Seeking Alpha

PeterScriabin

PeterScriabin
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View PeterScriabin's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Scoop: Apple's IPhone 6 Will Have Sapphire Screen! [View instapost]
    karim: forgive me for possibly asking the obvious but:

    presumably, Matthews' profile, with the offending word in its text, was on his LinkedIn page for some time before today, yet - for some strange reason - it was briefly taken down, and then restored with altered text, the very same day you observed it there, right?

    Although I am not (yet) a subscriber to PPL, I understand that the Matthews profile news has been on Matt's site for 2 days. So it's not clear whether it was that, or today's postings, that caused the deletion/changes.

    Does this mean Apple is monitoring the interwebs for references connecting it to GTAT or sapphire, and prevailed over either LinkedIn or Matthews himself, on a Sunday no less, to alter the text? I'm swimming with all this a little bit...maybe you can comment? Thanks...
    Sep 8, 2014. 02:33 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Workday And The New Horizon In Cloud-Based Applications [View article]
    Author: please explain, or at least exemplify: "We're talking here of native [cloud] applications that address the cloud as a single computer, and use the data large companies have stored there to make change happen in real time.

    In particular: What on earth is "cloud as a single computer"? Salesforce software is somehow using data outside the customer's store, or even their own extended databases (eg. those of other customers), to affect decisions the customer makes? How is this not a gross breach of security or contract? Or are these passages of yours just more cloudy mumbo-jumbo?
    Aug 29, 2014. 03:53 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Salesforce Has The Strength To Push Your Investment Up [View article]
    During this commercial for Salesforce, you did not seem anywhere to relate the size of the current GAAP losses, your beliefs about the soon-forthcoming GAAP profits, and the PPS. In other words, your thesis ("marketing costs will fall, so GAAP profits will become positive, so buy CRM now") seems to apply for ANY CRM PPS whatever. Yes?

    If you did not mean this, then what level of GAAP profits do you expect from Salesforce, and when, and what rate of growth do you expect, and therefore what multiple do you think is appropriate?

    While I'm asking you for basic information, instead of an extended commercial - WHY exactly do you think SG&A for Salesforce have always risen at approximately the same rate for the last 5-10 years, so that there have NEVER been any substantial GAAP profits, and why/how do you think Salesforce will be able to keep customers WITHOUT such marketing spend?
    Aug 25, 2014. 10:11 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • LinkedIn slips on rumors of major short position [View news story]
    Uh, Darren, I think you have reckoned without Mark's sensayuma. If I know him, he's short LNKD, as am I.

    With that said, I wouldn't short on Einhorn's say-so. This is the chump who thinks MNK is a short. From reading his credo on that, I know for a stone-fact the man is arrogant and incapable of doing fundamental research. But with THAT said, he is right on LinkedIn!
    Aug 19, 2014. 01:43 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Update: Questcor Shareholders Are The Net Gainers Of Acquisition Deal [View article]
    26851233: as far as one can tell from known IDs on the MBs, all major brokerages have already swapped shares and added the cash to accounts. My broker, Merrill Edge, completed the changes to all my positions last night - despite a rep previously telling me it could take up to 10 business days.

    I had the impression that Mallinckrodt management assiduously pursued a rapid practical fulfillment of the merger arrangements, once the votes were tallied last Thursday.

    The only fly in this particular jar of ointment, and it's temporary, is that the whole cloud of short-fleas that infested the QCOR carcass, have simply flown over to the nearby warm Mallinckrodt body. All the same incentives that produced the Mall-Questcor deal (immensely profitable product with continuing long-term growth, tax-inversion, shorts unreasonably perverting PPS) are now in place to produce the Allergan-Mallinckrodt deal.
    Aug 19, 2014. 11:23 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ADMP And Its Cloud Of Uncertainty - Why It's Time To Buy [View instapost]
    Thanks for the mini-write-up, James. Curious as to which were the "questionable management moves" that you mention? You mean the shelf? As you note, they're going to need a little funding (nothing like enough dilution to justify the 6-->2.70 move) until EPI starts producing revenue.

