Seeking Alpha

koleffstephan

koleffstephan
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View koleffstephan's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • An Interview With Grier Eliasek, President And COO Of Prospect Capital [View article]
    Mr. Alfonso: I appreciate the interview and the question and answer format. I do not seen many other BDC companies and their management teams doing inverviews such as this. Your credibility is not damaged in the least and the reason your interview generated much interest and commentary is because PSEC the second leading BDC company by market capitalization and the most heavily traded BDC company. That is one of the many reasons why readers and investors and traders are fascinated with this BDC in addition to the bountiful dividend that it pays coupled with most insider ownership of any BDC stock actively traded. Thank you again for taking the time to do the interview and for posting the interview - much appreciated.
    Jan 29, 2015. 09:54 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital's Upcoming Fiscal Q2 2015 Earnings And NAV Projection [View article]
    Hi Scott: Thanks for clarifying the exposure of PSEC's energy exposure. In essence, they have 5.1% energy exposure, as management has publicly stated. Management has never stated that they have "5.1% energy exposure plus an unknown portion of the CLO investments," and I see - from reading your article and message post responses - that you have not written or said that either.
    Jan 29, 2015. 09:03 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital: A Sequential NAV Decline And Potential Sell-Off Will Be A Buying Opportunity [View article]
    jmkdog: I am with you in sharing your sentiments about holding PSEC as an investment. I disagree with Hi Yield that the Buzz's article had any influence or has any influence on the price of PSEC stock movement. Just wishful thinking in my opinion.
    Jan 29, 2015. 08:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital: Oil, Energy And CLO Exposure [View article]
    FRPT Saves Lives: You write a well reasoned message post and your opinions and reasoning articulated in your message post are the same thoughts that most objective and non-biased investors/traders share and agree about PSEC and it's management team and it's prospects (no pun intended) as an investment.
    Jan 29, 2015. 09:12 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital's Upcoming Fiscal Q2 2015 Earnings And NAV Projection [View article]
    Hi Yield: "Scott's comment above he agrees with Wells Fargo and Buzz in this matter." What exactly are you insinuating that Scott Kennedy is agreeing on with the Buzz and Wells Fargo?

    As far as 6%, I made a mistake. PSEC said it was 5.1% energy exposure not 6% -sorry.

    You and the Buzz said/inferred or both, that the energy exposure is more than 5.1%. Correct? A number of 18.5% energy exposure was written in a message post (to include the CLO's) - purportedly.

    Again, 5.1% energy exposure - pure and simple.

    If you are alleging that the Buzz was not "throwing out" (and you agreeing with) 18.5% energy exposure then please tell me or show us what was the figure (percentage) of energy exposure that the Buzz said PSEC had exposure too.
    Jan 28, 2015. 02:09 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital's Upcoming Fiscal Q2 2015 Earnings And NAV Projection [View article]
    Hi Yield Drip: PSEC has publicly stated that they have 5.1% energy exposure. PERIOD! They did not publicly state that they have 5.1% energy exposure plus the CLO energy exposures. PERIOD.

    You are quite able to find the Buzz's message post stating/inferring "that their (PSEC) energy exposure is more like 18.5% including the CLO's," and also find your response message posts agreeing with the Buzz's proclamation of this. I am not wasting my time looking for stuff that you are quite capable of looking for.

