Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View PeterScriabin's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Petroamerica Oil: Welcome To The Cheapest Oil Producer Worldwide (Part 2) [View article]
    Wayne, thanks for the link! My question is as much addressed to VD as you: from the article:

    "The company is seeking $70 million to $80 million to pay a C$35 million ($31 million) bond maturing in April and to fund production growth, Navarrete said. A share sale is not being considered. The existing notes have an 11.5 percent coupon."

    If "PTA's cash...reached US$70 million on 24th November 2014" (VD, above), why are they looking to borrow so much, to repay a US$31 million bond? I realize they are refinancing a loan at a lower rate, but the amounts seem "large".

    The Q3 results looked pretty horrible, especially compared to a year ago. Ah, production was blockaded for about 70% of the quarter, by "Marxist protesters". Are we quite sure that's all in the past?

    Adding all this to 6564051's excellent list of "reasons" (also above), I can quite understand the PPS. But every risk has its price. I agree it may be a good bet at US$0.15-0.20!
    Nov 28, 2014. 09:41 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • France gets larger discount on Sovaldi than its neighbors [View news story]
    Hard to see how a $15,000 price difference, for a few small boxes, can be supported between 2 adjoining countries that belong to a union where free-trade, zero tariffs and open borders are the LAW. Even if Willy Schmidt can't just pop over into France to get his prescription filled, how would there not be middlemen to drive Harvoni over to Germany, no matter how regulated intra-EU trade in drugs notionally is?

    All I know is that Gilead is going to make a ton of money.

    Just wait for Q1 to be announced in April (emoticon = {smiles and rubs hands together, saliva drooling from edge of mouth}).
    Nov 20, 2014. 12:23 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Earnings Preview: Q3 2015 [View article]
    Hi jiri: PEG = Price/EARNINGS/Growth. The revenue growth is (apparently) there. You and Jim need to explain how SFDC is going to produce EARNINGS. Costs have to stop growing as fast as revenues. Capeesh?

    Marc doesn't care about any of that, because he is cashing out millions every month - on the back of pimps like Cramer, who know (much) better, and marks like you.
    Nov 15, 2014. 10:42 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon On Watch After Options Activity [View article]
    As so often, Gary, you are not reading with comprehension - whether wilfully or not, I cannot tell.

    Shorts (as opposed to long-put buyers) do not need luck or wild guesses, only that the truth is generally recognized, in the end.
    Nov 15, 2014. 05:03 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon On Watch After Options Activity [View article]
    Why, Gary, this is as close to a theory of the bafflingly-bloated AMZN PPS as I've ever heard you come! Hitherto, you have ONLY pointed to the scoreboard.

    No one knows WHEN the procession-watchers will notice Mr Bezos's lack of business attire, which is why I steer clear of puts. But I am betting they notice in the end. Shorting is not inherently more expensive than going long. I can wait patiently, because this particular King has no more money for clothes, and cannot forever rely on long people, who stand up and block the crowd's view of his naked, short body.
    Nov 15, 2014. 04:06 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon On Watch After Options Activity [View article]
    I covered some of my short at 280, AH after earnings, KNOWING (sic) it would soon (had not expected SO soon) be back at 320. Am now layering into more shorting, 320 through 360. Don't think it will ever return to 400, but if it does, will go ALL IN.

    The notion that Amazon is somehow disguising investment spending, that will produce GAAP profits (let alone profits that would justify a price above 200), in ANY of the Operating Expense lines is completely bogus. This story/meme suits both sides of the trade, and has done for several years now.

    Mr Bezos "has a dream", sure, but company profitability is not an important part of it. As long as he has powerful friends in the investment industry who can successfully promulgate the Greater Fool theory, the current cycle of down-on-results / up-on-dream-weaving, will continue. As long as the payments cycle and/or higher interest rates don't burst the bubble, anyway.
    Nov 15, 2014. 12:50 PM | 9 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Earnings Preview: Q3 2015 [View article]
    Based on a paragraph (below) from the latest 10-Q, I have an open question for CRM Longs:


    . even expected non-GAAP profits yield a current P/E of approx 128 (ie. 64 / 0.5)
    . GAAP profitability is not expected, nor is there any company-delineated business model for producing same at any time in the future
    . deferred costs increase remorselessly at the same rate as, or an even higher rate than, deferred revenues

    THEREFORE - what on earth do you find compelling about holding - let alone buying more - CRM ???

    10-Q text:

    "We expect to incur net GAAP losses in the future. We have incurred net losses in each fiscal quarter except one since July 31, 2011. In addition, we expect our costs to increase as a result of decisions made for our long-term benefit, such as equity awards and business combinations. If our revenue does not grow to offset these expected increased costs, we will not be able to return to profitability and we may continue to incur net losses, on a U.S. GAAP basis, in the future."
    Nov 14, 2014. 06:07 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Gilead: Another Competitor Bites The Dust [View article]
    panamerican: Well, maybe one big reason Moderation so STATED (not implied) - is that the Obama admin stood for, nay supported, three waves of Ben helicopter QE.

    The general Republican hostility to such monetary policy was made amply clear. Even Brett stated that "The Federal Reserve has been very good for the stock market".

    You ever read Krugman? What party does he primarily support?
    Nov 12, 2014. 01:09 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What We Learned From The MannKind 3rd Quarter Conference Call [View article]
    LforD: "a company has 40 the math".

