Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : SDL, Inc. [Nasdaq: SDLI] -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Ox who wrote (1632)	6/8/2000 8:38:00 PM
From: Ben Wa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3951

Latest DeutscheBank Alex BRown Global Planetary Bank report from May 31 uses revenue of 449 million for this year and 714 million for next year. eps of $1.27 & $1.66 respectively. that is eps growth rate of 31% from 2000-2001. The reality is that both SDLI & JDSU are capacity constrained. From an investment point of view, they both need to spend gobs of dough to add capacity or else the competition will dominate. Yet, when supply catches up with demand, pricing will drop and for the first time, the amount of money spent on additional capacity and prices paid for acquisitions will come into question. Since manufacturing is the key, anyone having a disruptive manufacturing method will become a major pain in the butt for both these guys. What momentum investors have forgotten is that the largest gains over time are made via earnings growth and pe expansion in combination. For this sector, the pe expansion story has been played out. (barring irrational exuberance)

To: The Ox who wrote (1632)	6/8/2000 8:53:00 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3951

I think the analysts lowball all the numbers as a matter of course. For example, based on management's revised guidance, analysts have upped their estimates for Q2, mostly to the 30/31-cent range I think (HQ is at 30). But look what management actually said: "With regard to pro-forma earnings per share, we expect to exceed Q2 estimates by approximately 24 percent or better, representing sequential growth in pro-forma operating profit of approximately 58 percent." That is a direct quote from Mike Foster, SDL's CFO, from a PR on their web site. I think he was pretty careful about how they phrased this: "exceed Q2 estimates by approximately 24 percent or better". He didn't say "beat average estimates", just "estimates"; and he didn't just say "24 percent", but "24 percent or better". Which to me means they will beat the high estimate by 24%, and every lower estimate by "more". I think the high estimate before the PR was around 27 or 28 (don't have access to first call, so can't tell), but the average was around 25. Now, 24% above 25 is 31 cents, and you can see that most of the analysts revised to 30 or 31 cents. But 24% above 27 is about 33 1/2 cents--rounded to 34 cents. And that is the figure I believe they are stating. That is also consistent with Foster's quote: "representing sequential growth in pro-forma operating profit of approximately 58 percent." Now, Q2 pro-forma was 22 cents, so 58% better is 34.76 cents. I believe that is the floor Foster is placing for this quarter's EPS. You can see that 34.76 is more than 15% greater than HQ's figure. Now either I interpreted this wrong, HQ and all the other analysts interpreted it wrong, or they are lowballing on purpose. HQ's estimate for Q3 is just 33, and for Q4 is just 35. If my interpretation of the above is correct (I don't see how many different interpretations you can have of "representing sequential growth in pro-forma operating profit of approximately 58 percent"), then SDL may actually do 35 cents this quarter (Q2). Now if they do 35 cents this quarter, all the analysts will have to revise their numbers again. I think this ritual is repeated as long as a company is growing extremely rapidly. I don't think the analysts are so stupid that they can't use a calculator, but it is not really in their interests to stick their neck out. Also, it is not in management's interest to make loud proclamations about how much their business will grow a year from now. As a result, forward-looking figures are subdued. But that does not mean the market believes the reality is so subdued, and therefore the stock gets bid up. It looks expensive based on what analysts and mgmt. will say in public, but each quarter the formerly expensive-looking price now looks kind of cheap, and the stock gets bid up to another expensive-looking price. I don't know how to forecast 2001 results, but we have the quarterly results to look at. If rev. growth stays over 20% QoQ--especially 25% QoQ--I believe the trend is still very good. JMHO