Value Investing Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bob Rudd who wrote (11712)	11/29/2001 1:44:57 PM
From: Bob Rudd	Read Replies (4) of 78535

Despite aversion to situations involving exposure to regulators, I started a small position in CPN after listening to CC [Long, but informative]. I came away assured that: Net exposure to ENE is immaterial, Other that operating leases, there aren't off balance sheet debts. On the regulatory issue: Calif. is a loony bin, but they appear to view CPN as more part of solution than part of problem. CPN is expected to earn 2.60 so selling for <9x 02....with a 5 year growth est of 30%. They indicated that hedging has made their exposure to energy price fluctuations immaterial. EV/EBITDA ~5.2 @22.8 ttm EBITDA. I felt adding operating leases to EV wouldn't be appropriate since the annual cost [lease payments] is factored into EBITDA [as expenses]...there are a chunk of them...a quick and dirty PV kicked up about 2.3$B...mostly on cogeneration plants.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next