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.

Technology Stocks : Loral Space & Communications -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rocket Scientist who wrote (5520)	3/19/1999 1:19:00 PM
From: Valueman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10852

RS: Good points to address: ...my position is based on the hope of the company actually making a net profit in the not too distant future, not on a multiple of EBITDA. And G* will either make a big positive--or negative--contribution to that net; if G* fails, I don't think the EBITDA from Skynet, SS/L and the rest will make much difference. If that is the case, then all your money is essentially bet on G. If it MUST succeed for LOR to be valuable, there is no sense in owning LOR. I have always wanted to be sure that all the other parts had significant value as well. I still think that way. As far as EBITDA multiples, when you compare EBITDA multiples of other companies, do you take into account what their depreciation and interest expenses are relative to Loral's?* Companies comparable to Loral, excluding other sat companies, are difficult to find(ok-impossible to find). Cable and fiber companies are somewhat similar in that they require huge upfront capex and lots of debt before the cash flows. Essentially LOR is just another telecom company, but a very unique telecom company. Should we look at PCS, or AirTouch in its infancy? Hard to say. To the extent an investor doesn't see the path or think's it high risk, why should he pay any multiple on EBITDA? Why do people buy internet stocks that will never be profitable? Loral's path is far clearer than Amazon or somesuch. What is SS/L worth? Does it need significant growth to have value? KO is growing very little these days, LU's growth was stunted last quarter, GE grows slowly, IBM grows single digits, HWP shrinks--it matters little to the valuation. These stocks remain at ridiculous multiples. All these stocks are franchises that are difficult to duplicate. Thus, their valuation remains high. SS/L has a franchise value too. It is essential to Loral. It will be essential to ALA someday. If it is not valuable, close it. Farm out the manufacture of sats. Let somebody else's profit margins be squeezed. The true value of SS/L can't be produced through some formula, or a multiple of EBITDA. Otherwise, Schwartz, who is not a stupid man, would have ditched it long ago. Sat manufacturing is extremely competitive. So is almost every other business. Does that make it a commodity? No. All in all, it is very difficult to put a price on it, but it is worth more than is generally thought. I do indeed believe G* will make plenty of money, especially seeing the sweeping change in thinking that is going on at G* and at the partner level. Thank you Iridium. C* is still a mystery to me. I have never given it any value, and do not see any near term. I am waiting to be surprised. C* GEOs, if they are ever to be built, will be too late to the dance to make any economic difference. If we step back and look at the very big picture, this discussion is probably pointless. Either the stock goes up or they are bought-period.

To: Rocket Scientist who wrote (5520)	3/19/1999 1:28:00 PM
From: Jeff Vayda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10852

RS: Good points, but making money on a stock is sometimes not based on current profits or even the acknowledged possibility of future profits. Sometimes a stock is bid up merely on the expectation of what it might become. Sometimes a stock is bid up from a herd mentality. "I have no idea what it is, but I dont want to miss the boat again." All fun if you get in early and lots of pain if you happen to be around when the bubble bursts. At the same time, a stock can be held down through no fault of its own. It may be in an unfavored sector or impacted by similar stocks who are having a hard time or the victim of some tough luck. There are many factors playing on a stock's valuation at anytime. You mentioned that you invested with the hope of a profit in the not too distant future. Have you set a time frame or is it floating? Does Loral get until this or that project is started plus X quarters? Does it get a flat 'by 2002' evaluation point? Back when I got into the Loral/G*/Qualcom group, I took a look at the market plan and said 2002-5 would be the evaluation point for me. (you know the old line, money in the market is money you dont need for x years) At some point, the expected gain no longer outweighs the opportunity cost. If I could pick the next 'illrational exuberance' stock, I would be out of these in a second. I dont have a crystal ball so I am forced to do my own DD and rely on the two or three brain cells I can scrape up at any given time. Those lonely guys gave the green light to the business plan a couple of years ago. Not quite to the point of trying to amass cells for another review, but the time is drawing near. This summer is very important to me. Things need to get on track and progress needs to be made on the stock price. I mention the stock price because I dont want to see all the profits from one enterprise funneled back into another. Money must start to show on the bottom line so that the investment world will take notice and drive the stock price higher. EBITDA is nice and if that makes the stock price rise, fine. Net Profits are neat, if they make the stock price rise, fine. In the final analysis, I am here for capital appreciation, not pie in the sky (sats in the sky?) gee whiz technology. Have a good one Jeff Vayda