Loading...
Symbols:
Get Seeking Alpha Free Stock Alerts by Email!
Get Free Stock Alerts by Email!
Transcripts
- TrueBlue, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Polycom, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Exponent, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- EXFO Electro-Optical Engineering, Inc. F4Q08 (Qtr End 08/31/08) Earnings Call Transcript
- Abbott Laboratories Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- St. Jude Medical, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Joe's Jeans Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Spansion, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
- Landstar System, Inc. Q3 2008 Earnings Call Transcript
-
Editor's Picks
-
Most Popular
- Bank Safety: The Hidden America That's Not in Crisis
- High U.S. Corporate Taxes Are a Myth
- Survival of the Longest
- Can We Prevent Asset Bubbles?
- Warmer Hands (Equities) but Cold Heart (Credit)
- How'd We Get Into This Mess?
- Full list of Editor's Picks »
- Why Cramer Should Be Suspended »
- Chesapeake Energy Corporation Business Update Call Transcript »
- Bargain Buys For Patient Investors - Barron's »
- Bullion Shortage and Spot Prices Tell Two Different Gold Stories »
- Some Stocks to Research for the Market Rebound »
- Boone Pickens' Holdings »
- Chesapeake Bites McLendon »
- Gold / Silver Ratio Tops 80 to 1 »
- Julian Robertson: Some Buying, but Bearish on the Economy »
- The Bottom's Within Sight - Barron's »
- The Countdown of a Manipulated Gold Price Is Running Out »
Trading Center
Hedge Fund Jobs
Job Seekers: Search jobs by category, get job alerts by email or live feed, apply online See full list of jobs »
Employers: See all recruitment options, get applications online or by email Post a job »
tchannon
15 Comments
$125 Oil Not Sustainable for the Time Being
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
Broadwind Energy: Cramer, Someone Had to Say Something
Broadwind Energy: Cramer, Someone Had to Say Something
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
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
PPC Advertising Takes Its Toll on Google
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?
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
Thomas Group: No Reason to Stick Around
Corus Bankshares, Brush Engineered Materials: Two Winners Among Losers
Corus Bankshares, Brush Engineered Materials: Two Winners Among Losers
Corus Bankshares, Brush Engineered Materials: Two Winners Among Losers
Seven Stocks That Trade Above One Thousand Dollars Per Share
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
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.