Thursday, May 31, 2007
Starbucks (SBUX): Pinching Pennies On Milk
Starbucks (SBUX) said Thursday it plans to switch its dairy standard to reduced fat, or 2%, milk from whole milk for all espresso-based drinks in its stores in the United States and Canada. The change will be complete by the end of 2007. The Seattle-based coffee chain also said it is assessing options for a conversion to a lower fat dairy standard in the 39 markets it operates in outside of North America.
Said Denny Post, senior vice president of global food and beverage in a statement, "The move to reduced fat milk as our core dairy offering comes directly from our customers' requests, and while they will still have the option to customize their drinks, our standard beverages will now come with fewer calories and less fat". Do not believe him. Why?
This is all about price and Starbucks doing anything it can to reduce rising costs in the face of stagnant store traffic. According the USDA, 2% milk averages 8 cents a gallon less than whole milk and when you buy almost 300 million gallons a year, 8 cents a gallon adds up real quick. Starbucks can try to gloss over this by saying they are "listening to our customers" but the cold hard reality is they have been making drinks this way for almost two decades now and no one has complained. If they really were listening, they would have eliminated all milk with growth hormones from the stores, but that would be expensive and negatively effect profits. The tell tale sign here is that they are cutting costs, not raising prices like they have in the past. This is perhaps the most public recognition that even they feel they are at the top of the price range and going higher here will cause even more defections to Mcdonalds (MCD) than they have already suffered.
I am not against a company saving investors money, but let's not play games and call it what it is when you do it. Of course for Starbucks to say that now, it would scare folks into thinking there was an earnings miss coming and with your stock at an almost 2 year low, that is the last thing they need.
Another Mystifying Analyst Call: Ethanol Producers
Bank of America (BAC)downgraded four ethanol makers, giving three of the companies sell ratings, on concerns of a 70% slide in margins by 2009.
While record gasoline prices have led to a 30% increase in ethanol prices and a 180% jump in production margins so far this year, analysts at the bank said they expect producers "will face an extended period of deteriorating margins resulting from new ethanol capacity."
Starting this quarter, 1 billion gallons of new capacity is scheduled to come online each quarter through at least the fourth quarter of 2008. The new supply could depress ethanol's premium to gasoline, drive corn prices higher and pressure distillers' grains values, Bank of America said. The Andersons (ANDE ), VeraSun Energy (VSE ), Pacific Ethanol (PEIX ) and Aventine Renewable (AVR ) were all downgraded.
Here is the mystifying part. For two years we have been hearing that ethanol is not the answer because we will never be able to replace enough gas to make a difference. Now we are talking about an ethanol glut? Let's make up our mind here folks. If ethanol priced drop far below that of gas, demand will pick up immediately, especially with the increase in E85 vehicles coming online. Right now it is only blended in 3% to 4% of all gas, the goal is 10% so there is still plenty of room to grow. Wal-Mart has been talking about installing E85 pumps all over the place but supply problems currently prohibit it. A glut? WalMart (WMT) will gladly take it, they could use the good PR. If prices drop far enough, there will be an inevitable consolidation in the industry in which case the strongest players will pick up cheap production and make up for smaller margins with increased output.
Let's talk politics. Does anyone really think anyone running for the White House is not going to woo Midwest voters by promising higher ethanol mandates and more support for producers? Don't you think the battle cry will be "let's spend the money here instead of Iraq". Now whether you agree with the policy or ethanol or not is irrelevant, the reality of the situation is. This industry has the support of the American people and Lawmakers, it will be just fine.
Google Coverage: Overkill Reached 6 Months Ago
Now, am I the only one who could go the next 6 months without reading another Google article or post? Holy Christ, I am seeing 20 a day on the same topic. This stuff is not even original content, just the same news rehashed over and over and over... Enough is enough kids. There is such a thing as overkill and the Google (Goog) coverage hit that 6 months ago. Google taking search share stopped being news in 2006, I do not need to see it 15 times when they announce it EACH MONTH.
I am waiting for twenty posts tomorrow about what CEO Schmidt ate for breakfast and what color it turned his stool, where I can find the video on Youtube and how this is just another brilliant marketing ploy. Once again, Google originality on display
We all know what is going on. The stock has been stagnant for 8 months now while the DOW and the S&P have raced to record highs almost daily. You can't understand why and feel the need to remind everyone how great the company is, DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY. Here is the problem, we all already know that. That is not the reason the stock is stagnant.
The law of large numbers is. As % growth declines as a company grows increasing larger (this is an undeniable trend), the multiple investors will pay for shares also decreases. That is what is happening to Google. That is it.
It is not that folks do not "understand" it or "hate" it. People are now at the "show me" stage of Google growth, not the "don't worry, it will happen" stage. If Google performs, so will the stock, if not, it won't. Period. No conspiracy, no short sellers, no confusion by the unwashed masses.
I need to go, there are 43 articles on "Google Gears" clogging my inbox. I need to get rid of them before Schmidt eats lunch and that coverage starts
Sears Holdings (SHLD) Q1 Earnings
Same Store Sales
Domestic comparable store sales declined 3.9% during the first quarter of fiscal 2007. Sears Domestic comparable store sales declined 3.4% for the quarter, while Kmart comparable store sales declined 4.4%. We believe these declines reflect both increased competition and the impact of external factors such as rising energy costs, a slower housing market and poor weather conditions during the latter part of the first quarter of fiscal 2007. Land's End and children's apparel experienced sales gain, marking the third consecutive quarter of apparel segments improvement.
Operating Income
For the quarter, our operating income increased $62 million to $393 million in fiscal 2007, as compared to $331 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006. This increase primarily reflects: 1) a gain of $30 million for a legal settlement reached in connection with a contractual dispute, 2) a $27 million curtailment gain recorded for amendments made by Sears Canada to its post-retirement benefit plans, and 3) a $15 million gain for insurance recoveries received on claims filed for certain of our property damaged by hurricanes during fiscal 2005.
Cash
We had cash and cash equivalents of $3.4 billion at May 5, 2007 (of which $3.1 billion is domestic and $0.3 billion is at Sears Canada) as compared to $3.2 billion at April 29, 2006 and $4.0 billion at February 3, 2007. The decline from February 3, 2007 primarily reflects increased merchandise inventories given seasonal shifts in our inventory levels in support of the spring/summer-selling season. Merchandise inventories at May 5, 2007 were approximately $10.3 billion, as compared to $9.6 billion at April 29, 2006. Additionally, we spent $113 million on capital expenditures and made debt repayments of $47 million, net of new borrowings, during the first quarter of fiscal 2007.
Swaps
Gains were partially offset by investment losses of $21 million ($13 million after tax or $0.08 per diluted share)incurred during the quarter on our total return swap investments.
What to think? Not much either way really, earnings improved so we can't complain there. True is is because of "certain item" but cash is cash and profits are profits. It is clear the housing slowdown is hurting Sear as they do a ton of home related sales (appliances, paint, furnishings etc.). Apparel sales continue to improve at Sears and that is good news as once housing turns around, and, yes it will, retail operation should see significant improvement. If we strip out all the "other factors" affecting earnings for 2006 and 2007, earnings were flat. Considering the relationship Sears has with the housing market through both it's appliance sales and "home services" division, this bodes very well. In short, good quarter, not great, but given housing, good is just fine.
Coke's (KO) New Sweetner: Shriveling Testes & Liver Mutations, But Hey, No Calories!!
Cargill, who admittedly has already spent "significant amounts" of money on the project is hoping the herb will "shake up" the sweetener market. Word is that coke has no plans to tamper with it's "Coke Classic" formula, learning from it's 1980's fiasco so I am left wondering if this will ever be more than just another aspertane, sucralose, saccharin niche product. Folks are very particular about their beverages and will resists any change so I am highly skeptical that it will replace or make a dent in HFCS demand anytime soon.
Perhaps the most immediate reason to be concerned about the product? The herb has become fashionable in Hollywood. On her blog, actress Mariel Hemingway has posted a recipe for a morning shake that recommends mixing in stevia for added sweetness. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this the same actress that suffers (or suffered) from bulimia, anorexia, and depression? So, I am supposed to put anything she recommends into my body?
This stuff looks like it will make folks long for the days when their soft drink just made them fat.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
AIG (AIG) To Return Excess Profits To Massachusetts
AIG, who carried the workers compensation for the "Big Dig" in Boston, recently reached a settlement with AG Martha Coakley in which they agreed to return almost $60 million in "excess profits" and interest to the state. In the original agreement with the state, AIG was guaranteed a limit on it's potential losses due to the "high-risk" nature of the work and in return, was required to return and excess funds to the state. The AG's office that AIG never returned these funds to the state. According to AIG, the funds were recently paid.
Sears Holdings (SHLD): Earning Preview
1- Same Store Sales:
Sears, despite constantly improving profitability has experience a steady decline here. Investors seem to want to see a bottom. If this number comes in flat or up, watch for an immediate run in the stock. Much has been said about the importance this metric has and that it is not a "be all end all", but, if it is the one folks follow, then we need to pay attention to it.
2- The Cash
Has Lampert done anything with it? Did he maybe buy Citi (C) shares for Sears and ESL? Has he invested it anywhere else?
3- The Swaps
These have been the only real investments outside of the retail operations. How are they performing? Did he liquidate them? Did he increase them?
4- The New Ad Campaign
Having seen it, I think is is great and have not seen anything close to this good from Sears in recent memory. Initial results from it may be available and anything said about it will be of interest.
5- Results
Believe it or not the actual earning numbers may take a back seat to the previous questions, assuming no large variation to expectations. Retails results have been mixed this quarter so a small beat or a miss may not be as important to investors as having answers to the other questions.
What will results be? With Sears not giving any guidance, any estimate is just a guess. I do know one thing, no matter what happens, I am not selling.
Altria (MO): Option Players Betting On Big Announcement
The December 70 strike, in the money by a dollar or so, has seen more than 18,500 contracts change hands today on the long-dated option. Heading into today's action, this strike was already home to peak open interest in the December call series, with nearly 60,000 open calls in residence.
Several blocks of 1,000 or more contracts have changed hands throughout the trading day. The largest transaction was a block of 2,418 contracts that changed hands at 11:11 a.m., trading off the bid price of $4.50 per contract. Another block of 2,250 contracts was traded at 1:56 p.m. and also traded at its respective bid price, changing hands at $4.30 per option. Given this trend, it is possible that options players are closing their positions.
MO shares have moved marginally higher in today's trading and are within striking distance of another new all-time peak. Last week, the stock hit a new high of 72, overcoming short-term chart resistance at the 71 level.
This research is from Shaeffer's Research
Milwaukee Lead Paint Trial Underway
Visit Jane Genova's blog Law and More. Jane live-blogged the RI Trial and will present us with the most accurate depiction of events in Milwaukee. I highly advise those interested check out her blog daily.
Here Comes A Wall St. Sale! Get Ready To Buy
There was a 6% sell off in China last night and that spread into the European markets overnight. The Chinese government tripled the "stamp tax" on stock trades to 3/10 of 1% in an effort to slow down the wild speculation in their market. The global sell off will undoubtedly hit the US market today. That means if there are stocks you have wanted to buy but were hoping to get them cheaper, today may be your chance. DOW and S&P futures are both negative this morning meaning at least at the open, we are looking at red.
For ValuePlays reader that means we may get the chance to buy Lowe's(LOW) under $30 like I speculated about yesterday. Maybe I can also buy those Citi (C) shares back at a price cheaper than I foolishly sold them for in January. If you think about it, it was reported Eddie Lampert bought them at around $54 a share, if they dip below that, I can't think of a reason not to pick them up.
Think about the logic for just a moment. Because the Chinese government raised a tax on stock trades and folks there panicked, there is now a reason to sell US shares? By any measure the US markets is NOT overvalued. Now, you could argue it is fairly or undervalued depending on the metric you want to use but by no measure is it overvalued. That means there is no logical reason for a sell off today. Of course we do know that markets are not logical, right?!?
Altria (MO) will get whacked today if the market does and the logic must be that because Chinese investors have to pay 3/10 of 1% on stock trades now, little Johnny in Newark won't light up this morning? Uncle Leo who goes through two packs a day will be so distraught at the plight on Chinese investors he will not be able to bring himself to smoke that first Marlboro today? Folks in the US who were going to paint their house this summer and use Sherwin Williams (SHW) paint will just hold off worrying about the poor Chinese investors? Please............
The Chinese market is up 60% this year and is clearly in a bubble stage. Folks have been saying this for a year now. I mean when Greenspan finally comes around and recognizes the obvious, you know it is a bubble. When you have a market in a bubble, any hiccup causes a wave of fear and then a sell off and this is what you have in China. If anything, fear of a bubble there or its "popping" should cause a "flight to quality" and that is the US market.
Alas it probably will not today and that is just fine with me as it has been a while since we have had a "Wall St. Sales Event".
Happy buying today...
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Short Increase Leaders: April 13 to May 15
The number is the increase in the number of shares short (rounded):
CVS (CVS) = + 46,000,000
Valero (VLO) = + 35,000,000
Altria (MO) = +29,000,000
Advanced Micro (AMD) = + 28,000,000
Ishares Russell 2000 (IWM) = + 18,000,000
Regions Financial (RF) = + 17,000,000
Time Warner (TWX) = + 16,000,000
Constellation Brands (STZ) = + 14,000,000
Delta Airlines (DAL) = + 14,000,000
Southwest Airlines (LUV) = + 13,000,000
Last Week's Dividend Increases
Lowe's (LOW) = 60%
LMP Capital (SCD) = 40%
Clorox (CLX) = 29%
Monroe Muffler (MNRO) = 28.6%
ARK Restaurants (ARKR)= 25.7%
Omnicom (OMC) = 20%
Assurant (AIZ) = 20%
TansAtlantic Holding (TRH) = 18.5%
SEI Investments (SEIC) = 16.7%
Abington Bancorp (ABBC) = 16.7%
US Savings Rate: Ignore It
Today savings is calculated as:
Income - Federal taxes - Expenditures= Savings
sound easy enough correct? Wrong and here is why.
1- Excludes capital gains
Let's say I bought 300 shares of Sears Holdings (SHLD) in 2004 for $23 a share spending $6,9000. Wanting to pay for my kids college, I sold them last month for $180 a share pocketing $54,000 or a profit of $47,100.
According to the current savings calculation, that $47,100 is not counted as income..
2- Includes all Federal Taxes
Now, Of that $47,100 I now have to pay 15% long term capitol gains taxes of $7,050. That tax bill is included in the "taxes paid" portion of the saving equation even though the income that generated it was not.
3- Includes the spending of the gain
The remaining $40,050 that is sent to the college, is now counted as an expendtiture in the calculation..
so for what I just illustrated, the income and expenditures and taxes all equal out to zero BUT, for the National Savings Rate, it looks like this:
Income = 0
Federal Taxes = $7050
Expenditures= $ $40,050
This gives me a NEGATIVE savings on this transaction on $41,000 when in reality, it should be zero.
Another factor? 401k's
How many retired people are getting an income from a 401K? If you are that numbers is NOT being counted as income, BUT the things you buy with it are being counted as expenditures, giving you an artificial negative savings rate.
Own a home? Has it increased in value? The increase in that value is NOT counted as savings either. When you sell it and have a gain you then roll over into another house, you have the same mythical spending with no income from our stock transaction. The money you put down on the new house and the taxes you may pay on the sale of the old are counted as expenditures but the gain on the sale of the old house is not counted as income.
Perhaps this is then reason that even though we have a "negative savings rate" as a nation, our household wealth is at all time highs?
Lowe's (LOW): Getting Enticing
This comes off news that Lowe's recently increased it's market share in 17 of 19 business categories last quarter. They also announced that they are increasing their dividend 60% and, here is a big one, adding $3 billion to their share buyback program. Last quarter Lowe's repurchased $650 million of shares and could buy more. This is a company that produces over $2.1 billion from operations each quarter and after all it's capital expenditures, share repurchases, debt reduction, still had a cool $250 million left to add to it's piggy bank.
The new buyback announcement means they have a total of $3.8 billion worth of stock they are authorized to repurchase. At today's prices that will take about 119 million shares of the 1.5 billion total or over 7% of off the market. That is a significant amount. The real beauty of this is that is can easily be done over the next year and a half with very little impact on operations or by adding any additional debt.
The dividend. At it's new level, Lowe's will yield about 1%. This is poor when you compare it to the over 2% yield from Home Depot. Lowe's will spend about $450 million over the next 12 months on dividends (depending on the rate of the share buyback) at the new rate and while significantly higher than the $87 million it doled out in 2004, more is needed.
Now, the buyback will help and let's look at why. Let's assume for a minute that Lowe's does not increase the dividend and keeps it at it's 20 cent annual level. Currently that means they will return $300 million to shareholders at the current 1.5 billion shares outstanding. After the buyback, there will be about 1.38 billion. This means that all thing being equal, Lowe's would only need to spend $276 million to keep the dividend at its' current rate. It also means that at the new rate (32 cent a share) they will be spending $441 million vs the $480 million they would have spent without the share buyback. So buybacks help both us shareholders, buy allowing more of a companies profits to be available to us (higher EPS) and allow the company to increase the dividend without a direct dollar for dollar impact. A win -win.
