>>Briefing.com...a surprisingly naive take on DBCC.
>>One rule of valuation still applies -- the value of a
>>company equals the discounted present value of
>>future cash flow.
precisely why DBCC [was] is? a superior investment?
>>Our story begins on October 13, when Marketwatch
>>filed to go public. At the time, DBCC had been trading
>>at $3 3/8, giving it a market cap of $113 mln.
>>Since then, DBCC has soared to $26 3/8,
why did briefing.com pick October 13?...DBCC traded considerably higher in 1996 ref/ quote.yahoo.com hence its recent gains are not as dramatic/unjustified as briefing.com would like one to believe or perhaps to conveniently fit their [flawed] and suspiciously naive argument...when put into historical perspective
>>The only other fundamental news since the
>>Marketwatch.com filing was DBCC's Q1 earnings
>>report on November 16, which quite clearly had no
>>positive news given that the stock price fell from
>>$6 7/16 to $6 following the release. And indeed,
>>there was no good news -- a multi-year slide in earnings
>>and revenue continued.
all wrong...news has been substantial and substantive and DBCCs most recent reported q(1) '99 ending 30 September, in fact, indicated a revenue turnaround specifically pursuant/as proximate cause of DBCCs Internet Business Model initiatives circa 1995-6 vs. q4 '98 ending 30 June...$5+ Mil EBITDA...and $30+ million in cash...no debt...
it is our opinion that was a dangerous and naive position for briefing.com to take given 1) their information is wrong and 2) and perhaps more importantly MarketWatch.com has not reported q4 '98 ending 31 December nor has DBCC announced q2 '99 ending 31 December 1999...we believe The Street.com, whom we highly admire, also concurs with our perspective given esecurities broke the fact on this thread that James Cramer's and or Street.com and or his hedge fund(s) purchased, at least, a 50,000 share block of DBCC late spring/early summer 1998... |