    You would think they'd have no trouble getting private placements if the funds share your and Joe Springer's (and my) evaluation of the pipeline? I suppose the recent swoon has complicated their efforts to get the price they (Adamis) want.
    Aug 18, 2014. 02:19 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Understanding The Excitement That Surrounds Gilead [View article]
    raining: this has been extensively discussed on SA and elsewhere, and is pretty clear, I think.

    The don't-buy case (for the home of which, see GS's research report) is that stocks should be valued on a DCF basis, and Sovaldi will likely only contribute to earnings substantially for 2 or 3 years, due to competition and pricing pressure.

    In plain English, this is saying that you can't extrapolate the $2.20 quarterly earnings to $8.80 and multiply by 10-15 (as you please), because it's likely not going to be that high by 2017. The rest of the pipeline is (in this kind of analysis) only likely to produce 8-10% growth, so, for now, $90 or so is plenty.

    For the opposite case see Dr. DeSantis's report, and any number of SA bullish articles.

    Finally, contrary to what you say, the PPS has moved pretty nicely since the earnings, from 90 to over 96 - though that may reflect buy-backs to an unknown extent. If so, the company obviously isn't buying GS's analysis.
    Aug 14, 2014. 06:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Yes, Me Worry [View article]
    Bret - I am astonished to hear that you read Mad magazine in the 1970s...was it really still around? You see, I read it (everyone did) in the 1950s! There was a boy in our class who had the misfortune of strongly resembling Alfred E Neuman, and the Latin teacher once sneeringly commented on it (you could do that in those days): "My God, Gradon, you look more and more like the cover of Mad magazine every day!" The room burst out in repressed laughter, and the poor fellow could only widen his sheepish Neuman-esque grin.

    Instead of studying Latin poetry, I should have been buying stock in the publisher of Mad magazine (and Action comics). What a wasted life I have led.
    Aug 14, 2014. 02:32 PM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Praise rolls in for LinkedIn's Q2 results, long-term opportunities [View news story]
    One reads that their GAAP earnings actually fell Y/Y (ie. comparing Q2s), and are now negative. As with CRM, revenue increase rates are fully matched by cost increase rates.

    There were no special charges that would justify considering non-GAAP, instead of GAAP, earnings - only the usual relentless and massive march of stock-based compensation expenses (AKA "wages and salaries") and amortizaion of intangible assets (AKA 'non-accretive acquisitions").

    If you follow fashion and ignore GAAP, the PPS is STILL 100x non-GAAP "earnings". Why is everybody gaga over this stock?

    Can some Long please explain this to me - because I am tired of bruising my chin on the desktop, as my mouth sags open in disbelief at the valuation and the cooing, fawning analysts.
    Aug 1, 2014. 02:12 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • LinkedIn beats by $0.12, beats on revenue [View news story]
    Oh, come on, DVL, it's the standard 100x non-GAAP earnings for GAAP-profitless .com companies. They're now "making" $2 / annum non-GAAP, so the standard PPS must be 200. Bah.
    Jul 31, 2014. 04:58 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • BioLife: New Contract Manufacturing Agreement Is Undervalued - CEO Michael Rice Explains Why [View article]
    Trevor, thanks for this and all your recent posts on BLFS. This stock is what used to be called a "sleeper", by which I mean the MAIN revenue source will only develop gradually (2016-2021), as a minority of current preservation-media customers gains FDA approval.

    It seems the current CEO has grasped that the contract-manufacturing segment is vital to support short-term market sentiment (2014-2016), because what the latter most fears is revenue-less biopharma stocks who will soon need to raise yet more capital.

