SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: The Ox who wrote (30738)10/15/1998 2:44:00 PM
From: RGinPG  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
 
ESV beats earnings by 35% ($0.42 actual per share vs $0.31 est)
But their estimates had been decreased 57% over the last 4 mths osxstocks.com
They are up too about 4.5% today so far.

infoseek.com
ENSCO Announces Third Quarter Earnings
09:39 a.m. Oct 15, 1998 Eastern
DALLAS, Oct. 15 /PRNewswire/ -- ENSCO International Incorporated (NYSE: ESV) reported net income for the three months ended September 30, 1998 of $59.0 million, or $.42 per diluted share, on revenues of $179.8 million, compared to net income of $67.8 million, or $.47 per diluted share, on revenues of $223.3 million in the year earlier quarter. Net income for the third quarter of 1998 included a $10.0 million gain ($6.5 million, or $.05 per diluted share, net of tax) from insurance proceeds on the loss of one of ENSCO's large anchor handling tug supply vessels, the ENSCO Kodiak II. As previously reported, the ENSCO Kodiak II sank in the Gulf of Mexico in early September and was declared a total loss for insurance purposes. The gain from the Kodiak II incident represents the excess of insurance proceeds over the net book value of the vessel. In addition the Company's results for the third quarter of 1998 reflected the favorable outcome of a foreign tax dispute, which contributed $.03 per diluted share to net income. Excluding these non- recurring items from third quarter results, ENSCO's net income for the quarter would have been $48.8 million, or $.35 per diluted share.




To: The Ox who wrote (30738)10/15/1998 5:45:00 PM
From: Fredman  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
 
I guess when I say 'great buy', i mean in comparison to about everything else that is out there. I just don't see a lot of other sectors/companies out there with a BETTER chance to double or triple with a 'lesser' amount of risk than these.



To: The Ox who wrote (30738)10/16/1998 1:52:00 AM
From: Fredman  Respond to of 95453
 
I mean 'GREAT BUYS' as in comparison to 1997 or early 1998 prices. If somebody bought then at 30-35-40.00+ SURE they got screwed. compared to today. But when they dipped a few weeks ago, say down to 8.25, then went to 13.00, and you bought in, and now it is back to 9.50, that's still a great buy. SURE 8.25 would be better, but 13.00 is better than 30-35-40.00 Isn't it ?? sure i'd like to have bought at 8.25 or so - we all would - but i sure do think we will be making money at 13.00. will they go back to 30-35-40 ?? who knows ? I will let you know when i can predict where the bottom is (i can't), but i am fairly certain 13.00 will double, or double and a half. oh, i agree - you can throw out all valuation models, stochastics, candlesticks, and any other kind of sticks.