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 : Disciplined Investing, especially the NAIC way -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (395)	3/16/2003 4:10:21 PM
From: - with a K	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 469

I hadn't seen the story on the barbed wire but I like it as you explained it. But maybe I'm not applying it correctly, as I look at ADP's section 2 and I see good things: steady growth in pre tax inc (line A) with the exception of the dip in 1999. 2002's figure is higher than 5-yr average. Nice. Line B (ROE) shows a nice, steady increase since 1998, from 18% to 21.6%. I look for companies with ROE above 15, so this is very strong IMO. I like the extremely low debt in line C. So what am I missing in this barbed wire test? ADP's section 2 looks like one of the best I've seen. (I should mention that I use OPS data from the NAIC site and when I look at the PERT Q and Y I only get four quaters of data, for some reason. I haven't looked into this any further, but I need to. You use AAII data, right? What does that cost?) OTOH, I looked at Baxter Int'l (BAX) because it was featured in March by NAIC as the undervalued company of month. I see an up and down line B and way too much debt for my tastes in line C. So I would argue this one doesn't past this test. BTW, has anyone noticed how the BI magazine has been on a terrible streak lately in picking stocks to study? It's almost laughable, IMO. Baxter had an "Avoid" rating by S&P on Feb 1 citing earnings quality issues, option expenses and too optimistic pension return assumptions. It has absolutely imploded since BI ran the story. Many other picks have a 3 rating by Value Line. The current issue has a follow-up on their undervalued pick 18 months ago, EMC, which has dropped 62%!!! They dryly state, "This fails to satisfy (our) goal that an Undervalued Stock should rise by 20%" Hey, when you screw up this big at least you can tell it straight! Just for yucks I punched in some of the magazine's picks for issues I have. Look at how far Charles Schwab has fallen since it was featured, from $17 to 7. BAX's chart looks darn scary. Fibermark fell from $8 to $5 in a short time recently. Then there is Enron, BI's most infamous pick. finance.yahoo.com What do make of all this? Maybe it's like the so-called Sports Illustrated cover jinx and you go and short these companies once they're featured! Or maybe you look at them again now that they been battered? - Kris