Page 4 of 25 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 745

Thread: The Stock/Investment Thread

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    It's not fantastic, it's mediocre. It's only fantastic when compared to what happened last year.

    Fantastic would be 600K new jobs.
    Obviously.

  2. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    It's not fantastic, it's mediocre. It's only fantastic when compared to what happened last year.

    Fantastic would be 600K new jobs.
    They always revise data. Easter/Passover was a jump in people buying "stuff" and a bit more travel, and PT retail hiring. All I'm saying is....600/000 new jobs alone isn't necessarily fantastic if they're predominantly crappy jobs, or people need two of them to eke out a living. Surely we can agree on that?

  3. #93
    True, true... I hope that doesn't happen though.

  4. #94
    Does anyone have any more investment ideas?

  5. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    Does anyone have any more investment ideas?
    I do! But it would involve "stock" and "hedging" outside formally organized markets and exchanges, so you probably aren't interested in that.

  6. #96
    I'd take a look at TEVA if I were you, ag. They just acquired Cephalon, which is an important hedge against their upcoming expiry of patents on Copaxone (a big MS drug), and will probably position them well for the next few years. The stock hasn't been doing great in the last year due to a number of factors (some not-so-great news from American regulators, possibly overpaying for Cephalon, some other issues) but in general the company has pretty good cashflow and a pretty solid business model. The P/E multiple is about 13 now, which isn't super cheap but is pretty cheap for its class of pharma companies.

    I wouldn't consider it a short-term investment, though.

  7. #97
    "Investments" are never short-term though, are they? If it's short-term it's probably a hedge/bet/gamble. May as well play the ponies, slot machines, or a Lottery.

  8. #98
    Hmm, was thinking more in the 1-month period. :P

  9. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    Hmm, was thinking more in the 1-month period. :P
    Aggie, how do you think that's "investing" and not "trading"?

  10. #100
    It's... fast-paced investing? Anyway, this is the "stock SLASH investment" thread, not just the "investment" thread!

  11. #101
    Found another company to short: Netflix. They were close to bankruptcy only a few years ago, but rebounded. The stock price is pure speculation at this point, though: climbed from 41 to 235 in just two years. P/E of 70. Volume sky-high. Short them now, and in a year they will be under 80.

    I'm bullish on Intel with their recently-announced 3d transistor breakthrough. Expect more chatter on this over the next 6 months and an actual product afterwards (maybe a year). Sales will go through the roof: they will decimate ARM. Just watch.

  12. #102
    Yeah, but just shorting a company because it's gone up a lot is silly. You could say the same for Apple after all.

    Obviously the technicals matter, but does no one invest for the medium/long term based on business fundamentals?

  13. #103
    Maybe in the 80s.

    People still have this late 90s/early 2000s mindset that tech companies can maintain infinite growth if they are doing well currently. That's not the case at all.

    Edit: here's an article on it as well as some thoughtful commentary/opinions:

    http://seekingalpha.com/article/2693...new-challenges
    Last edited by agamemnus; 05-12-2011 at 09:47 PM.

  14. #104
    So I can't seem to find anything based on searching. But a company I bought shares in (actually at the suggestion of this board -- wasn't a good bet) is changing its bylaws. So I decided to skim through the bylaws and noticed a section on "calls on shares". It sounds like some kind of payment to the company that they can invoke, but I can't get my head around it.

    Anyone familiar with this at all? Is there some gaping hole in the legal climate that I've missed?

  15. #105
    Is this a call option? Could you quote the entire section?

  16. #106
    I tried to find it online, but I can't find the filing on their site. Which is weird.

  17. #107
    Perhaps it's just a way for them to trade in your shares of their company for shares of another company if they merge, for instance...

  18. #108
    Yeah, I doubt it's anything that they can use to collect payment from their shareholders. I've never heard of such a thing. I can't tell what it is without more details, though.

  19. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    But a company I bought shares in (actually at the suggestion of this board -- wasn't a good bet)
    What stock, and who suggested it ?
    . . .

  20. #110
    My guess is it's Goldman Sachs. They're re-structuring some internal things after being warned by the SEC. 'Call on Shares' sounds like some kind of margin account call during restructuring, or something. Just a guess, though.

  21. #111
    Er, no. Nordic American Tanker (NAT). BetaTestAdmin/BattleApple suggested it two years ago.

  22. #112
    Since the middle of April:

    Gold: up slightly from 1500 or so.. it's at 1540, or 3%. (I was "wrong")
    GOOG: down a boat-load, from 580 in the middle of April to 485 now, about 17%. (I was "right")
    MCD: up 7% (I was "wrong")

  23. #113
    I'm honestly fascinated with why Google's stock is so cheap right now. Their P/E is ridiculously low. Even with concerns about their 'new' CEO and their somewhat slower revenue growth ('only' 15% projected for 2011 and 2012), it's still a company with great cashflow, a huge pile of money, and a rapidly diversifying revenue stream. Revenues from display ads, Android/mobiles, etc. have been increasing at a decent clip, which allows them some breathing room compared to when their only profit came from their basic ads service. They still have a commanding chunk of the search market and have made inroads elsewhere. Lastly, they've done a far cannier job of acquisitions than have many of the big players (e.g. Microsoft buying Skype, HP buying Palm, etc.).

    Honestly, of the big technology companies, Google is probably the best deal right now.

  24. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    Their P/E is ridiculously low.
    ~19 is ridiculously low? I'd call it normal. The other two companies you mentioned have P/Es below 10, which is easier to call low. Google's been overpriced for a while, I think it's fairly priced now.

  25. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    ~19 is ridiculously low? I'd call it normal. The other two companies you mentioned have P/Es below 10, which is easier to call low. Google's been overpriced for a while, I think it's fairly priced now.
    Uhm, I'm looking at a prospective P/E, based on 2011 earnings estimates ($33.66 per share). That works out to around 14.5. If you use 2010q2 through 2011q1, you end up with about $31 eps, which works out to about 15.5. That's pretty cheap for the stock market right now, especially with a company expecting 15% revenue growth and sitting on some $30-odd billion in cash.

  26. #116
    Theoretically, the "normalness" of a "high" P/E should factor in growth prospects as a key aspect. Since Google is not growing as fast as it used to (or even as previously expected), the stock price, and the P/E, will fall...

  27. #117
    15% revenue growth may be slower than the past, but it's still awfully fast for similarly-valued stocks.

  28. #118

  29. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    15% revenue growth may be slower than the past, but it's still awfully fast for similarly-valued stocks.
    Anti-trust investigations don't help the stock price either.

  30. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    Anti-trust investigations don't help the stock price either.
    Didn't really hurt them from the European investigations. I think most people realize these allegations are more spurious than the ones against MS back in the day, and that both were motivated by corporate interests.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •