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: staring who wrote (58015)	9/17/2016 10:22:23 AM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78748

SENEA. That's a pretty good summary, and a good reason for you (and others) to pass on the company. For me, I've followed the company sporadically for several years, and while the stock may be fairly valued (maybe fairly-valued at best), I'm willing to bet the downside to the stock is limited because the company does have a history of coming through the commodity/farm cycle, and I can foresee a small upside again to the stock in better times. Also, while price/stated book value is .7, in past years price/stated bv has often been .9 with stated bv sometimes increasing. I'll bet I might see that .9 again. Otoh, to your point: price/sales is flat, revenue is a very slow grower, and there's no indication that investors get anything for their investment (no dividends). Also, I acknowledge the polite nature of posters here: I realize a case could made that my purchase is just silly in that, if I'm only expecting a few point gain, and I'm willing to hold for a while (12+ mo) to get it, but I'm only willing to make a small bet on the company -- it's seems foolish to bother at all or waste time for peanuts, when there might be much better opportunities in other stocks elsewhere.