The only thing stopping me from buying share now is the anemic dividend. In a rather mature industry, I would like to see more of a commitment to shareholders here. Lowe's is kind of a "tweener" in this respect. It is not really a growth company anymore and it does not yield much for potential investors. But, were shares to get hit and dive under $30, they would be very tempting for me. Very tempting
Monday, May 28, 2007
Bespoke: Great Research
"Bespoke Investment Group, LLC applies this same "tailored" concept to financial research with MyBespoke. Until now, customized market analysis has been available only at the institutional level -- and at enormous costs. Bespoke has altered the landscape for customized research by allowing anyone -- from large institutions to the most modest investor -- to receive the specific in-depth analysis they need in a cost efficient and timely manner."
"Formed in May 2007 by Paul Hickey and Justin Walters, formerly of Birinyi Associates and creators of the acclaimed TickerSense website, Bespoke's research platform will enable any interested party to gain the data and knowledge necessary to make intelligent and profitable investment decisions. As evidenced by Bespoke's Think B.I.G. website, users gain access to some of the most original content and intuitive thinking on the Street.Bespoke Investment Group, LLC applies this same "tailored" concept to financial research with MyBespoke.
Until now, customized market analysis has been available only at the institutional level -- and at enormous costs. Bespoke has altered the landscape for customized research by allowing anyone -- from large institutions to the most modest investor -- to receive the specific in-depth analysis they need in a cost efficient and timely manner.Bespoke Investment Group, LLC applies this same "tailored" concept to financial research with MyBespoke."
I have been receiving the daily emails from Bespoke for a few weeks now and they are good. I like the "Morning Lineup" email. It gives a very concise and informative capsule of the upcoming day and arrives about 8:30 am est. Now, eventually they will begin to charge for this service so the "value" of it will then be determined. I have no idea of any potential pricing so I will not even attempt a guess.
You can go the the site and request a "Sample" and they will email it to you in a pdf format. I suggest you do it as the information is detailed and different that the normal research out there. I specifically enjoy the work they do on sectors and the overall markets and the economy. It is "big picture" items and worth the look.
Top Stories Month To Date From Value Investing News
1- Sears Holdings: A "Techinical" Look- ValuePlays
2- Financial Blog Watch: Controlled Greed- Radio.wallst.net
3- Monish Parabi 13-F for 3/31/2007- sec.gov
4- Wally Weitz on Berkshire Hathaway and Dell- youtube.com
5- Seth Klarman: World Class Warrior- nytimes.com
Good Reading and have a safe holiday....
Friday, May 25, 2007
Owens Corning (OC) Insiders & Officers Buying Up Shares
Corporate officers spent $1.9 million of their own funds to pick up over 68,000 shares. The big fish was 10% owner Harbigner Capital Partners, who bought $35 million worth for 1.04 million shares.
Officers:(rounded)
Chairman Mike Thaman- $505,000
CEO David Brown- $505,000
DIR. James McMonagle- $160,000
VP Dean Roy- $65,000
VP Charles Dana- $74,000
VP Brian Chambers $74,000
DIR. Ralph Hake- $93,000
VP Sheree Bargabos- $99,000
VP Joseph High- $50,000
VP David Johns- $74,000
VP Stephen Krull- $74,000
VP Frank OBrien- $50,000
VP Charles Stien- $50,000
I have been recommending Owens since January and am up over 20% so far. It would seem like my enthusiasm is shared by those with the most intimate knowledge of its operations and prospects, management.
Similar to George Soros's recent purchase of ADM shares seeing folks purchasing a stock you have been invested in does reassure you of your picks and when you are in the stock well before their purchases and at much lower prices, it does bode very well for the future of your investment.
Dow + DuPont = Drama
Dow says the speculation, and the accompanying stock price spikes, were fueled by the actions of Romeo Kreinberg and J. Pedro Reinhard, who held "multiple meetings" about a takeover. JPMorgan Chase, who was working on the unauthorized takeover proposal of Dow, admits it met with both men. Both executives deny the accusations and have countersued Dow for defamation. Another question that will need to be answered is who at JP Morgan let the "cat out of the bag" to folks who then piled into shares of DuPont or, was it only Krienbeg and Reinhard?
The SEC probe and the lawsuits will hinge on testimony from JPMorgan CEO James Dimon, who told Liveris that Kreinberg and Reinhard had held talks with JP Morgan about a Dow takeover. It would be hard to imaging nobody at JP doing anything wrong after looking at the activity of both companies stocks, so Dimon will essentially have to throw some of his folks to the wolves.
The really big news here is the attempted Dow and DuPont merger. This story is going to have a ton of twists and turns to it in the coming months and ought to keep us occupied in an other wise slow summer. Dow has long coveted Dupont's seed business an the offer was an attempt to get it. Since that seems to have failed could a Monsanto (MON) joint venture be coming? It would be a way for Dow to get heavily into the seed business and provide Monsanto cheaper building blocks for its products and cash to reinvest in it's business as it has stated it wants to.
Stay tuned to this one
Notes From Sherwin Williams (SHW) Investors Conference
Lead Paint was the first topic: Inside Council Dale Normington addressed the gathering after CEO Chris Connor stated, "While Rhode Island has been a little bit of a hiccup, we think there is a light at the end of the tunnel"
Mr. Normington:
Rhode Island:
"It would seem inappropriate to say, but I do take great pleasure in announcing that after almost 8 years we finally get this out of the hands of the judge who was handling this in Rhode Island and to the Supreme Court. There is no question the court will hear our appeal and that will happen in the next year." (8 to 10 months)
The appeal will be five parts running concurrently:
1- Contingent fee
2- State is appealing win Arco got
3- state will appeal contempt citation against RI AG
4- Appeal of legal issues by Sherwin
5- Appeal of trial issues by Sherwin
"For those who saw the trial and seen the judge's opinions", according to Normington there are a "plethora of issues" both legally (market share, product identification, contingency fee, public nuisance) and from the trial (jury instructions, issues with witnesses, evidentiary rulings and opening and closing arguments and more) to address.
Issue of remedy(Special Master). "There is no plan in place and there will not be one for quite a while." The scope of any remedy "I can assure you will be thoroughly debated"
Two full days of oral arguments are expected in Q1 of next year and he expects a decision before they adjourn in June 2008.
A "win" is a new trial or a reversal based on legal issues of allowing trial to go forward to begin with.
"Sherwin Williams currently has third party action against landlords and judge has not announced when those trials will go forward"
Ohio:
"Localities heeded the siren call of Motely Rice"
Asking for a Federal Constitutional review of Trade Association (LIA) involvement being a function of free speech. Sherwin is claiming free speech activities cannot be a basis for liability.
"Ohio product liability law prohibits prosecution without product identification and there is no product identification available in lead paint cases" Meaning there is no way to identify the maker of the paint that may have poisoned children. Localities have argued this law does not apply here, Sherwin obviously feels it does. Common sense would lead one to believe it does also.
Federal judge in Ohio will review contingency fee legality. A decision is expected in 30 days.
"If Federal judge rules contingency fee illegal under federal constitutional grounds, we can argue that ruling enjoins all localities from using contingency fee council"
California:
"Judge ruled cities cannot use contingency fee council. Localities may not be able to go forward without contingency fee council"
"Cities have requested a stay pending review". Judge will rule this week or next on stay request.
The Business:
CEO Connor: "We have lots of opportunities ahead of us". Perhaps giving insight into future plans for Sherwin, Connor then said, "Our model transports to other regions of the world."
Paint store expansion has been "very successful" and will continue "for the better part of the decade".
My takeaway:
Official at Sherwin are actually relieved to be in the appellate process and seem very confident in the direction the lead pain litigation is headed. Why? I guess it may be because when all is said and done, they did nothing wrong and eventually truth and what is right always wins. It may not be easy or quick, but it happens.
The tone of the business talk was one of expansion. Whether it be through the acquisitions of more local dealers to expand the paint stores or international to open more markets, Sherwin is not sitting still. While not specifically stated, it is clear that Sherwin is intent on being the #1 paint and coatings company in the world. They plan to "aggressively pursue" expansion in China and India, markets where the current coatings landscape in very "fragmented" and ripe for consolidation. According to Connor, the companies affirmation of guidance and Q1 share buybacks should illustrate their confidence in both the results and the value of shares.
This is a very exciting time to be a Sherwin shareholder. The company is on the cusp of finally ridding itself of the lead paint albatross and is correctly looking towards the future. I think one will look back at this period of time several years from now and view it as the seminal point in which Sherwin vaulted itself from a huge regional to a huge worldwide presence.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Credit Suisse Downgrade Of Dow Chemical (DOW): Nonsensical
What is it going to "under perform""? The market? Does he think the The Ratings For Sectors
Overweight: Industry expected to outperform the relevant broad market benchmark over the next 12 months.
Market Weight: Industry expected to perform in-line with the relevant broad market benchmark over the next 12 months.
Underweight: Industry expected to underperform the relevant broad market benchmark over the next 12months
Now the Individual Company Ratings
Outperform: The stock’s total return is expected to exceed the industry average* by at least 10-15% (or more, depending on perceived risk) over the next 12 months.
Neutral: The stock’s total return is expected to be in line with the industry average* (range of ±10%) over the next 12 months.
Underperform**: The stock’s total return is expected to underperform the industry average* by 10-15% or more over the next 12 months.
So what do we have? The Chemical sector being downgraded to "under perform" means that is will lag the S&P in 2007. Dow's neutral rating means that is will match that performance plus or minus 10%. Some math is now necessary. Let's say S%P advances 10% in 2007. This guy is right and the chemical sector "under performs" and only advances 8%. That means that Dow's neutral rating means that shares will be between $44 and $53 from their current $45. The more the sector lags the market, the more the downside risk. If the chemical sector only advances 1% in 2007, his expectation is shares will trade between $41 to $50.
Here is the best part: "In an effort to achieve a more balanced distribution of stock ratings, the Firm has requested that analysts maintain at least 15% of their rated coverage universe as Underperform. This guideline is subject to change depending on several factors, including general market conditions."
Translation? "We have to put a certain number of firm in a category whether they warrant it or not. A depending what the market does, if we are going to look foolish we reserve the right to arbitrarily change that."
Is anyone getting where i am going with this? He has no idea where shares are going to trade..
Please ignore them...
Sprint Nextel (S): An "F" In Customer Service
Aside from it's features, what set Nextel apart from every other provider was it's customer service. It had bar none the best in the industry. When one called customer service at Nextel you left the conversation feeling that they not only valued your business, but were thankful to have it. A call to customer service was actually a satisfying and enjoyable experience. I would actually receive calls from customer service out of the blue thanking me for doing business with them and giving me 100 or 200 free minutes that month to use. The call was not a "make good" due to a problem, it was just a thank you. They would even call me to offer a free upgrade to another phone, just for being a customer. When was the last time a company called you with a freebie that had no strings attached? Their efforts lead to shareholders being handsomely rewarded as the stock climbed from $3 in 2002 to $30 when the merger was announced.
All that changed with the combination of the two companies. A call to customer service today is only slightly less maddening than listening to Palestinians and Israelis argue about "whose fault it is". The person on the other end not only does not speak English as a first language, I am not even convinced they are vaguely familiar with it. I know what the critics are going to say "you just cannot understand people with an accent". Aside from not being true, the problem is that they cannot understand me and my dialect is about as vanilla as they come. The most glaring problem? The connection we have always, for lack of a better word... sucks. No matter if I call from my cell phone, home phone, business phone or pay phone the connection is always lousy and Habib and I spent 90% of the conversation asking each other to speak up so we not understand each other more clearly. How can a phone company have a lousy connection?
Another recent experience in which I attempted to switch from the Nextel to the Sprint network entailed 3 trips to the Sprint store (because the people at customer service in Bangladesh told me to go there, which was wrong), a phone delivered two days late to the wrong address and 1 hour on the phone trying to actually place the order. I could have refinanced the house quicker. The single most infuriating part? Apparently the folks at the Sprint store are not allowed to sell you the phone and switch you to the Sprint network!! Is this one company or not? Now, they can switch me from Verizon or AT&T to either Sprint or Nextel, but not from Nextel to Sprint, okay.... Understand this is two years after the merger.
Now, understand this is not just me, a recent JD Power Survey gave Sprint the lowest grade among the major cell providers for customer service.
The effect of this continued fiasco are felt in an consistent decrease in subscriber growth for the combined company. Sprint has tried to explain this by saying "it has been focusing on higher-quality customers, which has resulted in the losses". Am I the only one who just cannot see the logic in this argument? If the customer you are going after is resulting in increasing losses, how can they be of "higher quality?" Remember, prior to the merger Nextel was a very profitable company.
Shares, after hitting a high of nearly $27 in July of 2005, current trade at $21. 2006 EPS fell 7% from 2005 and Q1 2007 EPS fell 150% from 2006 levels (6 cent profit to a 3 cent loss). It has been over 2 years and this is clearly not working.
Rather than focusing on "higher quality" customers and ignoring the rest of us, how about focusing on higher quality (or just competant) customer service? It worked wonderfully for Nextel.
Bio-diesel Producers: Ethiopia Wants You
"Ethiopia is the largest coffee producer in Africa. As a large (population about 75 million) but extremely poor (per capita GNP is the $100/year range) country, there might be interest in biofuels from an available resource. I would be interested in knowing more about this possibility, particularly some idea of capital requirements, required support infrastructure (e.g. reliability of the technology, need for highly skilled personnel, etc.), minimum size/capacity of a viable operation and expected output (gallons/liters of biodiesel)."
"Any of your readers with an interest in the Horn of Africa are welcome to add their email addresses to the list. The focus of the list is political/economic/developmental, with only very occasional items about coffee or biofuels."
"Shlomo Bachrach"
Any interested parties can email me information and I will forward them to the necessary parties.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Home Depot (HD) vs. Lowes (LOW): Go With Oprah
Enter Oprah. Probably the single most important endorsement a company or person can get today is one from Ms. Winfrey. The mention of a book on her show instantly makes it a best seller. A personal trainer or self help personality featured on the show will find their schedule instantly filled at whatever rate they demand. In short, if Oprah gives you the thumbs up, welcome to instant success. Love her or hate her, her impact is undeniable. You are probably asking yourself what this has to do with Home depot and Lowe's.
Oprah shops at Lowe's. This spring has featured various home improvement episodes like the most recent one in which Oprah did a favor for her neighbors by sprucing up their Chicago balconies. Who did the work and got essentially an entire show long infomercial and thumbs up from Oprah? Lowe's.
The effect of this can be seen in the latest earnings report from Lowe's when they reported that 17 of 19 company segments experienced market share gains during the last quarter and while customers are spending less per trip, more of them (to the tune of 5.9%) are choosing Lowe's when they shop. While this number may seem small, it is staggering when you consider Home Depot experienced a 20% drop in store traffic during the most recent quarter.
Eventually housing will turn and the big winner will be the one with the most customers, thanks to Oprah, that will be Lowe's.
iPhone: Apple (AAPL) Making All the Wrong Moves
USA Today reports the supposed half-decade deal also precludes Apple from developing a CDMA handset in that time. It would also appear that the arrogance and dismissive attitude Apple took with carriers during negotiations may come back to bite them. Word is that the #2 carrier in the US, Verizon will introduce it's own version and is claiming it will be an iPhone-killer. According to Denny Strigl, Verizon CEO, "We do have a very good response in the mill. You'll see that from us in the late summer."
Rather than have a market all too itself for some time buy playing nice with all carriers, the attitude Apple took has caused a rush to introduce like versions to co-inside with it's launch. Now not only will the iPhone not be available to the other 140 million plus US cell phone users, but those folks will be able to get their own version from other carriers this summer. Anyone want to bet it will be available for far less than the $500 -$600 the iPhone will be?
Now, any Verizon offering will not have the iPod application that the iPhone will have but if my many critics are to be believed, that was not going to be a major selling point anyway so the elimination of it will really be an insignificant factor to those purchasing these phones from Verizon. What will matter? Price. If consumers are able to avoid cancellation fees, can get a similar phone at a cheaper price and already have an iPod, there is zero incentive to rush out and get the iPhone.
This also means that the 10 million units Apple plans to have sold by the end of 2008 will be done to 47 million AT&T subscribers meaning 1 in 5 will have one? Doubt it.
How long does anyone think it will be before RIMM's (RIMM)Blackberry has a version out there that will be available through all carriers?
When entering a new business, it is not really a good idea to strut in and tell folks who have been doing it for many years how much better you are than them and why you are going to dictate what they can or cannot do. All reports out there indicate this is what Jobs did and in the process seems to have focused the efforts of the other carriers into competing against him rather than working with him. Bottom line, he needs their networks for his product, he seems to have forgotten or chose not too recognize it.
I said before that the iPhone, as things are currently configured will be nothing more than a niche product and that it will be Apple's first stumble after a string of hits in recent years, if the USA today article is correct, the AT&T deal all but assures it.