    40 days from 9/30 is 11/9, but today is still only 11/5. So what on earth are you on about??
    Nov 6, 2014. 02:19 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why You Should Add LinkedIn Into Your Aggressive Growth Portfolio [View article]
    Marcus, your profile states you are a student in Accounting and Finance. So you might be expected to appreciate that there is a quantitative, as well as a qualitative dimension to investing. Even if LinkedIn is really the top-quality company you feel it is, with prospects to match, the question arises of whether the NPV of the likely stream of future GAAP profits is, or is not, already reflected in the current PPS. Is $2 a share good value? $200? $2000? You offer nothing to help the investor differentiate these THREE orders of magnitude.

    The main feature the neutral investor notices about LI, as the years roll by, is that no matter how fast users and revenues grow, costs seem to increase at much the same rate. The company continues to make less than 1/100 of its PPS in annual net income, even if vital elements of GAAP accounting, such as recurring SBC, are deliberately left out. In GAAP terms, the company increased its losses even in Q2, the announcement of whose results led to a 40 % PPS increase (since abated somewhat).

    Is there something about the LI business model that will likely always multiply costs as fast as revenues, such as constantly needing fresh salesmen and computer networks in order to bring in new revenue, or is this only a feature of a certain level or phase of operations? If so, why? I think you have to analyse this in thinking about LI, if only for your own good, never mind that of your readers.

    Fair disclosure: very short LI.
    Oct 21, 2014. 10:27 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Question Isn't If Gilead's Hep C Combo Will Be Approved In The US By Next Friday; The Question Is The Price Of The Regimen [View article]

    Thanks for such clear and educational replies. I certainly had not realized there was such a clear demarcation of "cured" and "not-cured" with ALL Hep-C treatments. Had assumed there could be more or less substantial remission or postponement of symptoms and systemic damage, as with so many other illnesses/treatments (including HIV and - your analogy - cancer).

    I apologize for describing your original post as "incoherent"! I had meant to say APPARENTLY incoherent, but the time limit for changes had expired. I well knew that MY not-understanding didn't mean others didn't understand, of course.

    Regarding "luck", I meant only that I had read that Sof/Led trials tended to be over-subscribed (ie. some applicants, who could have benefited, were turned away, for lack of places) - so that anyone who got in could be described as "lucky", no matter how much research they had done.
    Oct 5, 2014. 11:39 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Question Isn't If Gilead's Hep C Combo Will Be Approved In The US By Next Friday; The Question Is The Price Of The Regimen [View article]
    Menicholas: You begin, and end, by trenchantly disputing Long Term Bio's contention that Sovaldi+X provides a full cure, where other, earlier regimes did not. As evidence, you describe a litany of treatments that tormented you with suffering, and provided you no cure, whereupon you lucked into a Sovaldi+X trial that totally cured you.

    You also refer to "the above data, and any other older data" as somehow providing support to your thesis, which remains totally unsubstantiated, and in fact contradicted by your own testimony.

    Normally, I would just shrug and pass over such an incoherent post, but you seem to know a lot about this subject, so I beg you: please clarify your line of argument. Where are these data "above"? TIA...
    Oct 4, 2014. 12:26 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Amidst Rising Debt, The Amazon CFO Quits [View instapost]
    really_now: despite my great respect for the opinions and writings of Timothy Phillips, I have to disagree with him regarding "some portfolio manager". I don't think you should give away the store so easily.

    FWIW, I did not trip on this phrase as "arrogant". It just sounds like you didn't especially note the name. It COULD also have an overtone that you don't have a whole lot of time or respect for some of the analysis on that station. It could even mean that you didn't want to embarrass this particular analyst by attaching the name to the faux pas. All fine with me, and none of it in the least in need of a correction, let alone an apology. If this was any part of the reason SA rejected your article, they could and should have just made the suggestion Mr. Phillips made.

    Where I do agree with Timothy is on "hard-hitting and entertaining"! Well-written, well-constructed, thoughtful, and informative to the general reader (eg. a not-even-B-grade, non-accounting student, such as moi). Your writing, in style and content, is far above most articles on SA. Period.

    I have to guess SA has some stake in the AMZN-Bezos mystique, and doesn't want to be associated with THIS kind of king-has-no-clothes journalism. Everyone has those kinds of thoughts about Bezos and Szkutak, when a 53 year-old CFO, who's always on the calls, suddenly ups and goes (even I did). You just expressed them better. Please do not be discouraged, but keep writing.
    Sep 16, 2014. 01:31 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Should LinkedIn Be In Your Portfolio? [View article]
    "The GSDM measures innovation and growth on a sliding qualitative mathematical scale (-1:1)"..."On a macro level, LinkedIn (LNKD) has an innovation metric of 0.26", (etc.)

    For the reader wondering what on earth these "innovative" new measures might be, it is disconcerting, to say the least, when the only links provided are to familiar Yahoo finance pages with the well-known, dismal income statements for LNKD.

    I agree with the previous posters that this article is without any value whatever, for explaining the value or prospects of LINKD - until this author deigns to explain what in goodness these made-up "measures" are.
    Sep 15, 2014. 05:43 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla's $1.3B tax breaks approved by Nevada lawmakers [View news story]
    PeterJA: humor unpatriotic too?
    Sep 12, 2014. 08:47 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment