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 : 50% Gains Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KM who wrote (31074)	9/14/2002 9:23:10 PM
From: Carl Worth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 118717

wow, that's a well thought out post from your profile i see that you are obviously way long on ALGX so i read the article you referenced and noticed the following things: "In the June quarter it lost $226 million, or $1.94 a share, on revenue of $184 million." All i can say is LOL....that pretty much speaks for itself. "The soonest that operating income will turn positive is in the fourth quarter, and then only to the tune of $10 million. That's not even enough to service the $900 million in net debt (bank loans, junk bonds and capitalized leases, minus cash on hand), to say nothing of capital spending, now running at $170 million a year." That's EBITDA, but the I in EBITDA matters when you are so far in debt. "Allegiance is the Southwest Airlines of the telecom business--it can offer better service for less" UMMMM...right....reality check....Southwest Airlines will make over 200 million dollars in profit this year in one of the worst years for airlines since deregulation, their debt/equity ratio is 0.4 and they have over 2 billion dollars in cash, allegiance isn't the southwest airlines of anything "A true believer, Holland (company CEO and founder) hasn't sold a single share since taking the company public in 1998. His stake, once worth $570 million, is now worth $4.6 million. That stake could go all the way to zero, but just as easily could bounce up." Okay owning his own stock is noble but how wise is a guy who doesn't diversify his portfolio at all? Certainly his financial management of his own money is awful, people don't like insider selling but sometimes a person has to be smart enough to lock in a few gains. Letting his stake lose over 99% of its value without ever selling a single share is just plain stupid. I find it ironic that the same article espouses shorting CSCO because it is allegedly overvalued....so that means CSCO, the clear leader in networking which is gaining market share and trades at a P/E of 25 times next year's earnings with no debt and 13B in cash is a short and ALGX which is a clear leader in nothing other than racking up debt, and might make a profit after interest pretty much never, is a long? even if the stock does bounce in the short run, dale's post was about the bonds...if and when the market rallies into year end and with the january effect and such, ALGX might bounce a little if it hasn't gone BK by then but i'd have to agree with dale that the chances of them paying a coupon that isnt due until almost a year from now are slim and none and slim is on life support the stock is at best a highly speculative trade on a chart basis only, the bonds are pretty much just a lottery ticket except you will never make a few million times your money in these bonds like you do if you manage to win the lottery, the odds of them ever even paying enough for you to get your original investment back in coupons and just break even are about as bad as the lottery though carl