Vanni,
I was going to ignore further discussions on this topic, but you put in so much effort with the references, that you deserve a response. I'll try to make THIS my last post on the subject. (I'll bold the quotes you extracted.)
LINKS:
1. From taxikid:
I am my OWN analyst in creaf.. always have been. if you followed the thread.. when volume was 100k a day.. i was here {8 5/8} and explaing how a turnaround would happen.. there was nobody here except a guy called wannabee fool, power ranger and an assortment of nice and informed people. Jon Tara brought in a lot of technical product knowledge and a strong contrarian argument... Power ranger does his homework, wannabee fool has a closer inside track to the doings of ML and that side of creaf.. The collective homework of these people was important.. at least to me because i owned the stock for two years.. i don't need to know what some singapore broker says.. i need to know that they aren't getting hurt on the side by the asian flu..
I believe you mis-read the meaning of something which was written in an ambiguous way and prone to mis-reading. Taxi was NOT disparaging Singapore brokers. He clearly puts forth the argument that he relies on himself and the quality posters to SI for his analysis. After careful reading, I take the last statement, which you took to be offensive, to mean, "I need to know that they [meaning CREAF, not the brokers] aren't getting hurt on the side by the asian flu." This makes sense in the context of the overall statement.
2. From Power Ranger:
Singapore brokering houses don't understand Creative, period.
Yes, Creative is base in Singapore, but I can tell you those Singapore Analylicks don't understand the business model of creaf. Most of them are just fresh Uni-gradute and they usually follow the wind in their reporting. One of the prime example is the in-famous Patrick Yau of Schrodder Singapore, he was so bold to proclaimed last June that creaf will be a single digit (S$) stock in 6 months.
This guy clearly has an opinion about the lack of their qualifications. It certainly doesn't look like racism. He even gives an example to back up his claim. (B+ content;D- spelling, grammer)
Anyhow, if these analylicks have to keep changing their estimate every few days, what credibility and respects should we give them?
This was a reference to YOUR claims of frequent revisions from the Singapore analysts and was purely speculative... "if these...", as confirmed by his efforts to check it out: BTW, I do have some friends in those houses that you mentioned, will verify with them about the constant estimate revision.
No racism lurking here...
3. Power Ranger
I will check with them when they start work tomorrow. I don't pay very much attention to those Singapore analysts, their ability are to be doubt. Just last month, one of the Singapore house (I forgot their name) revised downward creaf estimate for this Q by1.5 cents and FY98 by 3.5 cents to about $2.48 eps citing the asian flu as a main concern, Can you believe he changed their recommedation from a BUY to SELL. Does a 3.5 cents drop in earning justify such a dramatic change? especially this was after creaf had been beaten to about $20? So much so for their credibility
Again, an argument about the analysts credibility with examples.
Oops, don't see any racism here either...
4. Derrick Lim Kok Fang
"I agree with PR that Singapore bokerage firm sucks. They only understand their local business models. They don't even see the evolving technological changes that is happening in the PC industry"
Sure looks just like a regular old opinion to me... You may disagree about the opinion, but see racism? Where?
5. Power Ranger
"Note that all the names you supplied are Stock Brokering house in Singapore. I will not give much thought on their analysis reasons given earlier."
He listed 3 of your firms, two of which did NOT have revisions. For clarity, assume a period after "analysis", above. "Reasons given earlier" refers to his choice to rely on his own analysis and the input from participants on SI as stated by Taxikid.
Don't see any racism lurking here either!
6. Prakash
Doesn't matter how many singapore brokerage firms changed their earnings revisions, or which way they changed, what's being compared with is the First Call (read non-Singapore) estimates.
Yeah? So what? He's stating that no matter how many Singapore revisions YOU may allude to, the stock price and investors here are looking at First Call estimates. Is that a racist observation?
Vanni, now that I have wasted a huge amount of time, let's put this to rest. I think MORE than enough has been said. We disagree. Oh yeah, one more thing: I don't appreciate being accused of being an apologist for racist behavior. You lost my respect with that one. De-linking LVB... |
