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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (17337)	7/1/2003 5:45:48 PM
From: Madharry	Respond to of 78958

A mutual fund manager recommended disney in the current barrons. I have not looked at it myself. as a child i owned some for about 30days when it was selling for less then the value of its film library, pre Orlando. My broker loved the stock. It went up 20% in a month and I sold. that decision probably cost me a million or two.

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (17337)	7/1/2003 10:40:40 PM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78958

Yes, seems to me the number of buying opps. for value investors has diminished. Some value-related exploratory positions I've taken recently include: GET, NSK (Dale Baker pick), ICPT, and JAX. Also added to my position in SCR.A.. All sell below book value. GET has plenty of debt, but its 'country & western' franchise seems very strong still. (They've reported increasing revpar from their hotel operations.) NSK has little long term debt and is geographically diverse with its satellite communications. (It needs more customers though to utilize NSK's equipment/services.) JAX is a highly regarded (in taste tests and in service) small casual restaurant chain. (It needs to deliver more bottom line results. A very thinly traded stock.) SCRA has been mentioned here many times over the past five or more years. If anyone bought in past years and held (like me), they've got a losing position. If they bought around Oct. last year or later, they are ahead. Debt is and has always been an issue. (Management competence too.) At this time they are managing debt by refinancing at attractive rates and reducing debt levels. Many SCR investors believe the totality of assets (esp. hotel chain, OEH, that SCR controls) is worth much more than SCR's stock prices (A+B shares). I added a bit to my SCRA position today. About RKY, UIC: I'm still holding RKY and looking to add if it continues to drop to lows. Have an exploratory position in UIC, not planning on adding more. finance.yahoo.com

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (17337)	7/1/2003 11:06:58 PM
From: Grommit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78958

Stock candidates. "Anyone having a problem finding buy candidates, as I am?" Yep. And I just ran my favorite screener and didn't find anything of interest. So let's try an easier way: AS Paul just posted, may I request that all the regulars here post their one or two favorite picks here. Think about your largest holding, most comfortable holding, or most undervalued gem... thanks grommit. Here's my picks ACAS and RCRC: Number one -- ACAS This was posted previously, but as a summary FYI: This company takes some effort to understand. There's plenty of valuable info on the company website -- where they describe the business model and take issue with the short thesis. american-capital.com The stock recovered to reasonable levels and and it was looking like the huge short interest was going to propel the price even higher. (The short sellers (selling) basis is around $18-$20 per share.) Then an article in Barrons a week ago which repeated short sellers arguments from a year ago. It drove the stock down from $28 to $23-$24. barron's article bdcinvestor.com rebuttals finance.messages.yahoo.com bdcinvestor.com HUGE insider buying: biz.yahoo.com finance.yahoo.com american-capital.com Stock Pick Number Two: I had trouble finding a number two. I narrowed it down to one of four and pick RCRC of the four: finance.yahoo.com Already written up here awhile back. Message 18702844

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (17337)	7/2/2003 2:32:42 AM
From: rjm2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78958

I was about to post something very similar. I am just not finding the kind of "buys" I like. (I typically like lower priced stocks with insider buying & value characteristics) I just cant find the kind of stocks I feel comfortable with. The overall insider buying figures have been pitifully low and insider selling has been heavy. Stocks are overpriced by historical standards. A friend of mine is really BULLISH and thinks since interest rates are so low that the relatively high P/Es are ok. Still, he cant find many places to put his money. Maybe I am just more conservative now but I just dont feel that comfortable buying stuff I am not real comfortable with. As a result, I have been doing selective selling over the last few months and have a nice sized cash position. Maybe I just want to have dry powder come dec tax selling. Who knows. But the overall lack of insider buying does not suggest the whole market will continue rallying. I think Paul mentioned JAX. I own a small position from many years ago. I paid $2.12. My problem with these guys is they turned down an offer many years ago by CHUX that was fair and in the shareholders best interest. They dismissed it and shareholders have been suffering ever since. I am going to cut & paste someone elses post from yahoo because its conveys my feelings so well. I really think the board & chairman of JAX are more interested in boosting their egos by having the "best" casual dining chain than in doing whats right by shareholders. "The Bottom Line by: xbarguy 05/05/03 05:52 pm Msg: 739 of 781 As gratified as we all are that our company took "a quantum leap" last year (as the Chairman's letter in the annual report professes), the bottom line is still this: Management turned down a $5.50 per share offer from CHUX in late 1997 / early '98. Part of the rationale for that decision was that the acquirer was offering at least part of the price in CHUX common stock. A comparison of proxies shows that $1.00 worth of JAX at y/e 1997 is now worth 56 cents. A dollar's worth of CHUX now sells for $1.93. Therefore, the breakeven share value for JAX from an opportunity cost point of view is $13.70. In other words, anything less than that price per share is lost due to the decision not to sell. JAX closed today at $3.22. Multiply $10.48 ($13.70 - $3.22) times the number of shares you own, and that's what you've forfeited as a result of that decision. When the Chairman thanks us shareholders for our patience, I wonder if he's doing this math in his head. By the way, our Chairman took a $71,250 bonus last year (a little more than a penny a share) for engineering the "quantum leap". Nice work if you can get it. Just an average guy's thoughts."

To: Wallace Rivers who wrote (17337)	1/21/2004 5:19:53 PM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 78958

Latest Kiplinger magazine has an article on "Five Stocks to Sell Now". I own some stocks on that list of course -g-. (TOY and RKY) I have cut back today, by 1/2, my small position in RKY. The p/e and p/sales are pretty reasonable, but I tend to agree w/Kiplinger that the negatives are strong too - Coors is undercapitalized when compared to the marketing and distribution resources BUD has. BUD is also trouncing everyone with their low-carb Ultra. OTOH, this is all well known, so possibly RKY won't decline much from here, esp. if the overall market holds up. OTOH again, it doesn't look to me like RKY will perform very well either going forward this year as it tries to compete with Budweiser & others. I was looking for about $5 more from the stock - from $55 to $60. Believe I'm better served now though by deploying funds elsewhere. -------- Sold half my small position in ITG. This company (stock) is influenced by the amount of shares traded in the stock markets, and volume is picking up. Forthcoming company news might be very good for the stock - or it might not be; I sold some shares now though to capture a short-term capital loss.