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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : FAMH - FIRAMADA Staffing Services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: STEVE SAMEULS who wrote (2929)	2/8/1998 12:18:00 PM
From: CO	Respond to of 27968

Steve, I agree FAMH does look undervalued. If I were not already a shareholder, I would be buying now. But my risk tolerance is probably higher than some. Some people want to wait until after the financials are out to buy in. If that works for them that is great. Personally, I would prefer to take a little higher risk and have the possibility of an even higher return. Doing research and asking legitimate questions of a company is good in my opinion. But to just attack a company and to try and scare hard working people out of their investment, because you have a grudge against someone or some other ulterior motive, is completely unjustified in my opinion. Yes there are still some unanswered questions, but that is why the price is still as low as it is right now. I think the audited financials will clear up a lot of things. I think they WILL have a very positive impact when they are released. In my opinion, good things are worth waiting for. If I were to hound the company on when the financials would be released, would it make them release them any sooner? I really doubt it. Even though I don't like it, some things take a little longer than expected and since there is nothing I can personally do about it, I think I will try to just wait patiently. Cheryl

To: STEVE SAMEULS who wrote (2929)	2/9/1998 1:15:00 AM
From: Little Engine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27968

Yet another post from your favorite guy... To answer the following from Steve, who writes: <<<why is the capitalization ($60mm vs $22mm) of ASIS so much higher then HIR? Obviously the pe's follow suit, but this is inconsistent with eps? HIR eps is $0.67 versus $0.27 for ASIS. I guess the market thinks ASIS has that much more growth potential? Anyhow, even if FAMH does half what they project in net income eps should be .04 and pe is still half of HIR and a quarter of ASIS? Looks undervalued to me?>>>> Well, I would guess that ASIS capitalization is higher since their profit margin is higher than HIR, 7 percent vs. 5.5 percent for HIR. Net margins of 7 percent are very high for staffing companies. Perhaps the ASIS P/E, then, should be higher than HIR's, but I think the spread is extreme right now. HIR looks more undervalued to me, with a P/E of about 8 vs. 42 for ASIS. If you want to buy stock by market capitalizations: ASIS= 58 MM, HIR = 32 MM, FAMH = 8.4 MM. Does this mean the market thinks FAMH's growth potential is that bad? With 28 million shares out (which is over a third of what Manpower has outstanding, although Manpower has $6 billion in revenues), it seems like FAMH stock will have a hard time gaining much altitude as their margins shrink, either by earnings revisions in the audited financials or simply the growth of the company. If half of what FAMH has told us is wrong, you still want to buy the stock? Wow. I'm glad SOLP came up, as I had never heard of it before. ...................................Sales................Income..................Profit margin SOLP (audited)........$29 million..........$1.3 million....................6.2% FAMH (claims)..........$8.5 million.........$2.5 million.....................30% I like SOLP as a comparison since 50 percent of its revenues (as I read their SEC filings) came from permanent placement, and the rest temp staffing. FAMH claims its staffing revenues come 30 percent from permanent placement, 70 percent from temp placements. Of course, they add in some financing revenues, but I have never heard what the percentage that would be. My educated guess would be small. Jim observed that I had used the wrong methods in trying to figure how the company figured "net profit" from its financing division in the 3rd Quarter press release. Thank you, Jim, for pointing that out. I underestimated how improbable the "$70,000 in net profit for September" figure looks. I neglected to think of the huge amounts of capital needed to obtain the "one month" numbers listed in the press release that trumpeted (inaccurately, as it turned out) the 3rd Quarter earnings. If there were no one-time earnings included in the finance division "net profit" listed, then FAMH would have needed about $2-3 million in capital, as far as I can tell, to earn over $70,000 in a month by loaning it out. ($70k x 12 = $840,000/year). Expect a revision of that "net profit" (downward) if anyone questions Ira about it. If it was recurring earnings, I wonder where that kind of capital could have materialized from by September, since at the beginning of July FAMH only had about $700,000 in cash, according to the numbers they gave D & B. Has anyone found a staffing company yet that generates over 10 percent in net profits? Still thinking, L.E. P.S. I, too, would hate to see people merely slam this stock, rather than give rational facts and figures that anyone can check out for themselves.