    Again and lastly, PSEC stated that they have 5.1% energy exposure. They did not state that they have 5.1% energy exposure plus the CLO energy exposure making it more like 18.5% with the possibility of many impairments having to be taken. Period and end of story.
    Jan 27, 2015. 10:33 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital's Upcoming Fiscal Q2 2015 Earnings And NAV Projection [View article]
    Hi Yield Drip: Really? No. Please let it rest. PSEC has publicly stated that they have 5.1% energy exposure and Mr. Kennedy (the author of this article and an accountant by profession) has also said the same. It is you and the Buzz who insist and have written message posts stating that you "don't trust PSEC's management analysis of them publicly stating that they have 5.1% energy exposure and that the Buzz feels is is more like 18.5% and you concur."
    So, please give it a rest of telling readers that I am trying to mislead readers. I am simply trying to prevent you and the Buzz from misleading readers into believing the Buzz's "analysis" that PSEC has 18.5% energy exposure. Please share with the readers a research paper from a bona fide analyst (Buzz is not an analyst he is a writer), accountant, brokerage house, or PSEC manager, who shares yours and the Buzz's opinion that PSEC's energy exposure is 18.5%. Mr. Kennedy's articles are always non-biased and that is why he is highly respected.
    Jan 27, 2015. 06:28 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Prospect Capital's Upcoming Fiscal Q2 2015 Earnings And NAV Projection [View article]
    Hi Scott: Wonderful and complete article on PSEC. I am glad that you reiterated and confirmed the public announcement that PSEC has only 5% exposure in energy. There has been some writers and message posters on this SA message board that have performed their own analysis and are stating that PSEC has over 18% energy exposure despite PSEC management team stating that they only 5 percent. Your article - besides being comprehensive and complete - was refreshing to get verification on PSEC's energy exposure being only 5 percent. Thanks for taking the time to post on the message board.
    Jan 26, 2015. 08:19 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Be Here Now: Thanks for letting me know. I have never been a MAIN stock holder and I too am glad that I have never owned this overvalued BDC stock. Thanks again for letting me know your history with owning PSEC stock.
    Jan 26, 2015. 07:37 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Be Here Now: There is nothing confusing. No one on this message board cares what I own, what you own, or what Buzz owns. Since Buzz makes himself out to be an authority on BDC stocks, and is a repeated author on SA, it is usual, customary, and reasonable to ask the writer (Buzz) what BDC stocks that writer owns to see if there is a conflict of interest as well as to see if the writer (Buzz) has any "skin in the game." Owning "small positions in BDC stocks for research purposes" -as Buzz repeatedly states he does - is so nebulous and so non-commital that a reader of his articles has not context as to the veracity or validity of his "research. Remember, the Buzz does the "research" and writes the articles and "holds small positions in BDC stocks for research purposes," - not me, so the only "confusion" is what exactly is the Buzz holding, what is the performance of his BDC stock holdings, and why do you blindly accept all that he writes without questioning. Moreover, the Buzz has small holdings in BDC stocks for research purposes (his words) so how can you say or infer that he is "not biased" when we (the SA readers) have no idea what he owns and if he has any conflicts -direct or indirect - when he writes?

    Please prove and show us (the SA readers) direct proof and evidence that "95% of his personal BDC holdings in 2014 had the highest returns over all other BDCs and that is why I believe he knows what he is doing. Results." That is very interesting commentary and I will wait for your response and direct evidence of that.

    As far as "hijacking," the Buzz is the one "turns attention to PSEC" when his articles on BDC stocks talk about "Energy Exposure and BDC Stocks," (paraphrasing the title) and PSEC has only 5.1% energy exposure and then the Buzz "turns attention to CLO's and PSEC" in an article that is about energy exposure and BDC stocks as if the inference is that PSEC is "risky" even though it only has 5.1% energy exposure.

    Lastly, I don't purposely mislead readers. I write message posts in response to writers that are biased against stocks that I own, when the information is blatantly biased. If the message posts are balanced and non-biased, I read and don't write message posts.