Eddie Lampert Speaks at Investor Conference
Remarks by Edward S. Lampert
Founder and Manager of ESL Investments
Delivered at
The Third Avenue Management Investor Conference and Luncheon
November 18, 2003
Summarized/Edited
by
Kaushal B. Majmudar
Managing Partner
The Ridgewood Group
(www.ridgewoodgrp.com)
[Ed. Note: Edward S. Lampert of ESL Investments is an intelligent investor that we admire. As he has traditionally maintained a low profile, we were pleased to have the opportunity to hear from him at a recent event. We hope that others seeking to learn about intelligent investing can benefit from his thoughts as much as we did. This is a selective and personal record of what he said and so should not be taken literally.] Edward Lampert: [Comes to the podium after being introduced by Marty Whitman]. I will make some brief comments and then take questions.
I started my firm in 1988 and began investing. I was inspired by Warren Buffett’s letters while still working on the Arbitrage desk at Goldman Sachs. We consider ourselves “Aggressive Conservative” investors [Note: A lot like Marty Whitman’s “Safe and Cheap” motto]. In investing, we seek to do a few things well, namely
2.) Understand the People Running the Business and
3.) Get safety from the price that we pay
About KMART
We invested in Kmart. Kmart was one of the worst managed companies in its industry. It was clearly distressed. Marty is one of the more sophisticated distressed securities investors and he was buying.
The standard Retail Bankruptcy process model is well established. People wait until Christmas and see what happens and then close the worst performing stores. Then the company hobbles along until the following Christmas and does the same thing again closing even more stores. It can be a slow process. Surprisingly, most of the Boards of Directors that put the company into bankruptcy stay in place until the company finally emerges under new ownership [pursuant to a plan of reorganization].
In the Kmart deal, neither I nor Marty were on the board or the creditors committee initially. Meanwhile, the professionals were making $10 to $20 million PER MONTH while the company was in bankruptcy. With that kind of money coming in, there would be low incentive to push to come our immediately. ESL and 3rd Ave. spent a lot of time trying to understand the existing process. They wanted to know the Company’s plan to emerge and the goals of the creditors committees.
Finally, Brandon (??) who works with Marty at 3rd Ave got onto the creditors committee. Their agenda (ESL and 3rd Avenue’s) was to have KMART emerge out of bankruptcy as soon as possible but with little debt.
The “Experts” said that KMART would never emerge from bankruptcy. The press was also extremely critical. As much as possible, everyone let Marty deal with the press because he is so frank and his comments on the matter were dead on. Most of the players involved in the process lacked urgency. This included many banks
and landlords (except those who actually wanted their space back). Lots of the players involved also probably had conflicts to deal with.
I have learned that it often comes down to who makes the decisions and also where the benefits and consequences fall - who benefits if the decisions work and who pays the price if it does not work. The large annuity aspect for advisors making $10 to $20 million per month made it less urgent for them to make it come out of bankruptcy. It was a difficult situation and a difficult process. However, ESL and 3rd Ave were able to influence the situation. Their power and leverage came from their willingness to put more money into the reorganized company as part of the plan (this was their source of power). In the process, they were able to force the shutdown of about 300 stores.
The plan they worked out was to take out the banks with cash (using money they invested). Trade creditors actually wanted the new equity. The Company ended up coming out of bankruptcy with $1 billion in cash and no debt. Because of Kmart’s consumer nature, perception was important. Now when it emerged from bankruptcy, the experts who said that it would never happen were wrong. However, they changed their tune and now started talking about how the Company would go right back into bankruptcy, a so called “Chapter 22” filling [i.e. Chapter 11 times 2]
More recently, they have been focused on trying to improve the operations and execution by KMART. There were already policies and procedures in place that people had not been following. People made a lot of improper decisions, but actually a big part of the problem was that they had been operating with the wrong “frame” for decision making. For any company, you need to have an overarching PHILOSOPHY to guide operations for profitability.
At KMART, they are trying to instill a teaching and learning culture by going back to first principles. This is challenging because in their case, they need to communicate to 170,000 people. They are simultaneously trying to improve the look of the stores and change the employee mix. They are thinking like owners in their approach to KMART. A lot of the successful companies in retail actually had owners (i.e. owner operators).
However, it is definitely an uphill battle. The Press does not understand what is going on at KMART. However, the Customers do and they have started getting compliments (from customers) again. Still they do have a lot of challenges.
ESL was established to invest like owners. The last 20 years has been about CEO as politician (e.g. Rumsfeld/Cheney) versus CEOs as owners. There is a whole system today that supports the rights of agents instead of the rights of shareholders. The Shareholder representation system is broken. Many of the recent SEC proposals are trying to introduce reforms to better align company, management and
shareholder interests. Good managements should be paid lots and lots of money because it is a hard job, but
only if they perform. You cannot pay people irrespective of performance. KMART was helped by the owner mentality that was possible because of presence and involvement of the large interested shareholders. Activist owners like ESL and 3rd Avenue help foster the proper balance between management and shareholders. This balance benefits all shareholders and not just the agents as is so often the case [in the
status quo today].
Q&A (selective)
Q#1 Someone asked about the Capital Structure of KMART at the time of the ESL investment.
A: There was approximately $1 billion in Bank debt, $2.3 Billion in Bonds, $800M in preferred stock, and some amount of common which was essentially worthless. Also about $4 billion of trade creditors were outstanding. In contrast, in the quarter ended July 2003 (post reorganization), the company had $1.2
billion in cash. $50 million of mortgage debt and a $2.0 billion 3 year line of credit (not drawn) Also, post reorganization there were 90 million shares initially issued at around $10 per share but now trading at $27 or 28 per share for a nice gain.
Q#2 Is future profitability for KMART based on repositioning the entire strategy or just better operations?
A: A lot of KMART’s problems were self imposed. They had a lot of possible assets and a good sized customer base. However, they needed to get back to basics and EXECUTE better and deliver a better in store experience to their customers. People like winners and they give winners the benefit of the doubt. The same people
who will wait in line at WALMART because WALMART is perceived as successful would get really pissed off if they go to a KMART and have to wait. However, expectations were so low that improvement was possible.
since then.
Copyright © 2003 by Kaushal B. Majmudar
Coffee, Cows & Corn All Hurting Starbucks
Let's look closer. In the first quarter of 2007, Starbucks (SBUX) bought back $50 million worth of stock. In the second quarter, that number exploded to $513 million, or 17.1 million shares. This represented 2.1% of diluted outstanding shares and was the reason Starbucks met expectations. After all the negative publicity recently, a miss would have led to a share sell-off and more stories about the "end of the line" for Starbucks.
While I applaud share buybacks as a way to enhance shareholder value, Starbucks cannot continue to spend $500 million a quarter to reach earnings estimates. One also has to consider that Starbucks' margins will be under pressure from higher costs, and that store traffic growth is anemic.
Domestic same-store sales transaction growth was a paltry 1%, leading me to wonder when CEO James Donald will finally admit McDonald's (MCD) coffee offerings are affecting sales. He never had to address the issue, as not a single analyst's question on the earnings call broached the subject.
After the earnings announcement, in an interview on CNBC, Donald said "we do not really consider or discuss our competition." He'd better start. They are stealing his business. Attracting only 1% more people per quarter will not fuel the long-term growth rate of 21.9% that analysts expect.
Another problem for Starbucks is ethanol--hardly what investors might expect to trip up the coffee company.
This year, the U.S. ethanol industry will produce over 5 billion gallons and use more than 1.5 billion bushels of corn, pushing prices near $4 a bushel. Dairy farmers are seeing the cost of feed jump and are finally able to pass that on to consumers. After years of flooding international markets with surplus milk products, the European Union, under heavy pressure from within, has curtailed its $59 billion annual subsidy system, at least where dairy is concerned. Combine that with drought conditions in New Zealand and Australia, two big milk-exporting countries, and it makes for tight supplies worldwide--and higher demand for U.S. product. Milk farmers, who collected 12.3% less for their milk in 2006, are fully intent on making that up this year.
"The price this year is not just going to beat the record by a few cents. It's going to knock it out of the park," Michael Suever, senior vice president for milk procurement at Chelsea, Mass.-based HP Hood, told the Boston Globe in April. Prices for raw milk are expected to rise at least 25% this year.
Starbucks, which uses an estimated 93 million gallons of milk a year, is looking at a $279 million milk bill in 2007. While it may not seem a lot to a billion-dollar company, it does equate to 36 cents a share, an increase of about 9 cents, or about 10.3% of profits, over 2006. This does not include the price increase to be incurred from changing the percentage of hormone-free milk from 27% to 37%. Starbucks does charge 50 cents more at some locations for this milk, so it must cost considerably more, no? When you are guiding 83 to 87 cents a share and 18% growth, the 10% of that in milk costs is huge.
We need to now look at biodiesel. Currently, Brazil is famous for two things: coffee and ethanol. Its national ethanol program has allowed it to become independent of imported oil, and now it's turning its sights on biodiesel. Researchers have found an economically viable way to turn coffee beans into biodiesel. The oil-extraction from coffee bean rate, now at 92% to 94%, means the project will begin next year, and this year's harvest will be affected, as coffee bean supplies are built up in anticipation. The project will enable coffee producers to produce enough biodiesel to power all their farm and agricultural equipment.
Why does this matter to Starbucks? Brazil is the world's largest coffee producer and exporter, and this study contends that up to a fifth of coffee production will be used to produce biodiesel.
Let's go back to Econ 101: When you constrict the supply of an item and have constant or increasing demand, price must increase. Starbucks, which already gets $5 for a cup of coffee, will feel the pinch. How much are people going to be willing to pay for a cup of coffee? Like all products, raising prices depresses demand. In the case of Starbucks, I think the effect of price on demand is more dramatic than commonly thought, as quality coffee can now be had at McDonald's for a fraction of Starbucks' prices. All coffee producers and sellers will be affected by the price increase, but when you are at the top of the price ladder and have painfully slow growth that is already a result of those lower McDonald's (MCD) prices, that pain may be more immediate and severe.
When you add the Brazil situation to the recently announce Ethiopia settlement that now has Starbucks paying additional royalties for coffee from that country, Starbucks is now facing an onslaught of input price increases with not much wiggle room on the revenue side. When consumers are looking at $4 a gallon for gas, will they cut back on the $5 latte and go for the $3 one at McDonald's? I bet they will.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
iPhone To Boost Blackberry Sales
From Big Ben's Investing Blog:
There is no question that the late June debut of the Apple (AAPL) iPhone will create a lot of stir. Much of the hype is already priced into the stock. Or at least most of the hype will be priced into the stock before the iPhone debuts in about a month. I still think you a can stay long Apple until the release. Apple will have a tough time selling the iPhone. An initial $500 price tag for a 4 GB music phone and a $600 price tag for a 8 GB phone will be too steep for most consumers. Still many iPhones will be sold and I remain bullish on AAPL.
Who Else Will Benefit?
1. Research in Motion (RIMM): Many of the same features of the iPhone can be had for a lower monthly fee and lower upfront cost with a Blackberry. The Blackberry Pearl runs between $59 and $149 depending on the carrier. Plus the data fees are $10 less per month than the iPhone. I believe consumers will upgrade their cell phones this summer and choose RIMM over the iPhone.
2. AT&T (T) will be a winner no matter what happens. AT&T is the exclusive carrier of the iPhone and will gain wireless subscribers. More importantly more consumers will add media bundles to their wireless plans when they upgrade to a "smartphone" in order to use all of its features. This is a homerun for AT&T, as the average revenue per user should increase with more "smartphone" subscribers.
3. Motorola (MOT) is my sleeper pick. Hovering near its 52 week low, I see lots of value MOT. Motorola has the RAZR 2 set to debut in July and the Q9 smartphone also set to debut shortly. The Q9 will put added pricing pressure on the iPhone and Blackberry Curve & Pearl.
One important thing to remember is that these cell phone upgrades come in cycles. I would never "invest" for the long haul in any of the above names. These are simply 6-8 month "trades."
The "apple-holics" can scream at the blogger here:
Corn Processors Easily Passing Along Cost Increases
The company's sweetener products, such as high fructose corn syrup, or HFCS, account for 55% of sales in all three of its segments. The #1 US producer in the US and worldwide is Archer Daniels Midland (ADM). Starches and co-products, such as corn oils and feed, make up the rest of the company's products. Corn Products, the number 4 HFCS producer in the in the U.S. said it's ability to pass along corn price increases to its customers faster than expected helped profits. .
Another major factor was the elimination of a 20% tax on US HFCS being imported to Mexico. The tax shut down a big chunk of the market overnight for U.S. exports of HFCS as well as bulk corn for HFCS production by U.S.-owned firms, said Corn Refiners Association spokeswoman Audrae Erickson.
The tax was ruled illegal and was repealed. Last summer, NAFTA reached an agreement to send up to 500,000 metric tons of HFCS into Mexico from October 2006 to December 2007. NAFTA's full, free-trade agreement opens up a huge soft drink market to many corn refiners.
Assuring the use of HFCS in the US, Coca-Cola came out and said they were disappointed with their North American results and wanted to drive Coke Classic again. HFCS is the sweetner used in these non-diet drinks. With the South American ethanol boom increasing sugar prices, soft drink makers have no alternative but to swallow any price increase corn processors decide to pass onto them.
More good new for ValuePlays Portfolio member ADM, up 16% since my January recommendation. With gas prices surging, ethanol is very profitable desipite corn's price increase. We now know that corn food processors are able to pass along this additional cost to buyers also. When you consider the additional demand from Mexico coming online soon, it looks like more demand induced upward pricing pressure will benefit corn processors. After all, what alternative product do HFCS users have? The answer? Nothing...
ADM will be ringing the registers
Selling Citi (C) Shares To Eddie Lampert
I am upset because I seem to have had this almost pathological inability to listen to myself prior to this blog. Had I not sold, my gain on the stock currently would have been 14.5%, plus the 2% in dividend checks I would have received for a total return of 16.5%. The pain here is felt even more when you consider after taxes my original gain is reduced to 8.25%!!
So, why did I sell them? I like businesses I can easily understand whether it be selling paint, cigarettes, insulation, clothes etc. Citi is massive and about as complex an international operation as there is out there. While it was (and apparently still is) "cheap", "cheap and "value" are not the same thing. There are plenty of "cheap" stocks out there that are so because the underlying business just sucks, period. Here is where I went wrong. Citi has a great underlying business, it is just poorly run. That makes it's cheap price a value once CEO Prince either gets his act together or is shown the door. Citi also would have paid me over 4% a year in a dividend to wait for either of these eventualities. Not a bad deal in retrospect. Fundamentally I saw this which is why I bought shares to begin with, I just was not convinced so I took the quick money.
Don't get me wrong, 8% after taxes in 3 months is nice, but, making small mistakes can eventually lead to larger ones. In an interview I gave with Geoff Gannon, I said my biggest mistake as an investor has not been picking losers, but not being confident enough in my reasoning and leaving too much money on the table. Read it here. In other words, making very good instead of great returns.
Blogging seems to have cured that as my format and interaction with readers does force me to constantly evaluate and explain my reasoning and methodology. It has lead to a more intimate understanding of my picks and pans and has to date cured the "doubting Todd" side of me.
I know what you are saying, "Citi only trades at $55 a share now, the difference is only $1 from your sales price" True, but my total return is 1/2 of what it could have been. Funny how things like that work, huh?
So, what to do now? Lick my wounds and go back at it. What else is there? Life is about living and learning and if you stop doing either you can't do the other. There was a great quote I heard once and if anyone knows who said it let me know so I can credit them, "there is no shame in making mistakes, just not learning from them"
Lesson Learned
PS. Eddie, can I have my shares back?
ADM Buyout Rumor: Nothing There
Currently ADM has a market cap of $25 billion and annual sales of $40 billion. It is the one of the world's largest processor of HFCS, ethanol, bio-diesel, cocoa and oil seeds. It does business in 35 countries and has over 26,000 employees. Shares currently trade at 15 times this years earnings and 14 times forward earnings. ADM has grown earning 21% in 2005, 40% in 2006 and should hit 21% in 2007 (year end June). After years of leaving analysts and Wall St. in the dark about earnings, former CEO G. Allen Andreas commented before he retired last fall that the current unprecedented expansion will "substantially add to earnings in 2008". This is the first comments I have every heard an Andreas publicly mutter on earnings. Current CEO Patricia Woertz commented on the latest earnings call that she was "more enthusiastic about the future" of ADM than ever before.
That being said, if insiders are this optimistic at a company that has a storied history of playing it's cards closer to it's chest than la cosa nostra, one must imply from this that 2008 is shaping up to be a very good year. Current estimates have ADM increasing earning next year only 9% in part due to the rise in corn costs. Yet the empirical data coming out suggests that this, far from being an issue may actually lead to more profits. In the most recent call ADM said despite corn costs rising, corn processing earnings increased 15% . Other ethanol producers also experience similar results. Recently, Corn Products (CPO), who produces no ethanol, only HFCS and other corn products commented that they have easily been able to past cost increases along to end users. The reason? The economics of corn are such that end users of its byproducts have no substitute for them. When you consider that 500,000 extra tones of HFCS will be sold into Mexico annually beginning in the fall of 2007, you have this increased demand further pressuring prices upward. Corn processors are also in the unique position to be able to easily hedge against price spikes, further insulating them from their effects.
Production increases mean ADM will increase it's ethanol production 50% by 2008, it biodiesel production will double and it will add substantial cocoa production in the US. HFCS production can be increased without the building of new facilities so the option to maximize anticipated demand increases is easily attainable.
