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: Cressidaadr who wrote (24234)	7/5/2006 1:54:38 PM
From: bruwin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78958

This discussion regarding my presentation of someone else's Value picks has been gone through before Cressidaadr. There were those who welcomed it, and there were those who didn't. In fact, one of the SI Board members asked me, in a PM, to present them again. The same member indicated that a 20% Gain had been realised in the last 6 months from previous submissions. Needless to say, one can't please everybody all of the time. If you're not in favour of it, may I respectfully suggest you just ignore it. I find your "Value" definitions interesting. One of my "Value" plays is HANS. It's up about 50% in the last 2 months. That's my example of "what a Value pick might look like".

To: Cressidaadr who wrote (24234)	7/6/2006 12:21:57 AM
From: Paul Senior	Respond to of 78958

SCX appears maybe mildly undervalued. I see it as a possible revision-to mean play as I look at current p/sales and p/book because those numbers look lower now than over past seven years. The current numbers seem similar to '03, also when the stock seems like it was same price as now. As the business got a little better the stock moved up. Maybe that'll happen again. I don't see it as a value stock that's so much more appealing than many other stocks that show up here. Is it because "tangible BV is $165 million" and market cap is "$90 million"? Stated book value hasn't improved in nine years (Was $25.99/sh.,moved up some, and now at $24.86/sh.) I use book value in a couple of ways: one is to see how the stock price and book value dance. For SCX, for the past seven years, the stock price approached book value maybe one time. Maybe it'll do so again. There doesn't seem to be a catalyst to make it happen though. Management doesn't seem so motivated. Secondly, I like to use book value to measure value (where the business allows that, e.g. not consulting, IT, etc.). This decade, the very best that SCX could earn on its equity (or assets, because there's no long-term debt) has been about 6.1%. This when it even could claim profitable years. To me, I won't pay anywhere near book value for 6.1%. If 6.1% is the best roe they can deliver, their stock SHOULD sell for below book value. Every cigar butt imo has value, and at some price below book value, the stock is a value. I have my methods for calculating; I presume others have there's. At somewhere around current .55 p/bk, the stock might be a small bet. Prospects going forward don't seem so great; there's no catalyst. So I look backwards. As a revision-to-mean play and a with dividend while waiting, that could work. Otoh, low trading volume, management that won't or can't do better than bond returns with the assets they manage, it could be a value trap.