    Even so, it's hard to comprehend the recent fall from over 8 to just over 3, which seemed to be PURELY the debt-equity replacement (with 3 to 2 then being added on when the ORS contract was lost). The debtholders were always going to be paid before the equityholders, so why the massive collapse? I don't care, it gave me a chance to more than double my (small) holdings. This is a long-term hold, for sure.
    Jul 31, 2014. 01:59 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Understanding The Excitement That Surrounds Gilead [View article]
    @invest84: very interesting post. Back in 2010-2012, when the currently-outperforming AIDS and HCV drugs were mostly a gleam in the proverbial milkman's eye, typical GILD PPS was about $20-25. Multiply by 1.5 and it's close to your $40bn. This is without accounting for the present cancer, leaukemia and other, unrealized pipelines, and the buybacks.

    Still, I think your post is a great reminder that we investors must always consider the current market cap in relation to the rosiest projections of earnings.
    Jul 26, 2014. 01:43 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Acthar's Future Could Be An Adverse Event For Mallinckrodt [View article]
    Article states "The New York Times last month broke the news that Acthar is suspected of CAUSING the deaths of an alarming number of people" (caps added to emphasize operative word). Like these authors, the cited article was written by a short seller, a person with limited integrity, or ability to perform any but the shallowest research. However, even the NYT article most definitely did NOT allege causation. As soon as you see the quoted sentence, you know what kind of people were writing this article!

    Unfortunately, very old, very sick people sometimes die. Shorts like these always point, Fauntleroyish, to the shortage of large, double-blind, randomized studies evidencing the effectiveness of Acthar. So, Mr. Short, where are the studies showing that very old, sick people with the same diseases and conditions, who did NOT receive Acthar, lived longer than the tiny numbers cited by the NYT?? No, really, where are they? And you speak of "causing"! Should be ashamed.
    Jul 17, 2014. 02:19 PM | 10 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor's Own Data Blatantly Shows A 31% Decline In Net Sales Of Acthar By Aetna, With Other Insurers Following Suit - Mallinckrodt Shareholders, Pay Attention [View article]
    Doc Engelman: your straw man must be getting pretty bullet-ridden - this is far from the first time you've trotted him out in the comment section.

    If steroids work, then everybody, especially the large insurance companies, is with you. Even in the 60s, they were easier and cheaper to manufacture. Who are these mythical docs of yours who, as a routine matter, prescribe Acthar, before trying cheaper alternatives?

    Eh, but unfortunately, they don't work for everybody, and then Acthar Gel sometimes does. How do you explain that? Babies as scam artists?

    Another angle for your old, retired mind to consider: maybe docs in your generation didn't know EVERYTHING there was to know about the effects of naturally-derived ACTH products VERSUS synthetically-derived VERSUS corticosteroids? Experts in the field have often commented here about the NON steroido-genetic effects of the former - something to do with melanocortin receptors? Can you be quite sure that, in the face of the evidence, your purveyors of "expert medical" advice will declare Acthar valueless in all cases?

    Do you really believe the entire edifice Questcor built since 2007 (when they jacked the price) is a fantastic scam? If so, you might want to get your delusions some "expert medical" attention.

    Oh, one last thing - was that scientifically-valid, exceptionally-useful application of yours by any chance smoking-cessation? How interesting...
    Jul 15, 2014. 07:34 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Questcor's Own Data Blatantly Shows A 31% Decline In Net Sales Of Acthar By Aetna, With Other Insurers Following Suit - Mallinckrodt Shareholders, Pay Attention [View article]
    Goldtean: you and docrodwong (who made same point as you) have put your finger(s) on the central, obvious flaw in the article.

    The article headline states "Questcor's Own Data Blatantly Shows A 31% Decline In Net Sales Of Acthar By Aetna", BUT ACTUALLY Net Sales Of Acthar By Aetna HAVE INCREASED.

    The author's response to your post confirms his dishonesty. "CAW, CAW, you're not getting a logical answer out of ME!!!"

    To QTR: it's not an "excuse"! Goldtean TORE YOUR FEATHERS OFF! The only matter of interest in your articles and posts is which comes first - your intellectual or financial bankruptcy.
    Jul 15, 2014. 03:16 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
252 Comments
447 Likes