Not Sustainable for the Time Being

As author of the article, I again claim no expertise in this arena - I just go by what I see. If I am wrong, well, I am just wrong as all have been wrong before - everyone from neophytes to sophisticated experts. If I am right, the same thing - and either way, nobody really cares.

My point is when the entire world is acting and thinking that the price of oil will go up forever and ever, well, maybe it is time to quantify the downside. Extreme peaks and troughs in a marketplace are typically characterized by irrational behavior and activity (my above article may certainly qualify) - and the subsequent collapse is often just as chaotic and irrational and often cannot be explained with logical thought.

I don't have the sophisticated data to back up the above - I will let the experts fill in the blanks. If I am wrong in my base assessment, then I am wrong, and best of luck to the oil longs. But if I am right, I take no credit - I just know I won't be holding the bag.

Broadwind Energy: Cramer, Someone Had to Say Something

Yes, agreed, also that Cramer will say wait 5 days, but mentions nothing of the sort in his BWEN bits.

Broadwind Energy: Cramer, Someone Had to Say Something

Hey bfoley - read the 1Q from BWEN just filed last week. They do not have anywhere near $1B in sales - not even close. $36M sales for 1Q with 80% of those sales showing up only because they acquired EMS and Brad Foote. They mighy get to $1B in sales someday, but it is not today.

Broadwind Energy: Cramer, Someone Had to Say Something

As author, I will respond. I do not use the writing outlets to try to manipulate the stock and I fully disclose my positions.

I thought I was clear that BWEN is in a great position to make some money and fair exceptionally well in the coming years. I know Cramer says to do homework, but most do not listen to that, just his picks. When Cramer says that but then just rattles off a company (which is part of his entertainment value that makes him successful), it was like Charles Barkley saying "I am not a role model." By the virtue of where Cramer is at, he has reached that deity status to some extent.

I took most of my position off of the table b/c I had a 12-bagger in 2 years; that does not happen often, and yes, Cramer's mention helped it get there. I just had a concern with how Cramer continues to whimsically mention this stock and how some points could have been better clarified about exactly where this company is at today, especially when compared to its competitors. I like what they are doing; I like where they are at. I just saw some glaring omissions from the cheerleading act of Cramer.

There are many options/outlets for manufacturing wind towers, such as TRN (which is 12x bigger than BWEN today in terms of real manufacturing output and revenue) - not just BWEN - so the landscape will be competitive.

Market Maven, Cramer is wrong just as often as he is right; everyone has examples.

Emily, give yourself Kudos for making money - not Cramer. He gave you an idea; you obviously did your homework on the ones you chose and your intelligence is what closed out the win, not the idea.

National City Corp. Story Unlikely to Have Happy Ending

Thank you for your comments.

I wrote this article - I never worked for Harbor Federal; I have no inside information; it is purely speculation and observation.

I do however, have second hand knowledge of local people and how much stock they owned at time of buyout (SEC filings, Form 4s, etc. for directors and officers). If these people sold early, good for them and they may have - but from listening to people talk, a lot of people held on to it - shareholders big and small. I used to own the stock for years, but sold on the buyout news as it was no longer a "Ft. Pierce/Local Owned" bank.

NCC will not go away - been around for 163 years. However, I am merely suggesting that if someone is to bail them out, they are not going to do the NCC shareholders any favors. No bank or finance company has received that treatment when struggling in this market. Note the recent deals: BSC, CFC, WM, C, WB, TMA. All got aid - all had to sacrifice significant market/shareholder value to take the aid. CFC even ran up high on takeover talk only to have the deal come to life at a lower price than it ran up to.

I am not aiming to accomplishing anything - merely stating an opinion. I may be wrong, of course, but if anyone is holding out on an NCC buyout at $15, they might be waiting a long time. At least we can all agree that it is not going to be $38 anytime soon, especially after seeing 17 years of gains wiped out in less than a year.

Furthermore, if NCC is to turnaround (which they very well may(they've been through world wars, depression, etc.), more pain will have to come in the form of diluted aid from a 3rd party, job cuts, and/or reduced dividend.

If your take on the situation differs than mine, it may be time to buy more NCC if you expect a higher premium buyout and feel the bank has excellent long-term merits. Both of those scenarios are currently in questionable status, at best.

I encourage and welcome feedback...I'm not here to be right or wrong; just to share an opinion.

And yes, businesses can learn from mistakes and come back stronger; however, it does not mean you get a free pass or become exempt from paying the dues to learn from the mistake.

I have nothing to gain from this and if anything, offering a skeptical viewpoint to those that are loading up thinking $15 is going to happen tomorrow. I hope for their sake that it is the case. I think, however, we can agree that the NCC as we know it today will have to go through some serious changes to get back on track (e.g., buyout, restructure, back to the drawing board, etc.).

In the end, nobody knows, least of all me.

I welcome and enjoy discussion on the events surrounding this deal and many others. For the outsiders, it is all pure speculation and guesswork.

Why Microsoft Should Drop the Yahoo Bid and Buy ValueClick

Can you provide more specifics to the strategic advantages of MSFT buying VCLK? I will be honest, I have VCLK shares and would love to see $30, but you do not touch on what VCLK can really bring to the table for MSFT to prompt the stroking of a $3B check.

PPC Advertising Takes Its Toll on Google

Your thoughts are well received and thank you. I do not think Google is in trouble, but their growth will slow and those are some factors contributing to the arena.

For instance, one company I reviewed used to pay $0.50 CPC for the trademarked term; others got in the game, drove the price to $2.50 CPC over a course of a couple of years. That is 5x for the same real estate. The cap has been now been put on at $2, reducing any more exponential income growth from that piece of real estate. At 300 clicks per day for 1 ad (and we know that customers click on multiple ads), Google will be losing at least $50k over the course of the year for that term (assuming 1 person bid $2.50 and nobody bid between $2-$2.49) - and there will be no more upside. It used to be at $0.50, $55k was generated a year; at $2.50, it became $274k/yr. So, $50k/yr. lost on 1 term. If there are 1,000 terms (and a trademark term could be dozens of terms), that is $50M lost (which is a tiny piece of Google revenue). It's a simplistic assumption, but it is lost revenue and there will be no more growth along the lines they have seen it grow.

Google does not impose the PPC limits, but if you are an affiliate marketer, and the advertiser/merchant says 'no affiliate can bid over $2 CPC' then the affiliate has to oblige or be terminated from the program. This practice, too, is becoming increasingly common. Again, there will be ceilings to PPC revenue growth in thousands of the little crevices where Google succeeds.

SEM, as you are likely familiar, takes a lot of work. Companies that outsource will do so for expertise. If they bring in house and have an extra 20% to spend on Google, people are hired and it costs the company money to do so.

Yes, there are many advertisers that want CPM or eyeballs, but if you are paying CPC, you likely need sales, inquiries. Even if only 20% of CPC want CPA, it is still 20% and significant.

More and more companies are enforcing trademark bidding restrictions -yes, some have had them forever; some are just getting into the game. Granted, it's not the majority of search volume, but take thousands and thousands of trademarks, it has an incremental effect. Google has always claimed success because it could efficiently take $1 from 10,000,000 people a day - tiny transactions adding up to a big pie. If you start to limit the growth on a segment of these tiny transactions, even 10%-20%, it will have an impact on Google's growth.

Again, thank you for your comments and they are well received. In the end, nobody really knows what is going on or what is going to happen and I always appreciate lively discussion.

Has ValueClick Cried Wolf Too Often?

Well, I do not have exact figures and that exact data would be impossible to retrieve as many CJ publishers would not share.

However, you can get a great feel for the landscape by searching Google for various terms and if you are familiar with the CJ linking structure, you will note that in many cases 25%-75% of the ad slots are CJ affiliates. Sometimes it is more or less depending on guidelines of the advertiser, but CJ affiliates will often rely heavily on Google and other paid search marketing to drive traffic.

It is not to say Google could not realize more revenue by going direct to CJ and use the pay-per-performance offers. However, Google is already realizing a fair amount of revenue that is derived from the CJ network.

Interest Rate Cut? Sleep it Off - Overall Things Look Good

Aerius - yes, I agree leveraging yourself to the hilt and investing wisely over the past few years would have yielded you strong returns - more so than being safe. I must admit, I heavily and intelligently leveraged myself and gained from such over the past few years. Now, I just see that it is not sustainable and at some point will end and is becoming more apparent - it may be next week; it may be 10 years from now. All I know is that the particular moment when that happens is getting closer. Thank you for the comment and reading the article.

Thomas Group: No Reason to Stick Around

None - no regrets whatsoever and no need to re-address. A nice contract for TGIS, though actual rewards delivered to TGIS are yet to be determined. I prefer to cut losses if they get too aggressive, which is what I did. Proceeds from that were put into other positions which during the short term have outperformed TGIS, even on this latest pop. Best regards to those that saw the contract coming and earned the short-term gain. TGIS, by the ratios, is in a good position to perform well, however, I feel more confident, long-term, in my other positions. I do not consider myself a psychic by any means and this certainly could be one that I come to regret - but the marketplace abounds with opportunity. Additionally, I try to be upfront to those reading and if my mind changes and my current opinion differs from an original, I come straight to the point. Again, best regards to TGIS holders and management for earning a part of the Navy contract.

Corus Bankshares, Brush Engineered Materials: Two Winners Among Losers

Thanks again for your response. I feel that your comments address and rebalance the position, as you suggested. These forums are all about open discussion and expressing points of view. I am not interested in misleading retail investors, of course - and I never said "buy, buy, buy" and never said it is going to the moon. However, I do not believe that CORS is in the dire straits that you suggest, but anything is possible. However, it is a risk, as nothing in investing is guaranteed - anything can happen. Additionally, in my original article, I did express the risk involved and that going under can certainly happen. Let's see how the story unfolds. I have no pride when it comes to things like this - we are all here to make money, build wealth, and preserve capital. Those are my #1 goals - being 'right' is secondary to building wealth via investing in equities. It appears that CORS has been beaten down and that there is value in this company from the information readily available to the investment community. Investing in any company that has lost a great deal of market cap always comes with significant risk, but the rewards are potentially big as well. Best regards and I am enjoying the discussion.

Corus Bankshares, Brush Engineered Materials: Two Winners Among Losers

Thank you for the continue comments. Your points and concerns are certainly valid and I respect them. I do not see a scenario where a bank pretty much owned and operated by the same family that founded it 50 years ago would blatantly enrich themselves at the expense of stockholders and watch the stock price of the company plummet to zero. Obviously, we have differing opinions on the future of CORS, which any investment is not without risk, so it should be interesting to see how it pans out. For my sake, I do hope I am correct, but I have been wrong before - that is the nature of the market. Yes, there is high risk here - and certainly a chance of something worse coming out of the weeds, but I logically do not see it coming to that. The actions of CORS indicate otherwise.

Corus Bankshares, Brush Engineered Materials: Two Winners Among Losers

investorgold2002 - Thank you for your comments. Yes, I am aware of the risk that CORS faces in light of this very slow real estate market - and I am from South Florida, so I have seen it first hand. Yes, it is possible they will have to eat many loans and end up in a liquidity crisis - that is the risk and it very well could happen. I am betting that CORS, the Glickman's, and their very stringent loan committee that is intimately familiar with all of their loans, made above average decisions and will not be impacted as much as the market and the shorts are betting. Certainly, it could happen, but if it was really an imminent risk, the Glickman's and CORS would face major charges of enriching themselves via company cash when a collapse was imminent. Could they be doing that? Of course, it is possible, though unlikely. It may take some time, but I am willing to bet that CORS will not be impacted as much as the market is anticipating. I have spoken with the developers of many condominiums - and all have loans. Simply writing off the loan and abandoing the project is not realistically an option. The developers, in the first place, have to justify obtaining the financing, regardless of what source and regardless if it is secured or not. Banks simply do not just hand out dollars to these developers. Additionally, at some point, even if it is a few years, things will turn around and the projects will be complete and units will sell. The developer could bail out now, but why? To lose all that has been put into the deal - which is sizeable from a personal standpoint for these developers - is not going to happen. Things might be tight for them, but they will wait around if they need to before defaulting. Therefore, I would surmise that CORS will come out with some battle scars, but will not collapse, despite the negativity facing this sector. Yes, there is great risk, but that is why CORS is currently yielding about 6% (excluding the special one-time dividend). If eating loans to the point of going under was a real possibility, I doubt CORS would continue their dividend payments to shareholders. For them, making a bad decision knowing what will happen in the end if it is bad is an almost definitive path to having to forfeit their monies received from the strategy and watching their many-multi-million dollar stake deteriorate. Yes, stranger things have happened and there is risk involved with CORS way more so than say a Bank of America that is better diversified, but CORS is not going anywhere. Thank you for your insight - I welcome all points of view and discussion.

Seven Stocks That Trade Above One Thousand Dollars Per Share

It's the understanding of units of ownership. If you owned your own company in full, why would you want to break up your ownership into little pieces? These companies have management that act like owners, and in many cases, are still run by the family that founded the company 100 years+ ago.

So, say you start your own company providing a service and that is your livelihood. You rely on the money the company makes, not the price per share of your stock. Sure, perhaps the opportunity comes along to sell a piece of it or raise capital and issue new shares, but the reality is, as long as you are an owner, just keep it for yourself. Furthermore, even if I am ok with someone becoming a new owner, I want them to pay the full price and not be able to have a few crumbs. The exclusivity of ownership.

Stock price is important, yes, but I bet that if you talk to any of the management at any of the above companies, I bet the price per share on the stock market is probably the last thing on their mind. Additionally, Very conservative financial theory (commonly practiced by family owned companies, small regional banks with huge operating history) and historical data suggest that having a stock split is not really good or bad - so, since it is not bad, and not good, why do it?

Microsoft's aQuantive Deal: An Act of Desperation

Jordan - thank you for your comment. You are absolutely right - this really is more of a 1+1=3 acquisition than MSFT looking to incrementally add to the bottom line. Financially, MSFT can take it - even if AQNT goes to 0, the $6B is a small amt of MSFT's cash and they will make that up quickly via operations.

And, yes, 100% agreed that I am not privvy to the exact discussions that took place between MSFT and AQNT and saying it is 'too expensive' the day after could certainly be premature.

MSFT has yet to succeed they can compete with Google or Yahoo! on the Internet level and the world is certainly moving towards a more web-based rather than desktop-based environment. MSFT, I believe, acted more out of fear than definitive certainty that this deal will pan out. Only time will tell. I think financially the premium is way too high and will put pressure on MSFT's line items over the coming years, though not to the point of materially damaging their business - more like someone's spreadsheet will be hurting. In many ways, MSFT had no choice, it seems and the act was motivated out of a fear of missing out rather than a definitive business plan. I also believe VCLK would represent a better choice over AQNT due to my personal experience with working with both companies. I would imagine or surmise that MSFT and VCLK had discussions as well and in the end AQNT said what MSFT wanted/needed/was looking to hear and that is what closed the deal.

In the end, these forums are just a place to express opinions and create dialogue and I appreciate your feedback and you do make valid points.