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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hueyone who wrote (43706)	6/20/2001 10:17:28 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Respond to of 54805

delete - duplicate, and this time I have NO idea how it happened. :( --Mike Buckley

To: hueyone who wrote (43706)	6/20/2001 10:22:36 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Huey, Let me get this straight, if John Shannon sells a company due to a change in his perceived merit of the company, it is a market timing event No, that's not the context of my comment. The context was that John was selling at one price with the expectation of buying back at a lower price. For me, that's market timing. or you sell Sandisk because you don't think it is living up to Gorilla watch and wait standards, it isn't market timing? No, not in my mind. It was using Rules #1 - #10, which in my mind has nothing to do with market timing insofar as the generally accepted use of the term is concerned. You'll probably remember that we had a very recent discussion about various perceptions of what constitutes and doesn't constitute market timing. I can't add anything more of substance and I'd feel more comfortable that Frank and tekboy address the issues they brought to light. As a reminder, I hope to hear from you about: Message 15967765 Thanks! --Mike Buckley

To: hueyone who wrote (43706)	6/20/2001 10:46:52 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Huey, Sorry that I missed your PS about the Siebel valuation. If you can answer a couple of questions without taking the time to finish your study of the topic, I'd appreciate it. If not, I understand. What metric(s) would you use for determining the fair value of a stock relative to its adjusted free cash flow? Considering that employees are at the core of a company's operations, what is the basis for excluding the cash flow issues directly related to acquiring the employees when trying to arrive at free cash flow generated by operations? If I remember correctly, you referenced the annual doubling of adjusted free cash flow per share in the context that it would be very unusual to sustain. But I'm not sure it would be. (I'm also not sure it wouldn't be difficult.) For instance, Siebel's unadjusted free cash flow in 1998, 1999, and 2000 was $46 million, $44 million, and $276 million, respectively. If unadjusted free cash flow can grow in such geometric porportions, can't adjusted free cash flow do the same? I'm not familiar enough with the factors that can most likely affect free cash flow or the magnitude of change free cash flow can typically enjoy as a company transitions from the bowling alley through the tornado and onto Main Street. So, I'm wondering if you have a feel for it that might be helpful. --Mike Buckley