anyone like ge here?? i know, wrong board but the ge board is hard to stomach... looks like it could be making or retesting highs soon .. all input welcome.. im thinking of june 27 calls
is this the real one or impersonator?
i thought Syb is Anna Chapman and Putin called her to come home
It isn't just the assumptions, though, it is the whole framework of it. Plugging what you call fundamental numbers into that framework really isn't that reasonable if it holds up to no stress test when plugging in past data. Right before Apple came out with iPod that kind of framework would have told you nothing, probably the opposite of Apple's prospects. Same for iPhone, then iPad. This is just an example.
I can only agree that the more stable and predictable and mature a company with fewer product lines, and the shorter the runway, the more relevant your approach becomes, but none of that criteria seems to be found with a company like Amazon.
Someone shouting at the top of his lungs scam and ponzi here or thinks that food and books have similar payment terms is always an idiot, so we can disagree here.
That old warren buffett said stock markets like S-E-X, it feel best just before it ends. Never a fan of Buffett, but I think that's a brilliant analogy, especially for the momo stocks. I see a few momo stocks having made a new high and then reversed to red today.
Huh? You need to check your math. Dilution rate was 4% then and only 3.5% now, almost flat from last year. It dropped lower for a time due to a share buyback that tends to happen periodically.
As far as market crash goes, I think you're just trying to connect unconnected events. That crash was very short-lived and related to real estate. Looking at Amazon's dilution rates is irrelevant as an indicator of anything.
I agree that when looking out long term, we need to begin with assumptions that are also long term oriented.
You should have been saying something like this for the last few weeks:
" I don't agree with bulb's assumptions. "
That would have been totally accurate, and I would have no problem with it. We obviously have different assumptions, and that's OK.
When people start with differing assumptions they can both use intelligent logic, but arrive at different answers or conclusions. So the discussions here should not be about who is an idiot, but about the various reasons we have for our starting assumptions.
The rate of insider selling within Amazon is abnormal from a time series perspective. Last time this heavy was leading up to the 2007/2008 crash...
I can give you a great many things about this trading scam that are abnormal....
So I chose a PEG of 1.4 which is high after a market correction.
And I used the 20% growth AMZN already reports.
And I used a PE of 28.
I think I doubled their earnings to 1.25
All of those values are typical of a very popular stock doing well. So I figure that's reasonable. I expect AMZN to return to more normal values as it matures. That has happened to every stock in history that I know of.
Your own assumptions of a reasonable PEG, PE and growth rate would be EQUALLY valid. Assumptions are just that. Maybe you would use a higher PE and PEG. How about growth rate? Anyway, the question is what do we think are reasonable expectations for future growth and EPS.
Last time I checked dilution was very normal. You say dilution as if it were unusual or unique to Amazon. Look around at some peers and tell me if you still think so.
"Bye bye sybil" , "sybil went broke", etc , etc , etc. Thats OK - sybby expected az much, particularly from that rugby play in, 1.1 ton of silver totin, judo fight'in , bar bounc'in, NYC apt dwell'in toughguy -- philjoe -- who haz traded the markets since 1998, and had the same single yahoo handle since 1998 (even though it waz created in '05)
"Long term I think 35 is about as likely as 1000. Again that's just what I think is reasonable, not using any formula."
This makes no sense. LT is way beyond 1Q which is all your assumptions are based on. The comparisons you made are with inputs that all going to be long outdated by any LT target point. So what you're saying is that your view really isn't all that reasonable LT. Its a kind of wild guess.
Not naive. I recognize it is a real cost -- shareholder dilution. It is also true that when Amazon stock stops going parabolic, retaining the most talented employees will take even more shares since Amazon doesn't generate true FCF and profits. Vicious circle coming....
You seem naive about tech and growth company compensation. Do you find say Google non-founding execs to be any different? Do they hoard stock? Is that a good sign? If they sell is it supposed to be bearish?