Strategies & Market Trends | Value Investing


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Spekulatius who wrote (47124)3/23/2012 8:14:14 AM
From: Madharry   of 51565
 
that may be but they are still selling at 35% diluted discount to their nav and are not all that concentrated. they have also agreed to buy back 10% of the shares outstanding with monthly caps. i dont mind the 2% managment fee as much as i mind the performance fee.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Paul Senior who wrote (47147)3/23/2012 9:33:55 AM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris   of 51565
 
what am I willing to pay for the profit margins I'm looking to expect, based on the company's historical profit margin performance. Google, which I've mentioned occasionally over several years has profit margins of 25% or more. What am I willing to pay for a company like that if they can continue this performance? How do I handicap that versus something like ALU which shows profit margins of 7% (per Yahoo) now, but a string of losses;

Since I mostly buy high-ROE companies, I have a feeling that adding some points for high margins just double counts the company's success. In other words, their high ROE is due to the high margins, so I can't give them extra for the margins. This is not true for WMT/TSCDY/etc. who achieve the high ROE with low margins, but that just reflects their business.

Something like ALU, I just don't buy at all.

So overall, I don't spend much time on margins. I am just careful with companies that have OK'ish ROE with low margins where the business is not obviously a low margin business or where I think that the company does not have enough moat like WMT to sustain even the low margins. Obviously, low margins with a lot of debt is a recipe for disaster even when debt is used to spruce up ROE.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: Mico Martinez who wrote (47149)3/23/2012 9:43:03 AM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris   of 51565
 
Chinese fraud risk.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Mr.Gogo who wrote (47134)3/23/2012 10:00:53 AM
From: Matt Monday   of 51565
 
Thanks for the article Georgi.

I just skimmed over it, but the margins do seem a bit stretch.... hoping looking for value with decent margin of safety will hedge this. I dont own that many stocks though, not sure how this effects me.

Is this something us value investors need to be aware of?

What macro things do you all even look at now that i think about it?

My only two thoughts are either low interest rates/cheap money/household debt/emerging market spending are helping drive the margins or the tech sector is becoming a larger part of the broad market.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Spekulatius who wrote (46443)3/23/2012 10:15:54 AM
From: Spekulatius   of 51565
 
re BBG -

there is somebody who likes BBG, because of liquid and oil exposure. BBG has a significant drilling program targeting oil this year. The bad news is that their spending this year your will significantly exceed their cash flow.
thestreet.com 

I don't own it, but I like the outfit. I do think they should try to stay within their means in terms of Capex. if their oil bet does not pay off, they could be in trouble (Debt covenants?), imo.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Mico Martinez who wrote (47149)3/23/2012 10:21:20 AM
From: grahamcracker1 Recommendation   of 51565
 
Re: What do you guys think about

<<Why is it trading at a really low price?>>

It looks like they recently guided down for the year, to the surprise of some analysts. Pork prices are off and this is apparently significant to their profitability.

Of course, if this is truly a solid company such reasons for price declines are a value investor's dream and I have made most of my money on companies with good long term histories and poor recent short-to-medium term results.

See MCD in Q1 2003. The Motley Fool piled on to the pack that wrote off the company that invented fast food just as the price went under $15/share (as I recall). I read a lot of huffing and puffing about how Wendy's at 6% market share was eating McD's lunch (ha, ha) at 50% market share. McD's subsequently released several hit new products and the rest, as they say, is history.

It was very similar to analysts writing off Coke at a time when Coke still had 6 of the top 10 drink products as Pepsi made all sorts of noise and the book "How Pepsi Won the Cola Wars" was released.

All this said, every time I see a Chinese company that appears to be a great value, I immediately start to wonder when that company that exposes Chinese sham companies will release a photo of an outhouse that's carried on the balance sheet as $1B worth of real estate.

It's unfair, but there are so many scams it's hard to sort them out. I think that this, and to a greater extent, the speculative general expectation for Chinese companies has conspired to whack the price.

If you can confirm that the company's reporting is accurate, this looks like a pretty good situation for a value investor.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Jurgis Bekepuris who wrote (47153)3/23/2012 10:33:23 AM
From: Paul Senior   of 51565
 
Yes, it does seem that high margins double weights the high roe. However, sometimes I find companies with very high profit margins (margins that might be sustainable), moderate or only very good roe, yet with a high enough p/e to where I wouldn't buy the stock if it were only on my usual p/e to roe valuation. GOOG and QCOM are examples where the very high profit margins weighed heavily on my decision to buy -- those superb margins trumped what I would otherwise avoid (very high p/e but not an off-setting outstandingly high roe).

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: Paul Senior who wrote (47082)3/23/2012 10:48:31 AM
From: Dan Meleney   of 51565
 
I did that with my first new car, a Honda-car (that's what we called them way back then). Did much better than average for an investment. It helped to be in SoCal and able to spot changing trends earlier than much of the country.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Paul Senior who wrote (47158)3/23/2012 11:06:34 AM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris   of 51565
 
Maybe you are right. :) I must say that missing GOOG and AAPL are still huge blemishes on my investing history.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

To: Mico Martinez who wrote (47149)3/23/2012 11:06:46 AM
From: Paul Senior3 Recommendations   of 51565
 
My assumption is that almost all these Chinese companies are frauds on the face of it, or fraudulently run. I've got the scars from purchases of maybe 15 of them to remind me of that. If my experience is typical, it's going to be difficult to get speculators/investors to get back into the Chinese market when there's no evidence that foreign investors can rely on financial reports or Chinese laws/regulations. So some of these "value" stocks may just languish.

In my experience, everything looked good -- p/e, roe, cash, debt, sales -- yet there's nothing that the investor ultimately gets other than creamed as the truth comes out. My feeling is that the people running these companies will eventually go to the next higher level of fraud -- give "investors" something to draw them in so as to prop up the stock price while the fraud continues. And that would be a cash dividend -- if the real company owners haven't siphoned the cash off the books yet.

I'm guessing the Chinese managements haven't wanted or needed (or been able) to institute a dividend, and so any Chinese company that now actually does share some of the profits with a cash dividend to small investors might be looked at as 'possibly' legit and maybe a possible speculation. For me, I only hold one mainland Chinese stock -- and it's just a few shares as a speculation -- XIN. finance.yahoo.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.