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.

Non-Tech : Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. (KKD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (581)	11/17/2000 10:02:11 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik	Respond to of 1001

Still, the fact that the franchisees are required to open a certain number of stores over the next few years (and don't appear to be on a pace to exceed that minimum by a whole lot) tells me a lot about who the onus is mostly upon.

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (581)	12/1/2000 10:59:36 AM
From: Daniel Chisholm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1001

An accounting quibble here. While it costs the company real cash money to open company stores, and even franchisee stores, these costs are not "expenses" in the accounting sense of the word (i.e., they are mostly capitalized). And even those store opening costs that are recognized in current financial statements, are most definitely NOT reflected in the "operating earnings". I'm certainly not one to take GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) at face value, but they do provide an excellent, consistent starting point for determining the true economics of a company. In the case of many traditional companies, the GAAP figures do end up fairly reflecting discounted cash flow models, etc -- after all, GAAP was developed around traditional sorts of companies and industries. It may well be that KREM's GAAP financial statements grossly underestimate the company's long run intrinsic value -- that's what potential shorts such as myself most fear missing during analysis. However, just because a company has various unique intangible characteristics, and just because they make a superb product, and just because their common stock is currently in short supply, does not mean that one can buy the stock today at today's price with an expectation of earning a reasonable annualized return (which I'd call 10-15%) over the next ten or fifteen years. And if you're thinking about a ten year holding period, you're increasingly moving into the game of "I'm smarter buyer/seller than the other seller/buyer" -- which is not to say that you aren't, and is not to say that there is anything wrong with this at all -- but it should be realized that this is the game being played. Until someone can convince me that their reported (Yahoo!) 12% ROE and 4.2% net margins substantially understate economic reality, I will continue to keep KREM in reserve as a research candidate for a short position (in the category of "real businesses, nothing spectacular though, no fraud or sleaze, but overvalued 3-5X"). - Daniel