Currently June options have speculators positioning themselves to pay $40 to acquire shares before June 16th with call options out numbering puts almost 4 to 1 clearly leading to an upward bias in shares. Currently ADM has an enterprise value of $30 billion or roughly $46 a share. With managements enthusiastic expectations for 2008, any offer to buy the company would have to be well in excess of that. More realistic earning estimates for next year that put eps growth in line with the 20% increases each of the past 3 years put 2008 share price at $44 at the low end of the PE scale. All this means shareholders should expect shares to trade in the lower 40's for FY 2008 that begins in July 2007 and any buyout offer should be at a minimum a premium to that putting shares easily into the $50 range.
Will it happen? There would be immense pressure on new CEO Woertz not to do a deal and she will likely not want to go down as the one who "closed shop" so to speak on a 115 year history by selling out to private equity, or worse, an oil company. Insiders and shareholder have visions of ADM becoming the "Exxon of Biofuels" and a buyout would quell those dreams. The only offer that may receive support would be a management buyout that allowed current holders to retain ownership in a now private ADM with current management a vision. The Andreas family had led the company for generations and as large shareholders would lead a revolt against a buyout by another firm. This anticipated hostility to an offer means it will either be avoided, or, be one that it very hard for shareholders to resist.
Either way, through results or a buyout offer, shareholders stand to prosper.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Thank You Ben
In March in a post I wrote "Where do we go from here? A slow decent to normalcy. That is all. Not a crash, not a recession, not a depression, just normal housing conditions with realistic lending guidelines."
It would seem Mr. Bernanke is now echoing that sentiment. Conditions now are not dire, they are getting back to normal. A little perspective is needed. Things have been insane for quite a few years in housing and the current slow down, while it may hit some of the more careless folks out there, is very good for everyone as a whole. The more froth and speculation in any economic activity, the harder the eventual fall then becomes. Bernanke should be given credit from resisting the shrill shrieks from the Barney Franks of the world on Capitol Hill to drop rates and increase regulation in the lending market. These actions would have lead to increased volatility in all markets and the uncertainty and guessing games that would have been created could have developed into something far more serious. In doing so he has all but assured a "perfect storm" of good things for the economy. The runaway housing prices will moderate, inflation is doing the same, economic growth has not suffered, job creation remains strong, unemployment is almost non existent, the S&P and DOW are at all time highs and historically speaking, interest rates are a non factor. All this in the face of Alan Greenspan running around the Asian continent telling everyone the sky is falling
While his predecessor, Greenspan, gets far too much credit for the "soft landings" he engineered from the problems he created, Bernanke should be credited for not needing a "landing" at all, just a nice smooth ride
Starbucks' (SBUX) Ethiopia Fiasco: Firings Ahead?
"At this moment, SBUX and Ethiopia are working out the terms of a licensing agreement acknowledging Ethiopia's ownership of three coffee marks. An Ethiopian official told me today that he hopes an agreement will be concluded in the coming week or two. SBUX was offered exactly this deal 18 months ago or so, but it rejected the offer dismissively and without seeking to discuss it. This led to the Oxfam campaign that has tarnished the SBUX image. SBUX's arrogant rigidity is a mystery. Prices were not mentioned in that agreement, and are not mentioned in the present -- probably very similar -- version, as far as I know."
In any matter, it is now clear that Starbucks will be paying more for it coffee from Ethiopia. Do not be surprised to see other coffee producing nations look to do the same thing in an effort to enhance profits.
"Coffee prices are rising as demand for premium coffees has been rising (in part because of SBUX's own growth) faster than supply, though supply of ordinary coffee is plentiful. The two executives within SBUX who are held most responsible internally for their mishandling of this are Dub Hay and Sandra Taylor. Both could be gone some months from now, but it is likely that Schultz will wait long enough to weaken the cause-effect link to the Ethiopia embarrassment since SBUX hasn't openly acknowledged how badly they handled it. It has been a PR disaster for SBUX but has given Ethiopia invaluable publicity for its coffees. Millions who were ignorant of the facts now know that Ethiopia is a coffee producer, that it is the original home of coffee, and that its coffees are among the world's finest."
The Ethiopian fiasco has badly tarnished the "Good Citizen" image Starbucks once had. In a Wal-Mart (WMT)inspired move Starbucks seems to have put profits ahead of the lives of Ethiopian coffee farmers in order to protect the bottom line. This uncharacteristic move to me is extremely telling. It is a sign that management recognizes costs are rising at a rate faster than they can offset them with revenue increases either by passing them off to customers or selling those customers more non coffee products. Their 1% transaction traffic growth the last quarter illustrates they will not be able to do it selling more people more items. This realization is causing them to do almost anything to control any cost they feel they may be able to, hence the initial hard line in Ethiopia. It smacks of a bit of desperation from a company who is seemingly in denial about it's future.
After all the negative publicity from this and doubt about future profits recently due to competition from the likes of McDonalds (MCD) and Dunkin Donuts, a profit warning would put shares into a free fall.
Perhaps Schultz and company are hoping for cost relief to bail them out or have a "Hail Mary" planned. Either way, the rest of 2007 could very unkind to shareholders.
Congress Votes To Raise Taxes
Passed essentially online party lines 52-40 in the Senate and 214-209 in the house, the budget blueprint plans to allow the personal income tax, capital gains and dividend tax rates to increase in 2008. Quoting House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D. SC), "It's not the perfect solution, but it is a long step in the right direction."
How? Raising taxes has never been the answer to our "budget" problems. Cutting spending has. More money in the hands of Congress will only lead to more spending. If history has shown us anything, this is an undeniable fact. In the outline, it proposes $20 billion dollars MORE of discretionary spending than the President had proposed. How about we back out that "discretionary waste" and not pick my pocket?
Corporations have spent the last 4 years raising dividends at a 20 year record rate as a way to reward shareholders. The effect of these increases will now be negligible when the tax rate on them is allowed to almost double. Look at the chart below.

The S&P has enjoyed a smooth ride as investor have parked their money and enjoyed the steady stream of reduced tax rate dividend checks. An increase in these rates would cut the value of these dividends by almost 50% and surely lead to a huge increase in volatility. While professional traders love volatile markets, they are the enemy of the average investor who gets sideswiped by the big market swings and end up losing money.
I cannot figure out why no one is talking about this now. One thing for sure, if it passes, it will be all we talk about..
High Gas Prices: Blame The Person In The Mirror
This means that despite you and I demanding more gasoline than ever, refiners are doing their part keeping up production. This demand and inventory depletion has lead to prices at the pump surging 43% this year past post Katrina levels to $3.13 a gallon nationally on Friday and seem to be heading past the inflation adjusted all time high of $3.22 set in March of 1981. For me, I cannot get too worked up about gas when I pay $3.40 a gallon for milk, $7 a gallon for coffee at Dunkin Donuts, almost 6 times that at Starbucks (SBUX) and $6 a gallon for water at a ball game.
Savvy investor will be buying refiner stocks like Chevron (CVX), Exxon, BP (BP) and Valero (VLO)as prices and demand will not slow for at least the next 4 months, leading to plenty of profits.
So if refiners are doing their part, why have gasoline inventories dropped 15% between February and April to the lowest levels since 1956? The main culprit? A strike at a French port that has decreased gas exports to the US 9.6% or 109,000 barrels a day and is responsible for almost the entire shortfall.
This works out fine, it is much more fun to blame the French that ourselves anyway.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
New Forbes Online Article
I will post it here some time next week.
Top Stories This Month to Date From VIN
1- Sears Holdings: A "Technical" Look : ValuePlays
2- Financial Blog Watch: Episode 2, Controlled Greed Radio.WallSt.net
3- Short Term Thinking In Altria: A Profit Killer- ValuePlays
4- Using Stops: Are You Stopping Gains? - ValuePlays
5- Author Says Work Has Been Wonderful- Omaha.com
Friday, May 18, 2007
Soros Buys ADM Shares
Soros, while I could not disagree with his politics more, I cannot argue with his track record in his investments. He is truly one of the all time greats in that department and anything he does is worth noting and following.
I have stumped for the value of ADM shares (and have held them for years) on this blog many times, the latest being here. It is always a confidence booster to know that one of the world greatest investors seems to be thinking along the same lines as you.
ADM shares, up 15% since I recommended them in Jan., are only in the infancy of recognizing their eventual value...
Starbucks: A Buy At What Price?
In a word, no. If they hit their EPS growth goal, Starbucks will grow earnings this year 18% vs the 30% they grew them in 2005 and as each day goes by, that "if" becomes larger. A closer look at last quarters earning shed some light on upcoming difficulties. Earnings were met chiefly due to an unusually large $500 million share buyback that enabled Starbucks to gloss over the fact that margins continue to deteriorate. This buyback becomes even larger when you consider in all of 2006 only $695 million worth of shares were repurchased.
What has not been discussed is the dairy and coffee situation. Both are going to experience an explosion in prices this year and Starbucks did disclose on the recent earnings call that they are not able to "substantially" hedge against these increases because a buyer for the hedge on the other side is not available.
Translation? Everyone knows these prices are going up. So, other than additional prices increases to their customers, Starbucks has no way of avoiding these cost increases going directly to the bottom line. Add the fact that they only served 1% more people last quarter, you now have a recipe for accelerating margin decreases and slowing revenue growth.
This deteriorating margin picture may now begin to effect growth plans. When margins continue to decline, in order for Starbucks to retain it's over ambitious growth, it will need to rely increasingly on debt. Note that in the recent quarter $488 million net in debt was issued which was more than twice the sum total of the past 6 years.
So what price then? Shares have to fall substantially from here before anyone should consider them. As the chart below illustrates, Starbucks has traditionally sold at a slight premium PE (1.25 to 1.5 times) to it's growth rate.
eps % PE ratio
1996 20 50
1997 50 49
1998 22 46
1999 27 50
2000 29 47
2001 28 45
2002 22 39
2003 21 36
2004 41 40
2005 27 43
2006 20 46
Of the times it did sell at more than that (2+ times), the following year featured increasing growth "justifying" that "froth". The aberration in the PE vs. growth rates trend has been from 2006 on. 2006 featured dramatically slowing growth for the third consecutive year and an increasing PE over the same time span. This was the genesis of my original post and shares since then have acted accordingly down 20%.
With that rate at this year at MAYBE 18%, its current 31 PE has shares grossly over valued. A price range of $22 to $27 put us in a historic PE to Earnings Growth range. Now, that also assumes they hit the 18% EPS growth this year which I am doubting more as each day passes.
With all the uncertainty surrounding the company at this point, I could not even begin to consider shares at any price other than the lowest end of the range, $22 or another 21% lower than current prices as I expect EPS growth to slow more.
Disclaimer: I have no nor have I ever had any position in Starbucks
Home Depot: Slow Down And Concentrate
As I have said before, HD without the Supply unit is worth far less than it is now. There is growth there. Yes, that growth is acquired growth but there is no “acquired” growth to be had in the retail division. The argument could actually be made that the retail division, when you consider Lowes is actually over built and a little contraction would do all players a little good. What Home Depot needs to do is stop the expansion of its retail operations.
There seems to be a trend recently in former high flyers like Wal-Mart (), Starbucks (SBUX) and now Home Depot to not fully recognize that they cannot continue to just grow and grow to get results. There comes a WMTpoint in time where you begin to just cannibalize your own customers. Rather than focusing on their current locations and improving them and their customers experience in them, they still have an almost myopic focus on more locations. All three are experiencing discontent among many of their core customers as they have felt “neglected” or taken for granted and are leaving for competitors like Target (TGT), Dunkin’ Donuts, McDonald’s (MCD) and Lowes (LOW)that they feel more appreciated by, who have grown smarter, and retained what made them popular. As a result, all three are experiencing difficulty and an onslaught of negative sentiment
If anything, Eddie Lampert at Sears Holdings (SHLD) and Julian Day at RadioShack (RSH)have proven that shareholders can be richly rewarded without throwing up locations everywhere and focusing energy and investment on getting the most out of what is already there and improving their shoppers experience. Growth for growth sake is not necessary for shareholders and the company to prosper.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Contingency Fees Now Illegal In US Gov't Cases
From Law and More:
"This is a profound statement of policy that should influence state and local government to look at contingency fee proposals with a skeptical and critical eye. Given recent experiences and developments in California and Rhode Island, other public authorities should expect strict scrutiny of such arrangements from ethical, legal, financial and political perspectives.
"The magnifying glass is focusing on this issue - and the public will demand transparency and accountability. No one wants an encore of the tobacco litigation disaster which enriched the states and contingent-fee lawyers dramatically but provided minimal, if any, health benefits."
“This Executive Order sets a proper framework for fairness and is consistent with the way the U.S. government should contract for services generally for appropriate transparency and accountability. While it may have precious little impact on the disposition of state leaders inclined to enjoy what they perceive as a Free Lunch, especially Democrats, it draws the right line in the sand for those officials of either party in the states who are concerned about abuse of the system they are supposed to uphold with integrity.
"A prime example is the just retired long-time esteemed Democratic Maryland Attorney General who had taken understandable umbrage at the temerity of noted trial attorney Peter Angelos who claimed that the had 'contracted with the state' to receive 25 percent of the $4 billion the Free State took as its share of the global tobacco settlement, or a cool billion dollar sure thing for what was over $200 million for his 'effort.' So - over time - principle shall triumph, as Americans loath those who rig the public system for gross financial gain without earning it."
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has issued a press release on this development.
Fully expect this to now follow to the state level....
This is great news for Sherwin-Williams and NL Industries as it is the beginning of the end for this litigation.
Read the Execuative Order here.
Falling Corn and Rising Gas: Good for Ethanol Producers
When you consider Aventine (AVR) reported a profit and said they paid $3.58 a bushel in Q1, Verasun's results seem to be an indication of poor management rather than rapidly deteriorating fundamentals in ethanol. Considering estimates have ethanol being profitable to produce at corn prices up to over $4.80 a bushel, ethanol will remain profitable for the foreseeable future. Archer Daniel's Midland (ADM) reported Q1 results recently and while they do not release their price paid for corn (I presume this is due to it being dramatically lower than their rivals and would put pressure on suppliers to provide these prices to others), they reported an increase in Q1 corn processing results. Shares of Pacific Ethanol (PEIX) are traded up 12% after their earnings actually came in it a profit
Now that we have a record corn crop going into the ground at a rapidly increasing rate, corn prices look to plummet before the summer is finished. When you add the fact that new ethanol production capacity that was scheduled to come online has slowed due to the higher corn prices, anticipated demand will not materialize. For ethanol producers who managed their businesses well during the price spike, this will mean a series of earnings estimate beating results will come rushing in. Ethanol producers are in a unique position to be able to hedge their input prices against spikes. The rise in corn prices seems to have taken no one other than Verasun by surprise and producers actually benefited from it. Now that prices are falling and gas prices are going in the opposite direction, more good news is in store for investors.
With the current outlook poor for the sector, shares ought to spike on the unexpected good news.
Wal-Mart (WMT): Time For Scott To Go
Thanks for the heads up Lee. Kind of like General Custard saying "we should have brought more guys"
It is time for Lee to go. It is not for the standard reason people give, the stagnant share price. Let's be honest here. If you were dumb enough at the turn of the century to pay 60 times earnings for a massive retailer growing at less than 1/2 that, you deserve the predicament you are now in. Given Wal-Mart's scale, it would have been impossible for ANY CEO to get performance out of the company to justify that high of a PE ratio and avoid the eventual share decline. The price of the stock had to fall.
Why should Scott go? I have been in 4 Wal-Mart the past 2 weeks and one thing sticks out. They have not changed at all the past 7 years. Everything feels the same, the look , the merchandise, the people, everything. The worst part is, there seems to be no plans to change anything. If you are struggling with earnings and growth because you have become stale, do something different. You just can't sit there, no matter who you are. How about this? Let's update the clothing. We have heard for years that Target has had great success with low cost brand name designer clothing. Wal-Mart's is just low cost and in an increasingly brand conscious world, it just is not cutting it. Let spruce it up a bit. Maybe we could take some of the $7 plus billion you are sitting on and buyback a meaningful amount of shares? Wal-Mart is increasing cash at an over a billion dollar a year pace and last year spent just over that on share buybacks. Let's take $3 billion and make a dent in the shares outstanding ( 1.5%) and give more back to shareholders if we are not going to put it work anywhere else.
Here is another issue. When I go into as Target, I can easily fins my way around because the layouts of the stores are very similar. It makes may shopping experience less frustrating. Are there any two Wal-Marts that are laid out the same? It makes it very difficult to "just run in" to a Wal-Mart to pick something up. Given the choice, I will choose a Target for thje convenience.
Wal-Mart's image has taken a hit. When people want something "cheap" they think Wal-Mart, when the want a value, they think "Target". Because Scott seems to have no desire to change that, it is time to go....
I hold no position in any company listed above.
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Dow Chemical (DOW): Liveras Keeps Delivering

In early March I wrote "I expect Dow (DOW) to make a major announcement by the end of April and, no, it will not be a sale of the company." OK, so I was off by 10 days. When Dow and the Saudi Arabian Oil Co. announced their joint venture this past weekend, it marked a major coup for both the company and it's chief Andrew Liveras.
