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.

Politics : RAMTRONIAN's Cache Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sr K who wrote (13830)	2/18/2008 5:54:06 PM
From: NightOwl	Respond to of 14464

Sr K... Do I understand you correctly? "Read the long-term guidance and GAAP requirements when it is "more likely than not" that NOL will be used before it expires. It is not a one-year projection. The GAAP wording was either on this board or Yahoo or in the 8-K for anyone who never heard of it." I've read that a "NOL," Net Operating Loss, will expire if not "taken" in 20 years. Your comment suggests that the $7.6M is the total NOL available to RMTR based on the last 20 years of earnings (losses)? What happened to all the rest of the hundreds of millions in losses since 1988? The only reason I can think of for not... "carrying" them "forward" is that most of it is not "more likely than not" to be offset by taxes in the current tax year... And they can't project how much will be used in 2009 or any further down the road. So what is your basis for the $7.6M figure? The only possibility I am aware of is that the company's CPA accepts that amount as "more likely than not" to be used in the current (2008) tax period. Looking at the loss history of this company I can't imagine a CPA these days accepting any management arguments regarding taxable earnings further out than that. 13% pre-tax earnings on whatever you imagine Q1 revenues will be, will never be 12 cents a share. Well I don't know what your "13% pre-tax earnings" means, but I assume you don't believe that 12 cents a share on a before taxes, options expense and any one time adjustments basis is possible. Does this mean you didn't think the 07 cents before adjustments for Q4 was possible? ...Or does it mean you believe they will spend enough on staffing, sales etc. to keep their expense ratio at the 45% range or whatever it takes to eat up much more of my $20M in taxable income? ...Or do you think my presumed tax rate is too high? Now that's certainly a possibility. I've never seen their tax returns and have no idea what their consolidate rate might be what with Canadian tax laws and all. Still... I think 35% is a fair guess. You are either a scientist or pseudo-scientist or enough of one to know that when you get a result that is out of line, you've done something wrong. Well... I certainly *try* not to do anything wrong Sr K. But unless you can explain to me how a CPA could legally project $7.3M of the reported Tax Benefit (the Q4 reported using $0.286M for the "current" year,2007, payable in 2008) over the next two or more years when everyone else... including the company and its analysts... has their hands full projecting earnings even one year out, I'm going to have to "think" that there is really not much of a "line" to be "out of" on this topic. Indeed with the spate of new hires and new office being opened I should hope that I'd be a lot closer with my $0.12 pre-tax for Q1 than you would be with... with... oh... I forgot. No quarterly guidance... Well with all the expenses being run out there on front street for the current quarter, not to mention the receivables piling up, I have to assume that I am either a lot closer to the Q1 numbers than the analysts at Collin's Stew... or you're going to have one hell of a stinky mess at the next CC. 0\|0

To: Sr K who wrote (13830)	2/18/2008 6:22:35 PM
From: NightOwl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14464

Sr K... I took your advice and when back to look at their 2008 guidance. This is what the Q4 PR said: "On the strength of our plans for top-line growth, we expect to continue to benefit from the operating leverage built into our business model to grow net income excluding stock-based compensation and income tax expenses in excess of 30%.” So they say 2008 net income before all the junk will be more than 30% higher... 30% would be $3,136,900 for all of 2008. Even if their tax rate is as high as 38% that kind of net income growth would not suggest a tax bill for $7.3M to a CPA or anyone else. But in 2006 on a per share basis, if you back the options expense and taxes out their GAAP eps was 0.02 cents/sh. That made 2007's net income growth 600% higher than the prior year. 350% growth on 2007's GAAP eps of 0.12/sh would give you 0.42/sh... That certainly makes 0.12/sh for Q1 seem within reason to me. 0\|0