    The Buzz is biased against PSEC and it does not take much intelligence or imagination to discern that. Therefore, when I read the bias, I comment on it and message post on it. I certainly have some "beefs" with some of PSEC's management decisions but I still feel that it is the best BDC stock in the bunch.
    Jan 26, 2015. 07:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Be Here Now: Are you an investor in PSEC stock? Or, were you ever an investor in PSEC stock? I ask for curiosity sake as well as being interested in your interest in reading PSEC stock information. As far as "it is your money and I hope that you do not lose it," so far so good for me. I have been an investor in PSEC stock since approximately 2010 and have purchased at prices as high as $12.30/share and as low as $7.41/share all the while collecting the fabulous dividend that they are paying. Buying PSEC stock at a presently 80-85% of it's stated NAV is much more appealing to me than buying MAIN stock at 120-125% of it stated NAV. "To each his own," but I"ll stick with PSEC and if you like MAIN (which apparently you do) good luck to you and it's over valued share price.
    Jan 26, 2015. 05:45 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Hi Yield: Are you using your message post on the SA message board to promote "Buzz's offline premium reports on BDC stocks?" Really? You can't be serious in thinking that I am interested in that service and the fact that the Buzz has a paid for subscription offline service in no way indicates "he knows what he is doing." He simply indicated he is a writer looking to make money. Nothing wrong with that. It is what it is. I do not "hijack" comments section at all. I simply rebut articles and information that are taken for as gospel and I have no intention of "promoting my stock." No one on this message board cares what stocks I own or don't own nor does anyone on this board care what you own or the Buzz owns. Really.
    Jan 26, 2015. 05:26 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Be Here Now:

    You stated your preferences and here is mine. I prefer to rely on PSEC management as stating in a public document/announcement that they have 5.1% energy exposure rather than Buzz. I do trust them and I do consider them very shareholder/investor friendly commensurate with the massive insider ownership of PSEC stock that the CEO owns relative to any other BDC CEO stock ownership in his/her own respective company. PSEC has 5.1% energy exposure.
    Jan 26, 2015. 05:51 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Hi Yield: You do realize that the Buzz, the writer who hold small amounts of BDC stocks for "research purposes" is the only writer who is stating that PSEC has 18.5% energy exposure that is likely to realize significant impairments? That's the only fact that I know and see.

    As far as "leaving negative misleading information," I think you must be reading a different message board than I am.

    As far a "valid concerns" about energy exposure of PSEC, they (PSEC management) has addressed it. THEY HAVE 5.1% ENERGY EXPOSURE THAT THEY PUT OUT IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT.

    I thought you would never ask about "getting my information directly from the company." I did have a private telephone conference call with the COO of PSEC, Mr. Grier Eliask, on 12-09-14 at 11 am and all company information (dividend policy, spin off of various companies, exposure to various industries, insider purchases of stock, etc..) was discussed and so, I did "get the information from PSEC."

    If you or the Buzz have "concerns" about the segment information as it concerns energy exposure with PSEC, perhaps you should also call yourself.
    Jan 25, 2015. 06:53 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Energy Exposure For BDCs [View article]
    Buzz:

    1. I disagree with your "analysis" that PSEC has 18.5% energy exposure and so does the CFO of PSEC, as he has written that PSEC's energy exposure is 5.1% and has signed his name on that public document.
    2. I have no "whining" because you write potentially negative articles on PSEC - I promise. Your opinion has no bearing whatsoever on my investment on PSEC and I have continued to purchase stock in PSEC on a regular basis since 2010 in both my retirement and non-retirement account. I wish that when you did write negative information on PSEC it would cause the stock price to go down so that I could purchase more stock at a lower price but I do not see your articles having any influence on the stock price movement of PSEC stock. So your opinion about why I might be concerned about you writing negative information on PSEC stock are illusions of grandeur. I read your articles on PSEC simply because I read any and all information from any and all authors that write about BDC stocks in general and on PSEC in particular - pure and simple. I don't have to usually comment on those articles (occasionally I do) because I find them to be fairly balanced and objective on all of the BDC stocks, including PSEC stock. I cannot say the same for your writings and hence - my commentary when I feel it is warranted.

    I ask you again, Did the PSEC management team put out a false document when they said that their energy exposure is 5.1%? Yes or No? I believe that they put out a correct or true public document and that you are incorrect in your statement that PSEC has 18.5% energy exposure that is likely to experience many impairments. Therefore, I believe there is no truth to your statement in case you were unclear in my position.

    I think PSEC management team knows their business better than you do and by inference, their exposure to all of the various industries that they have exposure to - that's just my gut feeling.
    Jan 25, 2015. 06:42 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
134 Comments
371 Likes