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: Gulo who wrote (48733)	7/12/2012 3:07:07 PM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78666

SKUL. I don't follow short % of float, and large short position is rarely a concern for me. I can offer no explanation for the short case other than what you have said. I looked at Amazon, and the comments I saw about SKUL products were mostly favorable, and on a par with other people were rating other headphone manufactures. I agree it's a "promising stock", and could do well. It's too tough for me to figure as a value stock. On some measures it might be okay; otoh, there just is not a lot to the company's public history, and that's a concern for me. Alleviated a little by the recent insider buys. I checked PLT (Plantronics) my fav in the sector, and that seems to be performing like SKUL: finance.yahoo.com It doesn't have anywhere near the high short ratio that SKUL has. PLT in some ways might be comparable to SKUL -- relatively low p/e for example or low d/e. PLT has much better net margins, and of course a longer history. PLT has a workforce of over 2000 vs. about 200 for SKUL (per Yahoo). Does SKUL have patents? --Can SKUL innovate competitively with the likes of PLT? I don't know. PLT's stated bv growth has been stagnant over the past few years. Maybe PLT is losing business to SKUL or others? Maybe the market is saturated? I do not know. SKUL: I guess... -> too tough for me. I defer to others on the thread for their opinions. For me, I'm not a buyer of SKUL or PLT at current prices. PLT has had ten years of profits. I might be interested in PLT if stock fell enough. Not sure. GL

To: Gulo who wrote (48733)	7/12/2012 4:59:36 PM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78666

SKUL - Short history is an issue. There are a lot of companies that are fads. You think that they have a brand recognition, but instead they have a fad recognition. Fad fades, they go boom. We have recently looked for headphones for 20-something audiophile with some sense of fashion. We bought Panasonic. This is just example that other companies can compete in terms of design/appearance/fashion. Panasonic reviews were good. If I was buying for a serious audiophile without a fashion sense, I'd probably buy Sennheiser. We saw a bunch of headphones at TJ Maxx, some of which were Skulcandy... this is not necessarily a positive - IMHO superhot products don't end up in TJ Maxx discount bins. So IMHO, Skulcandy might be a fad. I will skip it. But please don't trust my opinion. Do your own DD and decide. It might be that I am wrong. :)