Currently in the chemical world the most talked and fretted about variable in input (energy) prices. Sales for Dow are increasing quarterly and annually and the only thing holding there stock back is the fact that energy prices are increasing along with them pressuring margins and profits. Last year on CNBC Liveras gave an interview that foretold the events of the past few months and what stands to happen in the future. He said in the interview that US energy policy was going to drive his company and others out of the US to places where they were able to get input for the products they make cheaper. Before anyone gets all riled up and decides to make a political pronouncement on this, I need put out the fire. Liveras was explicit in his blame for both parties here. Neither has done anything meaningful in regards to implementing a national energy policy that would sustain us. Both parties in the last 20 years have controlled Congress and the White House and neither has done anything about it. The argument could be made that Bush has done the most with his push for alternative energy but even here he is only dipping his toes in the water.
The US, Liveras said has access to ample oil and natural gas reserves but will not allow them to be drilled. This causes an artificial reliance on imports and increases their prices. Whether you agree or not on the drilling policy is irrelevant, the facts are what they are when it comes to pricing and it's effect on business. Liveras has pulled off a master stroke for his shareholders. In a "if you cannot get cheap milk in the store, go to the farmer to get it" move, he is building the largest petrochemical complex in the history of Dow in with the worlds largest oil producer in Saudi Arabia. He has now guaranteed shareholders the cheapest input prices in the industry for the products it will produce. How cheap? Most analysts estimate the natural gas Dow will be using at the facility to be 1/8 to 1/10 the cost of gas it uses in the US. It will be a staggering savings for DOW at a mammoth facility.
How big will this be? Currently DOW has 100 plants around the world that took 100 years to built. The Saudi complex by itself will house 30 additional plants.
The next announcement will be in China with it's China Shenhua Energy Co to turn it's massive western coal supplies into energy. China is desperate to develop its western provinces to take some of the strain off the infrastructure on it's eastern seaboard. China recognizes that it's oil dependency is growing annually and its looking for ways to offset it before it significantly strains the country's growth.
We now have DOW building the largest petrochemical plant in a country with lowest input price costs and near completing a deal in the world most populated country to help supply it with desperately needed alternatives to oil. When you add in the doubling of the capacity at their Kuwait project, Dow is becoming the largest and lowest cost producer of it's products to the fastest growing area of the world. Sounds like recipe for success.
These will be joint ventures are in keeping with Liveras's stated strategy and will mitigate the costs by Dow. The fact that they are essentially going into business with the government's of those countries assures the success of the projects for Dow and it's shareholders.
On another note. Isn't it nice to be a shareholder of a company that has a CEO who, when he states the goals and a direction of our company, actually delivers on them immediately? Dow is a long term play and by long term I am talking about decades, not months or years. The long term value of Dow is multiples of any price people were talking about in the recent buyout speculation frenzy in February and March. Liveras resisted taking the easy buck and shareholders will be the eventual winners. I own shares and are enrolled in the companies DRIP plan (read more about DRIP plans here) so every one of the juicy dividends Dow pays just deliver me more free shares of the company.
The Next Home Equity Boom
The novel product gives homeowners cash for their equity in return for a portion of the proceeds from the eventual sale of the home. For instance, a homeowner who has a $500,000 home can extract $100,000 of that by giving REX 50% of the change in the home value. So, if the home is sold in 5 years for $750,000, REX receives half the increase, or, $125,000. If it sells for $600,000, they receive $50,000.
It is a break from the traditional debt based equity extraction option homeowners currently have and is available in California, New Jersey, Virginia, Florida, Washington, Colorado, New York and North Carolina. Founder Thomas Spoonholtz expects it to be available nationwide within a couple of years.
He aims to have it sold through mortgage brokers with up to a 2% of proceeds fee and homeowners will have to commit to hold the home for a set number of years or face "early exit" fees or 5% to 25%. This approach will appeal to retirees looking to maximize the extraction of equity from their homes without incurring interest payments. Younger borrowers will like the fact that their debt ratios will not increase and the effect on their credit scores will be non existent. It will also allow for higher borrowing limits since the home will be held for a minimum time frame, increasing the equity available.
What this product essentially does is allow current homeowners to borrow "future equity" in their homes and not pay interest charges.
Emotion And The "Apple-holics"
My favorite response was "you should be banned from the internet for being so gay. f-off dork face." Well said, thanks for thinking that one through. If you are going to be insulting, let's at least put some originality in it and make it a good one. My four year olds can do better.
Enough of that. Another response was "the overwhelming # of pro-iPhone responses received (i.e: potential iPhone buyers) thus far should make you want to reevaluate your opinion on the iPhone." Actually is doesn't. If it does anything, it makes me question the lofty prices level of Apple's stock and the potential pain investors may be in for. Here is why.
In January I wrote when Google was approaching a new all time high, "You should expect the multiple for Google to contract to a range commensurate with its growth rate. If that rate this year is around 30% expect the pe to shrink to about 30 times 2007 earnings. That give us a price for Google shares of about $450 a share. In other words, Google is overpriced. It is priced for its current growth rate, when that rate slows as it must (law of large numbers) its price will fall.
Google is a great company with a wonderful product, its stock is just too expensive."
The responses I got from "Googlites" was no different that what I got from Apple holders yesterday. Just substitute the company name and the gist of them is the same. I am an "idiot", "just do not get it", "Google hater" (this despite me saying it was a wonderful company). I followed up with another piece days later and this one recently. The responses have all been the same.
Google (goog) share price since first article? Down $40
In February I penned this article on Starbucks (SBUX). Again the responses where the same as the Google and Apple episodes. Again I said "great company with a wonderful product, it's shares are just overpriced". No matter to the "Starbazis", I apparently hate everything Starbucks (not true). Then in March, Founder Howard Schultz penned a memo echoing the sentiment in my first post. This is not to say Mr. Schultz reads me but to say that my piece was not the apparent Starbucks bashing article it was accused of being. For a current take on Starbucks, visit my friends at the StockMasters
Starbucks share price since first article? Down 20% to a 52 week low
What is my point? Emotion. It is the enemy of every investor. When people feel so strongly about a company or a product that any criticism of it causes such anger and hostility, they no longer have the ability to take a rational look at their investment. I have no position or ever have had any in any of these three companies so the eventual outcome of my opinion means nothing to me financially. That also allows me to look at them for what they are, not what they have been. It is ironic that most of the responses I got focused on the past and have a blind confidence in the future. I also find it funny that almost to a person they have owned shares in the companies "for years", "since they went public" or "at $10 a share". Has nobody bought them in the last 5 months? Who is buying and selling all of those shares everyday? Another favorite response has been "people like you have been saying stuff like this for years." Okay, I do not know what "like me" is (I will assume it is not complimentary), but I have not said anything before Jan. and Feb. 2007.
Comments like those are my very point. Warren Buffet said "if you spend too much time looking in the rear view mirror, you will not see the potholes coming up in the road". Google and Starbucks shareholder have either missed them or refused to see them.
Now to the "Apple-holics". The Motorola razor at the time it was introduced was "cutting edge" cell phone technology and priced at $500 and up. It did not sell well until it could be bought for $199. The original iPods were only moderately successful until they could be purchases for under $200 and then $100. The Blackberry recently saw its share of the pda market go from 4.9% to 20% in one year. What happened? I can now get one for $99 rather than the $299 they were previously sold for. They have not increased their share of the business (professional) market, (which is 50%) they have increased their consumer market. No matter what anyone thinks, consumer cell phones are a commodity and in commodities, price rules. Especially with an almost disposable product like a cell phone that gets washed, dropped, sat on, lost, etc.
It should be noted that I gave Apple huge credit saying that they do not even need to go down to $99 for the iPhone to sell, just $299. That does mean I see value in it, just not $600 worth. Will it sell, to the "apple-holics" yes, to the masses? Not at $600.
One also has to consider that it will only be available initially to the 47 million people who have ATT wireless. According to the presentation, Apple expects 10 million units sold by the end of 2008(it will be available in Europe at the end of 2007 and Asia sometime in 2008). So we expect 1 in 4 AT&T users to have a iPhone? Won't happen....
So once this rolls out how do we judge my accuracy? Easy, anything less than the 10 million units sold at $600 by then end of 2008, I win. If they drop the price? I win. If they ditch AT&T prematurely and open it up to all wireless companies? Partial win for me as they will do this eventually anyway. If they sell more than 10 million at $600 by then end of 2008? Tell me how wrong I am, you will know where to find me.
With the emotion these folks exhibited, there has to be froth in Apple shares. No matter who runs a company, they make a mistake and stumble. Steve Jobs and Apple will eventually. With the froth and emotion in the shares and with the shareholders, that eventual mistake will result in a very hard lesson for people. Unbridled exuberance on the way up results in desperation on the way down and those two emotions make for a wild ride for shareholders.
I will repeat a comment I gave to almost all the Starbazis, Googleites and Apple-holics after their comments and email. I hope I am wrong if you are a shareholder, I do not want people to lose money and hopefully potential investors have resisted the urge to buy and have saved themselves significant losses and maybe some current ones sold out and saved some angst. I hope I am, it is just that, I haven't been.
I await the angry emails and comments. You can call me whatever you want, just not "wrong" :)
Berkshire A Buy Post Buffet
Buffet has the ability to "buffer" shareholders against the eventual catastrophe and it's impact but refuses to part with his cash. Insurance industry profits have been at all time highs the past two years and even Buffet himself has acknowledged that this cannot continue. Berkshire earnings increases over that span have been due solely to insurance profits, not investing gains or increases in it's other operating segments. Industry pricing has already come down and we are one active hurricane season away from watching those record profits evaporate. When they do, Berkshire shares will take a hit with them.
Here is my issue, Buffet has the power to insulate shareholders from this eventuality. His recent purchase of 10% of Burlington Northern and 15% stake in USG marked the first time this century he has taken a meaningful stake in any company. In the past 6 plus years he has dabbled in shares of Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Lowe's and others without making any meaningful foray into them. When Berkshire was experiencing its meteoric rise, it was due to Buffet making huge investments in a handful of companies. Now, the definition of huge changes as your size does. $100 million to Berkshire in 1975 was significant, but today is 2% than of what Buffet has on hand to invest. That being said, Buffet still has the ability to make portfolio changing investments, he just chooses not to. Berkshire's investment portfolio today resembles a mutual fund with small positions in over 30 companies that are bought and sold regularly. In the past Buffet has said "Wait for a fat pitch and then swing for the fences". Why isn't he doing that? Considering the investment possibilities Berkshire has, his recent investing record is one of bunts, not big swings. He has also said in the past "if you would not buy the whole company, why would you buy a single share"? Using his own logic, I have to ask "Warren, if you are going to invest $160 million in Home Depot, why not $1 billion" The theory still holds, if you would not buy 100 shares why buy one share and if you would buy one share, why not a hundred of them? An investment of 4% of his available cash is not "swinging for the fences"
25% of Berkshire's current market cap is it's cash. Shares trade at a PE of 15 times earnings and given it's earnings ability and financial stability, that should be higher. The reason it isn't? People recognize that the $40 billion will be sitting there next quarter and next year and in today's low interest rate environment, money in the bank does not impress anyone. Put it to work and Berkshire's multiple will expand.
Unfortunately, that will not happen until Buffet retires and someone else runs Berkshire's investments.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Lead Found In Children's Toys and Furniture Recalled: Today!!!
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with the manufacturer named below, today announced a voluntary recall of the following consumer products. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of Product: Antique White Furniture from the Cottage Collection
Units: About 2,000
Importer: The Land of Nod®, of Northbrook, Ill.
Hazard: Some of the recalled furniture contains paint with high levels of lead. The lead level exceeds that allowed by the federal ban on lead-containing paint which is designed to protect children who might ingest paint chips or peelings. Lead paint is toxic if ingested by young children and can cause adverse health effects.
Description: The recall includes the following furniture and item numbers. The item number can be found on a label located on the back of the product. The shelf kits include one shelf and two shelf supports for use in the Low Rider Bookcase, the Double-Door Armoire or the District 28 Armoire.
Sold by: Land of Nod® catalog and Web site nationwide, and The Land of Nod® stores in Illinois and Washington from September 2003 to August 2006 for between $50 and $1,100.
Manufactured in: Mexico
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announces the following recall in voluntary cooperation with the firm below. Consumers should stop using recalled products immediately unless otherwise instructed.
Name of product: Multi-colored and solid-colored sidewalk chalk.
Units: 50,000 packages
Manufacturer: Manufactured by Agglo Corporation, Hong Kong (China), and imported by Toys "R" Us, Inc., Paramus, NJ.
Hazard: The multi-colored and solid-colored sidewalk chalk contains high levels of lead, posing a risk of poisoning to young children.
Description: The sidewalk chalk is packaged in a clear-plastic backpack-type carrying case with these words on the label: "Chalk To Go...Totally Me!...24 pieces, sidewalk chalk in different colors, fun chalk shapes." The label on the package also says "Conforms to ASTM- D4236." The sidewalk chalk comes in several shapes: butterfly, spider, ice cream cone, bottle, cylinder, and triangular stick. The chalk pieces are solid-colored or multi-colored, including red, blue, green, yellow, and purple.
Sold at: The sidewalk chalk was sold at Toys "R" Us stores nationwide from March 2003 to November 2003 for about $4.99 per package.
Manufactured in: China
Remedy: Return the sidewalk chalk to Toys "R" Us for a refund.
So here we are. Products full of lead being imported into the country and sold to parents for use with their children. How long has this been going on? Could this be the "public nuisance" poisoning children. I find it much more likely that a child playing with chalk or a toy ingests it from their hands or from the air as they erase it vs. a kid gnaw on a windowsill. Since we cannot prove the source of lead in children, how can we arbitrarily exclude all these other more likely sources?
CSX: Rolling At Full Steam
Its principal operating company, CSX Transportation Inc., operates the largest railroad in the eastern United States with a 37,170-mile rail network linking commercial markets in 23 states, the District of Columbia, and two Canadian provinces. Headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida, CSX is the gateway to the west for goods coming into eastern ports and the main hauler of products coming from the Midwest to be exported.
Earnings in 2006 grew 64% and CSX increased it's dividend 50%. Management predicts record revenues cash flow and profits through 2010. The key drivers? Gas and ethanol. Diesel fuel price increases disproportionately affect trucking vs railroads. It has become increasingly cost ineffective to ship goods long distance by truck as prices have risen. This has pushed more users to go the the railroad who, due to this increased demand volume have been able to add fuel surcharges to offset their increased fuel costs. In ethanol, CSX experienced 24% volume growth in 2006 shipping the corn based fuel. CSX is the main shipper of ethanol from the Midwest to the east coast. It passes through it's Chicago hub and from there to points east. This market will only continue to grow as mandates and demand do. When Archer Daniel's (ADM) reports "strong ethanol demand", this is good for CSX.
These factors lead to CSX producing cash from operations of $2.1 billion, $1` billion higher than 2005. To return this to shareholders, at the end of 2006 the board approved another $2 billion to be completed by then end of 2008. Today's announcement of another $1 billion means that a total of 15% of the company's outstanding shares will be off the market by the end of next year. This is a huge win for shareholders.
The rail business is booming and CSX is doing its best to reward its shareholders.
iPhone: Apple's (APPL) First Flop
More Isn't Always Better:
The beauty of the iPod was and is its simplicity and singular purpose. It enabled even the most tech phobic of us the ability to operate and enjoy it. Because of this sales have been phenomenal. There are several versions of mp3 player phones out there and none of them are big sellers. The reason? The market does not want them together. I do not want to have to turn of my music to get a phone call. If I am driving my family in my car and we are listening to the iPod, having to turn off the music to answer my phone becomes a major hassle. The same holds true for any event that I use the ipod to play music at. Having both in one creates problems, it does not solve them. Why would I pay $600 for this, or, buy an iPod in addition to this in order to avoid the hassle?
One Carrier:
All of have cell phone agreements and have a cancellation fee. This varies from $100 to $150 dollars. This price need to be added to the costs of the iPhone for those who want it right away or will cause a lag in initial sales. This lag will allow cell competitors to create their own, cheaper versions to compete, hurting future sales.
Touch Screen
Being able to make a call simply by pointing a finger at a number is an feature touted for the phone. How is this any different or accurate than scrolling on my blackberry? This feature will lead to frustration as users who do not point exactly at the number they want will keep initializing errant calls.
"All In One" Historical Issues:
How many people have had TV/VCR or DVD combos or the dreaded all in one fax, scanner, copier? Now, how many regret that decision? When you have an all in one you then become a slave to that device. If either breaks, the both units must be replaced. If a newer, better version or either comes out, you cannot purchase it because it then entails buying both again at considerable cost. Now, when you consider the unimpressive reliability history of the iPod and the cost to attempt to repair them (usually it is cheaper to just buy a new one), it is not an unrealistic stretch to consider that you may be purchasing one of these every 2 or 3 years. An expensive proposition.
What Should Apple Do?
