Tue, Oct 21, 2014, 3:18 PM EDT - U.S. Markets close in 42 mins.


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

The Spectranetics Corporation Message Board

  • glinder_torain glinder_torain Nov 1, 2012 12:53 PM Flag

    Is Motley Fool even relevant?

    I'm normally silent on this board (partly due to new format), but I just had to laugh at the Motley Fool article written and posted under SPNC on Oct. 27. "Are You Expecting This from Spectranetics? by Seth Jayson. First of all, is he asking the question in hopes that SPNC investors will give him an answer? As I've seen so often within the past year, Motley Fool articles often will give data without coming to any of their own conclusions. In this article, the writer just throws out unnamed "analyst" estimates without giving an opinion to his own question.

    So let's look at some of the predictions vs. results.

    1. YTD 3rd qtr revenue vs. last year 3rd quarter.
    Motley Fool analysts' estimate - 7.5% growth, EPS stays the same
    Result - 9% growth, EPS increased 0.02/share

    2. 3rd quarter revenue vs. last year
    Motley Fool analysts' estimate - $34.5 million
    Result - $35.2 million

    3. Projections
    Motley Fool analysts' estimate - $138.8 million for 2012
    SPNC raises guidance to high end of previous estimates to $138.5 - 139.5 million
    SPNC raises Net Income guidance from $1.5 - 3.0 million or 0.04 - 0.08 per diluted share to
    $2.0 - 3.0 million or 0.06 - 0.08 per diluted share

    So what does one of those esteemed analysts do after SPNC beats estimates and raises guidance?
    Barrington Research downgrades. Sounds like someone is covering their butt or wants to get
    their large clients into the stock at lower prices.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Seth Jayson is one of a number of Motley Fool authors who does not "write" articles but merely uses a cookie cutter. He has about 3 or 4 "templates" which he simply looks up the numbers to fill in the blanks. If you click on his name in any of the articles and you go to his list of articles, you'll see the all have similar names. Go compare any with the same names and you'll see immediately that he has absolutely no creativity, is not a journalist, nor an investor - simply a monkey who copies/pastes numbers from one place to another.

      Because of the way he does this, similar to other Motley Fool authors, there are frequently incorrect conclusions, or very stupid analysis, because there is no in-depth analysis of what the numbers mean. A frequent error is with earnings numbers or loses - absolutely no distinction when there is a one-off charge, a massive tax credit, or other event which might skew earnings, yet they'll look at it no different than normal EPS.

      My favorite is NAV - last year EPS was something ridiculous like $18/share because there was a $1.5 billion tax credit. All these Fool authors were posting about the PE of 1.5 incredulously without even having the common sense to go look at the income statement and see it sticking out like a sore thumb. Now with EPS at 20 cents/share they all look pretty stupid as the PE is now 109.

      • 1 Reply to o08o.ugh64w
      • Thank you for your information on Motley Fool. I only read their stuff when some article pops up related to a stock I own. I don't find their information useful and now your explanation helps verify what I'd been thinking for some time now. I should probably start a new thread related to their "analyst" numbers vs. SPNC actuals, the subsequent downgrade and then immediate reversal back up. Just don't know if I have the time or if it's relevant at this point. Just wanted to point out in my first post how shady some of these upgrades and downgrades are immediately following earnings. Over the years I've learned to anticipate exactly what happened with SPNC this past week. Beat expectations, someone downgrades, stock retreats rapidly for a day or two, then springs back after the manipulation has served it's purpose. I guess you just have to learn how to play their game.

    • I feel that my suspicions were confirmed today. Given that SPNC beat the "analysts" predictions, which were sited in the Motley Fool article and then Barrington Research pulled the old downgrade and it did retreat to under $14 but now it's up over $15, I believe there are some pretty happy Barrington Research customers who either got out of their short position or were able to buy low.
      Do you think there might have been a little manipulation there?

    • it appears that motley fool is following lead of outhers by letting any number of peaple do reports using there name. result being that motley fool now means nothing.

      Sentiment: Hold

28.085+0.975(+3.60%)3:17 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.