Steve, a "PE of 140" excludes the one-time gains, of course. Trouble is, there are so many one-time gains, or if you prefer, so many one-time additions to book value that one can't simply call the stock overvalued. This is a good example of why one needs to use a combination of measurements: Revenue growth rate; operating earnings growth rate; ratio of price per share to sales per share; ratio of price per share to book value per share; and above all, comparisons between similar measurements for similar types of technology stocks. When you look at the whole picture, at least as seen in the combination of performance measurements, you get another idea; namely, that SNDK is one of the most undervalued stocks when compared with OTHER technology companies that dominate their market niche.
Your comment about high tech money managers preferring "to invest in companies that sold to other high tech companies rather than the consumer" provides food for thought. I assume this means they like companies such as Intel, which sells to other manufacturers. How come they like Intel but not QUALCOMM? And how would they explain why they like Sony? I believe there are so many exceptions in the technology area that one can't really draw valid generalizations about the preferences of portfolio managers. Individuals, however, have an advantage. They need not be tied down by rules of thumb or the herd instinct. They need only answer two questions: Is this stock a good value at its present price? Is this the kind of stock that is good for me? |