This is the easiest part. There is no reason to have an 8GB iPod on the phone. Give us a 2GB capacity so we can put our favorite stuff on it and listen when we want and cut the price to $299 and you may have something. A $599 phone will not gain mass acceptance no matter what it does, especially when people can still get it's functionality from their existing devices. Also, the exclusive deal with AT&T was not a very bright idea. Until it is expanded to all carriers, you will have nothing more than a little niche product.
The real winner in all this? AT&T, not Apple or its shareholders.
Lead Paint: Recommended By the US Gov't.
From the US Dept. Of Agriculture , Forest Service Lab in Madison, Wisconsin in January 1949 in a paper called "A Standard of Quality for House Paint". "Pure white lead paint, usually classified as group L type lA grade 1, is an excellent paint for some uses, especially where repainting may be put off longer than is generally desirable". What makes this "classification system" detrimental to those currently suing lead paint manufacturers is the opening paragraphs:
"You can now buy house paint and barn paints labeled by the maker with both his trade brand and a classification recommended by the U. S. Department of Agriculture. The classification is a form of quality standard. It tells briefly what kind and grade of paint you are buying. The trade brand tells, as it always has, who made the paint and expects to be held responsible for it. Together, classification and trade brand supply all that is needed to buy from reputable sources with an eye to quality as well as to price.
The USDA classification plan was suggested by the Forest Products Laboratory after more than 20 years of research in the painting of wood. Under the plan there is a classification for every kind of house or barn paint for wood buildings.
Paint buyers should think of grade chiefly as a guide to the way paint should be used for best and most economical service. Although grade 1 (more lead in pigment) of suitable group and type is likely to be the best purchase for most work even if it costs a little more, good work can still be done in many cases with paint of grade 2 or grade 3."
After 20 years of research, where is the "danger warnings" for lead paint by the US government? In fact, they classify lead based paint and recommend it to consumers as the "highest quality." How were "leadless" paints described on the 1 to 5 scales (one being best)? "There are also leadless paints of groups TZ, SZ, or STZ for use particularly where there may be hydrogen sulfide in the air, which blackens paints containing lead. The leadless paints are of type 4D or, if they are low-grade paints, sometimes type 5.
What is also of important note here is that the USDA was running tests in the 1950's, to determine the best paint for household use using paints with lead pigment in them. This means that even in the 1950's when many paint makers had stopped making lead pigment based paint for household use the US Gov't was still running tests for a classification system that determined lead pigmented paint was the most desirable due to it's durability. The result? Master painters were able to purchase their own lead and added it to paint to improve its performance. How can we now hold paint companies responsible?
Monday, May 14, 2007
Don't Pay High Prices For Declining Earnings
The company?
Whole Foods
Two years ago if I wanted organic foods, I had two choices, Whole Foods or the local health food store. Since Whole Foods was the low cost purveyor of those items, sales at WFMI surged and investors enjoyed a huge run in the stock. Today I can go to Sam’s Club, BJ’s Wholesale or and of my local markets and get organic food. The question now is, since I can get the same items, cheaper, at numerous other locations, why go to Whole Foods? The answer is I wouldn’t and not many other people are either as same store sales growth last quarter was non existent at .3%. Further dampening the outlook is there is no growth impetus for the company on the horizon to justify the lofty PE shares now enjoy.
In an effort to jump start sales in February they agreed to purchase the Wild Oats Markets chain that lost $16 million last year. Revitalizing this chain will not be that easy as cash on hand for WFMI has plummeted from $267 million to $46 million in the last 12 months and cash from operations has seen a steady decline during the same period. Even should they sink the money into this chain, sales growth from it will not be impressive due to the much smaller square footage at Wild Oats locations vs. Whole Foods. Simply put, investments in Wild Oats will need to be accomplished by the addition of debt without tremendous payoff, further squeezing margins.
Much like Starbuck’s, Whole Foods is a company whose best years are behind it. Competitors have encroached on its theme and the originality that made it such a fast grower is gone. Both companies are selling products that are perceived by most people as equal to their competition for higher prices. In today’s price sensitive environment, that is not a recipe for growth.
It especially does not deserve a PE over 3 times its growth rate. Current investors of Whole Foods are in for a painful lesson in growth vs. the premium investors will pay for shares
Land's End: Expand It, Don't Sell It

There was a blog post out there this past week that said Sears Holdings (SHLD) should spin off it's Land's End line in order to create value for shareholders. It was a well written and thought out piece and I could not disagree with it's author more. I cannot find where I read it but if the author reads this and wants, they can drop me a line and I will link to it. Here are the reasons for my disagreement:
The future of Sears retail:
In February I wrote, "I am rapidly becoming convinced that the future of Sears Holdings retail clothing operations will be predominantly Land's End merchandise." This thought was further bolstered when in his annual shareholder letter, CEO Eddie Lampert said that the Land's Ends division had a record year in 2006 for both sales and profits. If this was not enough to convince people, at the annual meeting last week, Lampert said that the Land's end "store in a store" concept was being expanded from 100 to 200 locations in 2007. If you have not been to one of these yet, go (here me Maggie?). The layout is enticing, the merchandise is wonderful and the pricing is good. In short, there isn't anything not to like and based on this years results, I am not the only one who thinks this way. As these locations expand, watch as the retail metrics for Sears improve at an increasing rate. There has been some concern out there that the stores would just cannibalize the online operations. Results to date have proved just the opposite. People seem to be more willing to buy online if they are able to return merchandise to a store for an exchange rather than going through the annoying mail return procedure.
Selling Land's End now would actually destroy long term shareholder value. Each of these locations, as they open increases the value of the retail operations. It would no doubt give us a short term boost, but it would come at a far too heavy long term price.
Brand Value
Recently Lampert created $1.8 billion dollars essentially out of thin air. What he did was to create a bond out of the Craftsman, Kenmore and DieHard brands. He found a way to quantify the value of these brands. As Land's End becomes more prevalent and profitable for him, he can do the same for it. I have come to realize that Lampert is smarter than most people out there and sees things that most do not. If you look at it, he has created billions of dollars in shareholder value from two names, Kmart and Sears, both of whom were left for dead by the investing world. Land's End will eventually have a value to him as a brand that is far in excess of the simple annual sales and profits from the division. Rather than selling this increasingly valuable asset, I would love to see it's expansion grow at a faster pace. Lampert, however, is a far more patient and wealthier person than I so I will defer to him on it's pace (that and the fact he has yet to ask my advice). Now, how much value could it have? It is hard to tell since Sears does not breakout individual results in their 10K, making quantifying it guesswork. My opinion is that since Lampert has repeatedly given Land's End the lions share of credit for margins improving from 24% in 2004, to 27% in 2005 to almost 29% in 2006, its value is substantial and will continue to increase as more locations open.
Future Investments :
Now that Lampert has said he will begin to "look for investments" for Sears Holdings, between the cash on he has on hand and the value of the bonds he created he is sitting on almost $6 billion and multiples of that in borrowing power. The guessing games will begin. If Lampert's, recent activity within Sears is any indication of his plans, any acquisition will have "Brand Appeal". What is Dr. Phil's saying? "The most accurate predictor of future behavior is past behavior". He is the first retailer out there to quantify the value of a brand name in addition to it's immediate effect on the profit and loss column. Expect the acquisition(s) to be of strong, respected brand names as for Lampert, it provides him value few seem to be easily able to see..
Saturday, May 12, 2007
This Week's Top 5 Fron VIN
1- Author Says Work "Has Been Wonderful" Omaha.com
2- Google: Caveat Emptor- ValuePlays
3- Buffet Never Makes Bet With Sucker Odds- Financial Times
4- Sears Holdings To Spend Cash Hoard- ValuePlays
5- Notes From The Wesco Meeting- Gurufocus
Friday, May 11, 2007
Circut City: Ripe For Buyout
Shares, now down almost 50% in the past year are priced for a buyout and have great value, sans current management. CC is sitting on $4.05 a share in cash (after LT debt is subtracted), $2.94 a share in owned inventory and last year generated another $2.11 a share in cash from operations. At today's price of $16.72, the cash on hand and value of the owned inventory would give a buyer a 42% return almost immediately or, assuming a buyer would have to pay a premium for the shares, CC's cash and inventory values would more than finance it.
Act one of the new buyers would be to show current management the door. Julian Day at RadioShack (RSH) has shown what good management can do for investors and a buyer of Circuit City woulds have the same opportunity. CC has appealing stores in good locations with a nice product mix, they are just abysmally run.
Some Friday Housekeeping
- Weekend readership is expected to plummet so my posts on the weekend will be more of the quick read variety
- Forbes Online pickup another article. You can read it here. I have agreed to provide them the articles first before they hit the blog going forward so they have them "hot off the press" so to speak. They will be published under the Personal Finance section in an area they call the "Adviser Soapbox" . I will let you know going forward when they appear. Currently it looks like every couple weeks, depending on my output.
- Has anyone heard from Geoff Gannon? As one of my favorite blogs to read (Gannon On Investing), it has been while since his last post. Here is hoping everything is ok.
- Some of you may have noticed that I have also been providing the site 24/7 Wall St. some exclusive content. I do not know how long this will last but if you keep an eye out there, you will find some additional articles. I tend to give them one or two articles a day. Some of them will appear here after they run there first. Others do not really pertain to the focus of this blog so they will not.
- I have received some fantastic email questions lately and are in the process of turning them into posts. Due to the news cycle and the timing of events it may be a week or so until they reach the blog but rest assured I am working on them.
- Please keep the email comments and questions coming. I take criticism as well as compliments as long as it is constructive and not petty or nasty. I have taken suggestions from viewers and implemented them into the blog. I like to think I am smart enough to know I do not know everything.....
- Over the coming week I will attempting to make some changes to the blog layout. If you log on and things look bizarre, it is just me fumbling my way through computer code and learning it on the fly. Rest assured any oddities are temporary and hopefully the end result will be better..
Thank you for reading, have a great weekend and Happy Mother's Day to all out there.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Sell Your Wireless Phone Service Stocks
One word: SKYPE
On Thursday Research In Motion (RIMM), in an stunningly under reported event announced:
SHAPE Services announced today the release of a new version of its IM+ for Skype Software for BlackBerry® smartphones from Research In Motion (RIM) (Nasdaq: RIMM; TSX: RIM).
IM+ for Skype Software by SHAPE Services is a mobile client for Skype Software. It enables voice and text communication with other Skype users as well as cost-effective calling to landline or mobile connections. IM+ for Skype Software uses SkypeOut credits for voice communication ensuring cost-effective calls to any number around the globe. For users of Skype Unlimited plan (only USD 29.95 per year) IM+ enables almost free calling from a BlackBerry smartphone to any PC with Skype or any landline/mobile number. All you need is a BlackBerry smartphone and IM+ for Skype Software installed.
Providing desktop-like access to a familiar Skype experience from any mobile device is the plan of SHAPE Services. In the nearest future the company is going to release versions for Windows Mobile Pocket PC, Windows Mobile Smartphone, Palm OS, Symbian OS and J2ME devices. A WAP version for universal access from low-end devices is also in the company’s plans for the upcoming months.
I guess it was only a matter of time in retrospect as technology in our cell phones advances, desk top like functionality should also.
A $30 annual fee for unlimited calling? The only question here is how fast people will begin buying blackberries and switching to the lowest cost cell plan from their providers. You can buy a blackberry from any provider and instead of paying $100 a month for cell service, pay $30 a year.
Once this catches on cell company profits will tumble..
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Using "Stops": Are You Stopping Gains?
"Do you use stops to protect yourself from a drop in stock prices and protect profits? If you do, where do you set them 10%, 20%?"
Let go to the basics. What is a "stop-loss order"? In its simplest form, it is a standing sell order place for a security you own at a set price below its current price. The theory is that they enable you to avoid a "meltdown" in the stock and protects you from a lost, or if you have a profit in the stock, preserve it. We need to look closer at this strategy though to see if it really delivers.
Investing vs. Trading
First things first. I am a value investor, not a trader. I only buy stocks in stable, fiscally strong companies that have a history of success. I have no use for fad stocks or 90% of technology stocks (I adhere to Warren Buffets thought process, "how can I invest in something that two 18 year olds writing code in their parent’s garage can destroy"?). Because of that, I have no use for stops. The reason is simple. When I buy stock in a company, whether it be 100 or 10,000 shares, I do it with the thought in mind that I am now buying a part of, and becoming an owner in, the company. This is no different than were I to buy a Dairy Queen franchise for example. I only consider selling my shares if there is a fundamental negative change in the company's prospects or share prices become irrationally overvalued. This causes my outlook and perspective to differ dramatically from the trader who buys shares in the morning with the thought in mind to get rid of them in the afternoon. I fully expect the prices of my shares to fluctuate in value throughout my ownership period which in most cases is several years. Because if this thought process, dips in the price of my shares are for me, great opportunities to purchase more shares at a now discounted price. I always find it funny that Wall St.is the only place in America where buyers get upset when the things they want to purchase go on sale. If you consider yourself a long term owner of a company, think of a drop in the price of the stock simply as a "sale" and not a loss of money.
The "Stop Effect":
Let's do a real life example to see how stops can negatively affect our long term results. Our investor owns shares in Archer Daniel's Midland (ADM) and has a 10% trailing stop in the shares. This means that the stop "trails" the price of the shares up so that it automatically adjust up to preserve profits. Here is the chart:

To give the investor full credit let's say he bought shares at their lowest point at $15 a share in August, 2004. He set a trailing stop at 10% and watched as shares slowly increased to $25 a share in mid February, 2005. In the third week of February, shares dropped from $25 to $21 a share for no reason. There was no earnings released, no warning, nothing. Now, because the investor had a 10% stop in place, his shares were sold at $22.50 (10% of $25 is $2.50 below the $25 price). He was right to have the stop in right because he saved himself the extra $1.50 a share they dropped, correct ? No, and here is why. Taxes. Since the investor owned his shares for less that a year he is not eligible for the long term holdings tax rate of 15%. He has to pay his effective rate and we will assume that to be 28% (most investors fall into this rate). His gains were $22.50 -$15= $7.50. He now must pay taxes on that $7.50 which equal $2.10. This reduces his gains to $5.40. Now, if we add his realized gain to his purchase price, he effectively sold his shares at $20.40 or a full $2.10 BELOW his stop price. To rub more salt in his wounds, AMD shares traded back up at $25 a share the next week, so he effectively lost $5 in potential gains.
Wait, there is more....
Our investor has learned from his mistake but still believes in "stops." He rubbed his wounds and bought into ADM the following week but this time moved his stop to 20%. This way he will be saved from "disaster" but not hurt by normal price fluctuations. At the end of March 2005 ADM announces earnings and they fall 9%. The stock sells off from $25 to $17 over the next few weeks. Now, the earning miss was just due to short term commodity price issues and not long term problems with the company or its businesses. In fact, cash flow increased, debt decreased and the company reiterated the results were short term in nature. Our investor though, because he had a 20% stop, sold his shares at $20 (20% of $25 is $5) avoiding the extra $3 a share loss as the share sunk to $17. Smart? Not so much....
Let's look closer. In the first transaction he ended up with a profit of $5.40 a share and after the second one, a $5 loss, his profit was reduce to a total of 40 cents. Now, if he had never had a stop placed on the shares, he would be at this point sitting on a $2 profit ($15 purchase price- $17 current price). Our investor is undoubtedly frustrated with ADM and like most investors gives up on it and tries another stock. In doing this he then ends up missing the greatest run in the history of the stock to the $39 a share it sits at today.
Without the “stops“, this frustration would not have been present and he most likely would have still be in ADM and wondering what to do with the over 200% profit he is now sitting on.
Who was our "investor" in ADM? None other than yours truly. I was lucky enough to learn from my mistake(s), purchase more shares at the $17 level and have held on for the very profitable ride since then. I have no stops in place for ADM currently (nor do I in any of my investments) because the stock is a long term pick based on two things, food and fuel and until the world need neither, I will be a shareholder.
Lessoned Learned: Sears Holdings:
I bought shares in Sears Holding (SHLD) in December 2005 for $120 a share. I bought them because of Edward Lampert and his ability to make is investors money and having been to Sears and seen the changes there (the Land's End "store in a store" concept is a sure winner), believed in his direction for the retailer. Another fact that did not hurt was his hedge fund, ESL Investments, sports a 28% annual return for investors. Remembering my ADM experience I did not place a "stop" order on the shares. They rose to their peak of $169 in early June 2006 and then plunged 20% over the next 7 weeks to $134 a share at the end of July. Had I placed another 20% "stop" on the shares, I would have sold them for a profit of $14 a share ($10.08 after taxes) or 8.4%. I also would have missed out on the immediate reversal of the shares as they then climbed to $180 by Halloween.

There was no reason to sell the shares in July. Eddie Lampert did not loose his ability to make money and Sears Holdings did not suffer a deterioration of the metrics he uses to measure its success. Do you know what the Summer 2006 prices were? A "Sears Sales Event". I did take my other advice and bought more shares while they were "on sale" and at their current level of $180 a share I am sitting on a very nice 9 month return of 30%.
If you are an investor buying quality companies for the log haul, it is my opinion that "stops" will do you more harm than good in most cases. If you are a gambler just trading stock symbols with no real idea of how the underlying company operates, placing a stop on those trades may save you from the inevitable terrible trade you will make.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Blockbuster (BBI): NetFlix's CEO is right...

