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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (52171)	4/26/2001 2:11:14 PM
From: John Malloy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

John, <<Of course, DCF is obviously flawed, because it did not predict the ability to sell CSCO at $75 last year. In the end, all models are wrong, some are merely useful.>> The DCF and DCF models are not flawed. What was flawed was our ability to forecast a year ago that sales and earnings would collapse. If we had made that forecast, DCF analysis would have given the right answer. You have to forecast future performance to find what a stock is worth. My point is that forecasting free cash flow does not forecast the cash the stock will put into your pocket when you eventually sell. Forecasting future stock price (by forecasting equity/share and the price/book ratio) does forecast what happens to your pocket. John Malloy

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (52171)	4/26/2001 2:49:18 PM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Hi John, Of course, DCF is obviously flawed, because it did not predict the ability to sell CSCO at $75 last year. i Must disagree. DCF is not intended to predict irrational price movements, even though such movements may represent the notional value of a firm. DCF is intended to provide an indication of NPV, or intrinsic value. such information may be of interest to the extent notional value deviates from it. In the end, all models are wrong, some are merely useful. again, a model such as DCF is OK as long as one understands its intended use. a pistol is not very useful for eating soup, but that doesn't mean the pistol is wrong. having said that, peeple could calc. DCF NPV and say X dollars is where a stock "should" trade, so if the stock is 2 times X, then i will Short it. however, perhaps it goes to 10X, in which case one's short could be in bad shape. if the stock subsequently goes to X (and perhaps X is zero) it will be a Pyrrhic victory if one has gone bankrupt in the meantime. such is to say that models are one things, and real world applications are another.