- Total revenues for the quarter increased 5.4% to $1.47 billion
- Worldwide same-store rental revenues increased 1.3%
- Met aggressive online subscriber growth objective for the quarter and have added approximately 800,000 Blockbuster Total Access subscribers; our highest subscriber growth quarter thus far
- Worldwide same-store retail revenues increased 14.3% during the quarter,
- Our year-over-year comparison, our online revenues increased 116%, and we picked up 10 percentage points in market share going from approximately 20% of the online market to 30%. On the store side, despite the store-based industry's first quarter decline, our customer visits and new membership sign-ups were both at the highest levels we've experienced in two years
CEO John Antioco
"We're also attracting customers from outside the video rental category, customers who have been getting their movies from other sources,like satellite or cable pay per view services. Simply put, consumers are discovering or rediscovering Blockbuster in increasing numbers because of the flexibility, the convenience, and the value Total Access offers. As a result, we believe we will continue to pick up share in the overall rental market by attracting business from both our traditional and non-traditional competitors".
"We also believe it will be very difficult for our major online competition to impact our growth since we don't think they have an answer to what we believe is a superior integrated service. Our competition has said they will simply wait us out until we change our proposition. They may have a long wait. We have no intention of making any changes to our Blockbuster Total Access proposition any time soon, unless we feel these changes will fuel our growth even faster or improve our cost efficiencies and service metrics".
Antioco was referring to NetFlix (NFLX) CEO Reed Hasting's who said it's "not a question if, but when Blockbuster will reset prices," and that Blockbuster's low prices weren't "economically feasible."
Here is the issue, is everything is working as planned, why did Blockbuster's operating loss for the first quarter totaled $18.4 million as compared to operating income of $32.1 million during the first quarter of 2006 and cash flow was also a negative $144 million, down from a positive $41 million in 2006.
Unfortunately for Blockbuster, Hasting is right. They cannot add and subscribers and revenue and then increase losses and say "everything is working". Blockbuster has two choices. They need to either rapidly accelerate the rate of store closings or raise prices because what they are doing now is just not getting it done. They were late to and continue to realize the stand alone video store concept is dead (or on its last breath). Technology is taking care of it. The race here is not to the mail, but to the download. When people are able to downloads movies to their TIVO's (TIVO) or TV's are internet enabled and they can do it that way, mail and store video rentals cease to exist. This technology does exist and will be more prevalent in the next 2-3 years. Click here for an article on it. The early bird price here ironically goes to neither of these companies but to Amazon. (AMZN)
Monday, May 7, 2007
Google Update: IL Caveat Emptor

As rapidly growing businesses become larger percentage growth inevitably declines. This is the law of large numbers
Back in January and February I had two posts on Google and it's share price. Rather than regurgitate all of them you can view them here and here. Please read them before continuing so we are all thinking the same way. Let's update with more recent numbers.
My opinion was and is that Google shares will be stagnant of fall near term (1-2 years). This is not due to a failure of management, products or execution. It is due to the share price getting ahead of the laws of math (large numbers)
% of Income From Revenues:
Net income as a percent of revenues fell from 29% in 2006 to 27% Q1 2007. This is probably due to the YouTube acquisition and the Doubleclick one will further deteriorate this metric but we will use it as so as to not being accused of fudging numbers to make a point.
Let's do some numbers. Consensus estimates are for 2007 earnings of $15.12 a share (48% EPS growth over 2006). So the question is, "what revenue number do we need to get there"? I am going to use 329 million shares outstanding at year end to be consistent with the share dilution the last year. This number will turn out to be too low as there will be more dilution but again, don't want to be accused of fudging. This gives Google net earnings of $4.97 billion in 2007. This is 60% net earnings growth but the continued share dilution will prohibit this from all dropping to the bottom line. At net income of 27% of revenues, Google must produce revenues in 2007 of $18.4 billion.
I should note here that that the $18.4 billion dollars represent 80% revenue growth of $8.4 billion dollars and is almost equal to the total revenue growth of 2005 and 2006 combined. Won't happen. It is an especially large nut to crack when you consider that 2006 revenue only grew 73% and Q1 2007 only 63%. We also need to consider that Google is coming into the slower summer months which will put real pressure on the last 3 months of the year to produce revenues equal to almost the entire first 9 months. I get this by taking the $3.6 billion from Q1 and giving Google $3 billion for Q's 2 and 3 to reflect the anticipated seasonal slowdown. This leaves us with $9.6 billion left at the end of Q3, $9 billion short of the revenue needed for our $18.4 billion to give us $15.12 a share eps. Even if we allow for Google to turn Q's 2 and 3 into Q1 beaters and give them $4 billion in revenues each, that still leaves them $7 billion short for the Q4. Just too much.
Other Share Price Headwinds:
Dilution:
Google used stock to purchase YouTube and as of q1 2007, basic shares outstanding have increased 2.6% to 308 million since Dec. 2006 (13% since 2005 and 60% since 2004) and the employee option program will expedite the rate of increase of this dilution.
From the Google site:
"If an employee chooses to sell options in the TSO program, he or she will use an internal online tool built by Morgan Stanley to sell them to the highest-bidding financial institution. The financial institutions buying the options will then likely hold them until maturity and then settle with Google. Google's employee stock options typically have a ten-year term from the grant date. Under the TSO program, Google's employee stock options, upon transfer, will have a lifespan of the lesser of two years or up to the remaining term under the original grant."
What is very interesting here is that in January, the Google site speculated that buyers of the options would short the stock to hedge the option purchase. This now has been has been eliminated from the explanation.
Now, Google could offset this dilution by buying back huge blocks of shares but this is highly unlikely since they re using the shares as currency to make purchases. This implies that they feel a dollar of stock is currently valued at more than a dollar of currency. This is another valuation warning
Acquisitions:
A large acquisition from Google could blow EPS estimates out of the water. But, looking at past history, Google did overpay for YouTube and did the same thing for Doubleclick and neither will do anything for earnings anytime soon and YouTube will likely turn into a litigation drain on cash well before it actually makes any money. Based on history, we need to discount this possibility as acquisitions are one thing Google has not done very well at all so far.
Analysts:
I cannot find a single "hold" or "sell" rating on shares of Google. As a bit of a contrarian, when I see that I instantly get alarmed. No company is flawless and when there are no dissenting voices, people hear the same positive drumbeat repeatedly. That leads to overconfidence in the company and its shares and make the inevitable mistake harder on everyone.
Now, let's talk multiple on the shares and prices. Last year, Google grew EPS 97% and traded at a PE multiple of roughly 2/3 that in the 60's. Companies with declining growth rates trade at multiples that are a discount to those rates. Let's say I am wrong on everything and they do end up hitting the $15.12 estimates. That would mean EPS growth in 2007 of 48%, down from 97%. If we apply the same 2/3 multiple we get a PE of 31 times earnings or a price of $468. It is not unreasonable to expect a multiple contraction of 50% for a growth rate reduction of a like amount especially when you consider EPS growth in 2008 will be even slower.
In January I wrote:
"You should expect the multiple for Google to contract to a range commensurate with its growth rate. If that rate this year is around 30% expect the PE to shrink to about 30 times 2007 earnings. That gives us a price for Google shares of about $450 a share."
Google hit $450 not long after (it was $500 when I wrote it) and has bounced around the $460 to $470 range most days since then. I cannot see any reason that Google deserves to be priced at any higher than that anytime soon.
I recently had an email conversation with a hedge fund manager who will remain nameless since I did not get his permission to air our discussion and have no desire to anger anyone. In that discussion he stated "...Google is at a new pace, one of none other than Google's..." When I hear talk like that, I instantly flash back to 1999 and 2000. "New" seldom is new, only "different" and that means the same laws of finance and math still apply. In our digital age competitors catch up more quickly and tech titans reign at #1 become shorter and shorter. This is rather ironic because it is the same digital technologies that enable their meteoric accent to begin with. IBM reigned for almost 30 years, Microsoft for about 12 and Google has been there for about 5 now. Growth slowed for all as they grew and matured and Google has proven to be no exception. It shares, however, have not realized that fact yet as they have already priced in this years earnings. Should Google stumble one quarter as all companies eventually do, look out below.
I will reiterate my closing statement from my January post. Great company, great products, it's shares are just over priced.
I await the angry emails and comments.
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Sears Holdings To Spend It's Cash Hoard

What did the street focus on? Domestic comparable store sales (as usual) for the first twelve weeks of the thirteen-week fiscal 2007 first quarter which ends May 5, 2007 for its Kmart and Sears stores. Kmart comparable store sales decreased by 4.7%, primarily due to lower transaction volumes across most businesses.
Results were buffeted by an improvement in children's apparel sales and this marks the second consecutive quarter an apparel segment's sales have increased. Last quarter it was women's apparel. This is huge because once mom's start going there for their kid's and themselves, the retail results begin to really pick up. Home appliances and lawn and garden were down. No kidding. We are in a housing slump and had miserable weather to this point this spring. Lawn and garden will pick up now that the weather has changed for the better and housing will turn around this summer spurring increases in both segments. When you add this to improving apparel results, the second half of this year looks to be very exciting for us shareholders
Lampert has several options available aside from retail results to boost EPS and share price this year.
- -He still has $604 million on the share repurchase plan left. This simply means that at today's price of about $180 he could repurchase 3.6 million or 2.3% of outstanding shares.
- -Cash on hand, the metric most Lampert followers watch will be "about $3 billion excluding Sears Canada", essentially flat from earlier in the year. In March, the Sears Canada number was $700 million and I expect this to remain constant after the excellent quarter they just reported seeing a C$29 million swing in results from a loss to a profit. With this amount he could pay off 100% of Sears debt and complete the buyback program.
- -He has also created over $1.8 billion in securities with the DieHard, Craftsman and Kenmore brands. He will use these when the time is right to make a big acquisition or sell them for additional revenue. With many retailers stumbling, there will be assets out there soon he can add at good prices.
Shares plummeted over $10 in after hours Thursday and those who bought in picked up over $2.50 a share Friday, and will see much more by year end. It is tough to get rich betting against Eddie Lampert. If you do not own shares, I would get some. Sears Holdings is in the infancy of what it will eventually become.
At the annual meeting on Friday, Lampert answered shareholder questions in a Buffet like Q&A session. Some notables:
- In early March I opined "I am rapidly becoming convinced that the future of Sears retail operations will become predominately Land's End merchandise". It would appear I was correct on that one as Lampert announced they were doubling the "store in a store" Land's End concept in Sears locations from 100 to 200 this year.
- Kmart is bringing back the famed "blue light special" that was so successful for so long
- Sears has a new marketing campaign entitled "Sears: Where It All Begins" with a new commercial that analyst Bill Dreher called "brilliant". These begin Sunday, May 6th
- Will expand the Craftsman and DieHard brands in Kmart locations
Personally, I feel the Craftsman and DieHard move should have been done long ago but probably was not due to production constraints with current suppliers. At any rate, the expansion of sales channels of these products will provide more value to the names and add more value to the recently created securities created from them. What does that mean? Essentially, Lampert created a bond - like instrument based on the Craftsman, Kenmore and DieHard brands. Holders of these "bonds" receive interest payments based on the performance of the brands. The better the performance of the brands (more sales) the more value these "bonds" then have. Here is the brilliant part. Currently these "bonds" are valued at approx. $1.8 billion and as these brands are sold through more channels, that only increases. In theory, Lampert could use them as cash to buy another company. Because there are future payments attached to the "bonds", he would then be able to pay a discount for the company to it's current price based on the future value of those payments.
Another way to look at it is Lampert now sits on about $4 billion in cash at Sears. By creating these securities, he essentially created another $1.8 billion "out of thin air". The value of these brands was always there, he just found a way to monetize it.
2007 will be a seminal year for us shareholders, much like 2005 was for Kmart holders. My guts tells me that several acquisitions are on the way that will transform Sears holdings forever. Lampert seems to like brands so do not be surprised to see several smaller ones involving brands, not necessarily sales outlets. By doing it this way, he gives more people reason to go to Sears and Kmart locations to get those brands and by adding them to the "securtization bonds", increases the value of them also.
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Don't People Get Tired Of Doubting "Lampert U" Grads?

Another blowout quarter for RadioShack (RSH) and it's Lampert University grad CEO Julian Day. Much has been written that past few weeks about The Shack in anticipation of its result and the sentiment was for of the end of the ride for shares. I will not point out those who wrote these articles but suffice it to say, wrong again folks. Results:
- Income from operations, $8.4 million ($0.06share) last year to $42.5 million ($0.31/share) this year, significantly ahead of analyst forecasts, as gross margins improved.
- Revenue was down 14.5% to $992 million.
- Excluding items, EPS were $0.29; analysts were looking for $0.14/share on revenue of $1.04 billion.
- Gross margin was 52%, up from 48.3%.
- Cash flow was $37 million, vs. $310 cash use last year.
- Shares up 65% this year
- Retail locations as of March 31 were 5,205, down from 6,835 on Dec. 31 2006.
RadioShack launched a cost-cutting restructuring in February including closing stores and merchandise adjustments; the company said reductions in selling and administrative costs and staff cuts will result in savings of $30 million a year.
CFO Jim Gooch: "While we recognize and we are focused on our top-line sales challenges, particularly in the wireless business, we will continue to bring a disciplined approach to the management of our business, with the goals of improving profitability, strengthening our balance sheet and driving cash flow."
I could replace the above results and statements with anything Eddie Lampert at Sears Holdings (SHLD) has said or wrote since taking over Sears and Kmart. It should be noted that the "Lampert Way" is working in Canada also as Sears Canada, a 70% owned subsidiary of Sears holdings just reported a fantastic quarter sporting an $11.8 million dollar quarterly profit vs a $17.2 million loss last year.
Sadly though it appears people still just do not get it. They will be focused on "same store sales" and revenues, not an annoying little thing I call profits. Yet, quarter after quarter Day and Lampert continue to deliver for shareholders as share prices continue to climb. While I own shares of Sears and have enjoyed the ride there, I missed the boat on RadioShack. I am hoping for 1 bad quarter, then let the doubters cream the shares and I will sneak in at a bargain price.
Take a look at year charts for both RadioShack and Sears Holdings:


Let the doubters say what they want. A picture is worth a thousand words (dollars in these cases).
Friday, May 4, 2007
LeapFrog (LF): Turnaround On Schedule

LeapFrog Enterprises, Inc. (NYSE: LF - News), a leading developer of technology-based learning products, today announced financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2007. For the first quarter of 2007, the company reported net sales of $60.9 million and a net loss of $30.4 million, or $0.48 per share. Cash and investments totaled $195.5 million at March 31, 2007.
"First quarter sales and gross margin were generally on track with our expectations," said Jeffrey G. Katz, president and chief executive officer of LeapFrog. "Our cash balance at quarter-end remained strong and our new product milestones for 2007 and 2008 remain on plan."
Highlights:
- Net sales for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 were $60.9 million, compared to $66.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, a decrease of 8.4%. Net sales from the U.S. Consumer segment totaled $43.4 million for the first quarter 2007, compared with $46.8 million for the first quarter 2006.
- Net sales from the International segment totaled $12.5 million for the first quarter 2007, compared with $12.0 million for the first quarter 2006.
- Net sales from the SchoolHouse division totaled $5.0 million for the first quarter 2007, compared with $7.7 million for the first quarter 2006.
Gross margin for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 was 40.5%, up 3.2 percentage points from gross margin of 37.3% for the first quarter 2006,
Operating expenses totaled $54.9 million for the first quarter 2007, an increase of 1.7% compared to $54.0 million for the first quarter 2006. Higher research and development expense associated with new product development was partially offset by lower advertising expense in Europe.
Loss from operations was $30.2 million for the first quarter of 2007 compared to $29.2 million for the first quarter of 2006. The $1.0 million increased loss reflects higher research and development expense, partially offset by lower selling, general and administrative expense and lower advertising expense.
The company recorded a net loss of $30.4 million, or a net loss of $0.48 per share, for the first quarter of 2007, compared to a net loss of $23.6 million, or a net loss of $0.38 per share for the first quarter 2006. - Inventories, net of allowances, were $76.2 million at March 31, 2007, compared with $73.0 million at December 31, 2006, and $163.7 million at March 31, 2006.
- Cash and investments totaled $195.5 million at March 31, 2007, compared with $148.1 million at December 31, 2006, and $202.3 million at March 31, 2006.
Key Performance Metrics and Outlook
Bill Chiasson, chief financial officer, stated, "Our first quarter sales decrease primarily reflects continued declines in LeapPad product sales as a part of our planned transition to a new reading platform in 2008 as well as the impact of our SchoolHouse restructuring strategy. As a result of the many operational changes we made last year, gross margins improved modestly and inventories at both LeapFrog and retailers remain at the lowest levels since 2001."
The company reiterated its current expectations for full year 2007 results:
-- Expects a modest sales decline from fiscal 2006 sales of $502.3 million, with sales being softer in the first half of 2007 pending shipments of new products in the second half of the year.
-- Expects an improvement in gross margin compared with 29.3% for 2006 driven by inventory clean-up efforts in 2006 and an improved product mix in 2007.
-- Operating expenses are expected to decline from $271.7 million for 2006 consistent with the expected sales decline.
-- Net loss is expected to show a significant improvement over 2006.
From the Call
- Schoolhouse segment lost $600K in Q1 as most sales come in Q2 at end of school year
- Retailer feedback on new items "very encouraging"
- Inventories at historic lows
- "Very encouraged" at progress and outlook for rest of year
- Little competition in "learning segment" of business
Do not get excited about the 8 cent difference in earnings vs the estimates. With only 65 millions shares outstanding that only amounts to 5 million dollars and R&D was the reason. Sales are ahead of schedule and new product reception is excellent.
Things are looking very good here as both management and the analysts were all very positive on the results.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Lead Found In Baby Bibs: Sue Paint Co's?????
The discovery of lead in the fabric of a brand of baby bibs sold at Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) has resulted in a recall of the items, the company said. Jon Gambrell from the Associated Press reported today.
"The bibs, sold under the Baby Connection brand name, came in packs of two to seven bibs, with embroidered prints or images of Sesame Street characters. Some were sold as long ago as 2004. The bibs were made by Hamco Inc. exclusively for the Bentonville-based retailer.
Mia Masten, a Chicago-based spokeswoman for Wal-Mart, said the vinyl portion of the bibs exceeded the lead levels set by Illinois for children's products. She said the company had worked with the Illinois attorney general's office to pull the items and later decided to expand the recall nationwide.
Masten said about 60,000 of the bib bundles were sold in Illinois without any reported injuries.
Masten said officials with the world's largest retailer have been in contact with Hamco, but referred all questions about the products' manufacturing to Hamco.
Officials at Hamco, a subsidiary of Crown Crafts Inc. of Gonzales, La., said the company has no comment and referred questions to Wal-Mart.
The Illinois attorney general's office identified the bibs as being sold between June 2004 and the end of March of this year in Wal-Mart stores throughout the state. Tests on three styles of the bibs tested positive for lead more than 600 parts per million, Illinois' standard for lead in children's products, said Robyn Ziegler, a spokeswoman with the attorney general's office.
While Wal-Mart pulled the product from its shelves nationwide, Masten said only customers in Illinois would be eligible to receive refunds or replacements. It wasn't immediately clear why the refunds only covered Illinois.
Initially, Masten said the recall only pertained to Illinois. Later Wednesday, she said it was nationwide.
Wal-Mart's recall comes after a lawsuit over the bibs by the Center for Environmental Health, based in Oakland, Calif. Alexa Engelman, a researcher there, said the center became aware of the bibs in September. Engelman said a report by an independent laboratory test contracted by the center showed the bibs contained 16 times the amount of lead allowed in paint.
Lead, used as a stabilizer in vinyl plastic, can be "easily substituted" for other products, Engelman said.
Public health experts consider elevated levels of lead in blood a significant health hazard for children. Studies have repeatedly shown that childhood exposure to lead can lead to learning problems, reduced intelligence, hyperactivity and attention deficit disorder. There is no lead level that is considered safe in blood, and recent studies have shown adverse health effects even at very low levels.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a statement Wednesday saying that the bibs were safe if in good condition. However, if a bib "deteriorates to the point that a baby could pull or bite off and swallow a piece of vinyl containing the lead, then the amounts of lead consumed could approach levels of concern," the agency said.
Those who purchased the bibs in Illinois can return them at their local Wal-Mart for a full refund or can receive a free replacement by calling (877) 373-3812."
This is more proof that lead is everywhere in our society and to hold one segment of the business community, namely paint companies like Sherwin-Williams (SHW), Valspar (VAL) and NL Industries (NL) responsible for all the damage is causes, especially when they have not produced lead paint in 50 years, is irresponsible. These bibs contained more lead than paint ever did and may have been poisoning children since 2004 especially when you consider how often children chew on them. But hey, lets go after paint companies??These suits have no merit.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Owens Corning (OC) Earnings Call Notes & A Lesson
- Roofing business will see a resurgence "soon"
- Housing market has become a "bit more pessimistic" and may be a bit slower for a little longer but, second half seasonality of OC's business will see a improvement (45% 1st half, 55% 2nd half).
- Sign's are out there that they market may have bottomed and is improving in certain areas.
- A prolonged housing slowdown will not affect this years results (as long as there is no further dramatic deterioration)
- Current housing downturn was unlike any other as it was very dramatic and was not caused by overall deterioration of the economy and commercial business was not affected materially.
- Insulation sales are picking up
- 07' sales should mirror '06 and improve throughout the year
- Roofing inventory has been built in Q1 when asphalt prices are low (new strategy)
A Lesson:
Did you panic today after the earning were announced? A whole bunch of people did as shares dropped $1.57 each in the first 4 minutes of trading on volume 40,000 shares. Those folks then watched as shares immediately climbed out of that hole and ended the day up almost 20 cents for a $1.77 swing. Us "long termers" maybe picked up few more shares when they went on sale this morning? Kudos to you if you did!!
Today was a perfect lesson for us. Those with short term outlooks will get burned time after time by news and those of us with long term perspectives will use those very instances to by more shares on sale and ad to our gains.....
Great day today...
Owens Corning (OC) Earnings: Nothing Unexpected

First quarter sales declined 17 percent.
"As expected, our performance in the first quarter reflected weaker volume in our building materials businesses associated with the significant slowdown of new residential construction in the U.S.," said Dave Brown, president and chief executive officer. "We are focused on delivering value to our customers through innovation, and our productivity initiatives to drive operational performance in a weaker market.
"Our Composite Solutions business continues to deliver solid results," said Brown. "Strong demand for glass fiber materials in North America and Europe delivered improved margins that allowed us to offset cost inflation. Our Japanese acquisition, completed in the second quarter of 2006, also improved our top-line growth."
When reviewing the operating performance of the company with its Board of Directors and employees, management makes adjustments to earnings before interest and taxes ("EBIT") and diluted earnings per share. To calculate "adjusted EBIT" and "adjusted diluted earnings per share," management excludes certain items from net earnings and earnings before interest and taxes, including those related to the company's Chapter 11 proceedings, asbestos liabilities, and restructuring and other activities, so as to improve comparability over time (the "Comparability Items"). As described more fully in the attached financial schedules, such Comparability Items amounted to charges of $28 million in the first quarter of 2007 compared to a credit of $1 million during the same period of 2006.
Consolidated First-Quarter Results
-- EBIT in the first quarter of 2007 was $33 million, compared with $115 million during the same period of 2006. Adjusted EBIT for the first quarter of 2007 was $61 million, compared with $114 million during the same period in 2006. The decline was primarily due to lower sales as the weakening new residential construction market impacted demand for building materials, and higher material and delivery costs.
-- Diluted earnings per share for the first quarter of 2007 were $0.01. Adjusted diluted earnings per share for the first quarter of 2007 were $0.14.
Quarter Highlights:
- -- Weakened demand in Insulating Systems and Roofing and Asphalt, combined with seasonal slowdowns in the building materials market, resulted in continued production curtailments at selected manufacturing facilities during the first quarter.
- -- Demand for glass fiber reinforcement products was robust in the first quarter, leading to higher capacity utilization and improved productivity.
- -- At the end of the first quarter of 2007, the company had $2.063 billion of short- and long-term debt, compared with $2.736 billion at the end of 2006. The company's debt at the end of 2006 included a note payable to the 524(g) Trust of $1.390 billion, plus interest, which was paid in full on January 4, 2007, a portion of which was funded by borrowing $600 million under the company's delayed draw senior-term loan facility during the first quarter of 2007.
- -- Owens Corning announced a share buy-back program in the first quarter under which the company is authorized to repurchase up to 5 percent of Owens Corning's outstanding common stock. The company did not repurchase any shares during the first quarter.
Update: Proposed Owens Corning and Saint-Gobain Joint Venture
On February 20, 2007, Owens Corning and Saint-Gobain announced that they signed a joint-venture agreement to merge their respective reinforcements and composites businesses, thereby creating a global company in reinforcements and composite fabrics products with worldwide revenues of approximately $1.8 billion and 10,000 employees. The new company, to be named "OCV Reinforcements," will serve customers with improved technology, an expanded product range and a strengthened presence in both developed and emerging markets. The transaction, which has been approved by the Boards of Directors of both parent companies, is subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory and antitrust approvals. Given the timing of regulatory and antitrust review, the joint venture is targeted to close during the second half of 2007.
Update: Strategic Business Review: Siding Solutions Business & Fabwel Unit
Consistent with Owens Corning's ongoing review of its businesses, the company announced during the first quarter that it will explore strategic alternatives for its Siding Solutions business, which includes its vinyl siding manufacturing operations and Norandex/Reynolds distribution business, and the company's Fabwel unit, the leading producer and fabricator of components and sidewalls for recreational vehicles and cargo trailers. The company expects a midyear completion of this review process.
2007 Outlook
Based on current estimates by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), the slow down in U.S. housing starts is expected to carry well into 2007, which will continue to impact the company's Insulating Systems business. Demand for Owens Corning's Roofing and Asphalt products is driven primarily by the repair of residential roofs, with lesser demand coming from housing starts. Owens Corning is assuming a more normal level of demand associated with storm activity in 2007.
Owens Corning expects that the Composite Solutions segment will benefit from strong global demand for glass fiber materials throughout 2007. In addition, the recent introduction of new products has the potential to positively impact this segment in 2007.
Upon emergence and the subsequent distribution of contingent stock and cash to the 524(g) Trust in January 2007, Owens Corning generated a significant U.S. Federal tax net operating loss of approximately $2.8 billion. Based on current estimates, the company believes its cash taxes will be about 10 to 15 percent of pre-tax income for the next five to seven years. Owens Corning anticipates that its effective tax rate will be approximately 36.5 percent for 2007.
Allowing for continued uncertainty and based upon the NAHB's current 2007 estimate of 1.45 million housing starts, the company continues to project that 2007 adjusted EBIT should exceed $415 million, not including the impact of the proposed Owens Corning - Vetrotex joint venture or other strategic organizational changes. This forecast will be updated and communicated quarterly.
First-Quarter Business Segment Highlights
Insulating Systems
-- EBIT for the first quarter was $53 million, compared with $122 millionduring the same period in 2006. Results were unfavorably impacted by a decline in sales volumes, changes in product mix, idle facility costs resulting from production curtailments, and increases in material and labor costs. In addition, results were negatively impacted by $11 million, primarily related to depreciation and amortization costs, resulting from the adoption of Fresh Start Accounting.
Composite Solutions
-- EBIT for the first quarter of 2007 was $26 million, compared with $14 million during the same period in 2006. The improvement was primarily the result of stronger demand, manufacturing productivity, improved margins and lower marketing and administrative costs. Results for the first quarter of 2006 also included approximately $6 million in expense resulting from downtime to repair and expand the company's Taloja, India manufacturing facility, and $8 million of gains on the sale of metal. Results were negatively impacted by $1 million resulting from the adoption of Fresh Start Accounting.
Roofing and Asphalt
-- EBIT for the first quarter was a loss of $8 million, compared with record first quarter earnings of $29 million during the same period in 2006. The decrease was primarily driven by lower volume resulting from declines in new construction activity in North America, combined with lower storm-related demand and the impact of higher material costs. Results were negatively impacted by $1 million resulting from the adoption of Fresh Start Accounting.
Other Building Materials and Services
-- EBIT for the first quarter of 2007 was a loss of $1 million, compared with a loss of $3 million during the same period in 2006. The improvement was primarily due to increased earnings in the company's Cultured Stone® business. The adoption of Fresh Start Accounting had no significant impact on this segment during the first quarter of 2007.
Synopsis:
As expected, a lousy quarter. As value investors we buy businesses when they are hopefully at their worst. Owen's clearly is at that level yet it is still making money. The real important takeaways is that full year guidance was unchanged. The St. Gobian merger will go through later this year. An active (or even moderate) hurricane season will really bolster the stock and any revival in housing will help. Essentially all business segments (except composites) are bottoming. as value investors this is the perfect spot to be in as we will ride the wave when they rebound laster this year. Like I have said many times before, ignore today's price activity in the stock. If it gets hit hard enough, buy more, the downside from here is minimal. This investment in a two year one at a minimum, do not let one quarter or one half a year shake you out of what will end up being a very profitable investment down the road.
I will be on the call today at 11 and update with any important announcements.
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
ADM: Long Term Outlook Fantastic

From The Press Release:
- Net earnings for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 increased 4 % to $ 363 million -- $ .56 per share from $ 348 million --$ .53 per share last year.
- Third quarter segment operating profit increased 8 % to $ 593 millionfrom $ 549 million last year.
- Oilseeds Processing operating profit decreased due to lower softseed and biodiesel processing margins.
- Corn Processing operating profit increased 15% due to lower operating costs and increased ethanol and sweetener selling prices partially offset by increased net corn costs.
"We performed well in a challenging quarter," said ADM Chairman and CEO Patricia A. Woertz. "We are particularly pleased with continued strong performance in our corn processing segment. Our results also
benefited from actions to strategically align our portfolio and our outlook on future opportunities remains quite strong."
From The Earnings Conference Call:
- 15.4 million shares repurchased at $34 a share
- US corn crop production up from 74 to 90 million acres
- Brazil corn production up 7 million bushels (42 to 49 million)
- Argentina, China will also have larger corn crop production in 2007-2008
- Corn yields per acre will jump significantly either this year or next due to new seeds
- There are still more acres under the conservation program that can be planted with corn
- 4th Q 2007 will start selling HFCS to Mexico in large quantities.
- Worldwide Soybean supplies adequate for 2007-2008
- Washington will expand the RFA (Renewable Fuels standard) to 15% of all gasoline sold
- Current studies indicate Flex Fuel car fleet expansion will not be necessary to accomplish this
- Oil Processing results will correct itself this year as rapeseed production recovers from abnormally low levels currently
- Ethanol expansion when complete will produce over 1.5 gallons annually billion annually or approx. 19% of US total (estimated at 8 billion gallons by the end of 2008)
- Additional business and governmental partnerships "will most definitely" be announced this year.
- HFCS pricing will remain at current historically high level throughout year (are contacted)
- Ethanol prices will increase throughout year. Demand is very strong
- Biodiesel demand will double between now and 2012
- ROE is targeted at 13% which is "well above cost of capital" (q1 was 13.8%)
- Long-term opportunities are "very strong". Woertz "this quarters results actually increases my confidence in our ability to manage through any difficulty and make me more optimistic about our future"
- Two cellulose ethanol project are continuing
Now, ADM is up 25% since I recommended it in January so expect the stock -to get hit because the "analysts" expected 60 cents a share. This will be a text book call by the analyst. Because of the run up, expect a downgrade or two in the stock and these folks only look out quarter by quarter. This is ok and expected. If you have been kicking yourself for not buying it sooner, you are now going to get a chance to get it cheaper. What does this mean long term? It means that even a spike in corn prices to 35 years highs cannot derailed this companies corn processing operations.
The Future: Massive Capacity Expansion (Completion Dates):
Missouri JV Biodiesel Plant : Completed 12/2006
N. Dakota Biodiesel Plant: 6/2007
Brazil Biodiesel Plant: 8/2007
Iowa Ethanol Plant: Phase I: 6/2007 Complete: 10/2008
Illinois Ethylene Glycol Plant: 10/2008
Pennsylvania, Cocoa Plant: Phase I : 3/2008 Complete: 1/2009
Nebraska Ethanol Plant: 11/2008
Nebraska PHA Plant: 11/2008
2nd Nebraska Etannol Plant: 12/2008
All are on schedule and on budget.
ADM has grown earnings spectacularly the past two years without adding any additional capacity. When this new production capacity goes online, earnings growth of 60% just from it alone is not only likely, but a in the end, probably a conservative estimate.
The ADM that reported to day is a shell of the company that will report earnings next year this time and will be dwarfed by the capacity of the ADM at the end of 2008. Long term shareholders are going to be richly rewarded as the long term fundamentals for all their businesses are favorable. One quarter does not a year make and smart investor will use the dip upcoming to buy more shares at artificially low prices.
Pentagon Wants Biofuels:
The U.S. Defense Department has launched an effort to reduce the military's reliance on traditional aircraft fuel.
The Pentagon's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has released a tender for the exploration of energy alternatives for the military. Officials said DARPA has sought proposals from companies and universities that would increase fuel efficiency and produce biofuel for military jets from agriculture or aquaculture crops."DARPA seeks processes that use limited sources of external energy, that are adaptable to a range or blend of feedstock crop oils, and that produce process by-products that have ancillary manufacturing or industrial value," the agency said.
Officials said commercial alternatives to traditional fuel have not met the higher energy density and wide-operating temperature range required for military aviation uses. They said the Pentagon has designed a program entitled BioFuels to convert crop oil to military aviation fuel, known as JP-8. Those invited to participate in the competition would deliver at least 100 liters of JP-8 surrogate biofuel for initial government laboratory testing.
Anyone want to bet this is the "governmental partnership" CEO Woertz spoke of being announced this year?
Summary:
Let's not forget, despite the temporary headwinds, earnings still grew and even at $40 a share ADM only trades at 14 times trailing twelve months earnings. This stock is by no means overvalued. We have a company with fantastic long term fundamentals that is the world leader in all its product categories trading at a discount to the market. What is not to like?
