Tue, Sep 2, 2014, 8:14 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


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

Skullcandy, Inc. (SKUL) Message Board

  • rjmcbear rjmcbear Apr 2, 2012 9:03 AM Flag

    Here are the reasons why I believe Skullcandy is a great investment:

    Not a big fan of SA but I do agree with this guys thought process.

    Skullcandy, Inc. (SKUL)

    Skullcandy is a lifestyle products company selling distinct audio branded headphones and other smart phone accessories. Skullcandy brings color, character, and performance to what has been a monochromatic space. They co-brand products with the NBA and other sporting venues. They also recently announced a line that links with runway model Kate Upton.

    While the shorts have made a point of dismissing the value of a brand, I suggest they check out Nike (NKE) and Lululemon Athletica (LULU). Neither company designs and manufactures a product that can't be copied and reproduced; however, each company is a master at marketing their product and placing it in the correct channels to maximize revenues. Skullcandy has the same type of branding appeal and with the massive short interest is poised for a classic short squeeze.

    Here are the reasons why I believe Skullcandy is a great investment:

    1. Skullcandy has 27 million shares outstanding, of which there are 8.7 million shares short. Institutions own 13.3 million shares, and major holders (Form 3 and Form 4 filers) own 10.2 million shares. This adds up to 34.2 million shares, 7.2 million shares more than what is currently outstanding. The short interest is approximately 60% of the float.

    2. Skullcandy is followed by 8 analysts all having buy recommendations with a consensus price per share estimate of $22.

    3. The last three years revenues were $118 million, $160.5 million, $232.4 million, and projected revenues for 2012 are $280 million.

    4. There has been recent insider buying in the company's stock.

    5. Skullcandy has beaten the consensus earnings estimate in the 3 quarters they have been public.

    6. Earnings are projected between $1 and $1.15 a share in 2012, and are projected at $1.33 in 2013.

    7. The PEG ratio is .59

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • they know your logic is worthless

    • Shouldn't you have researched the patent status as part of "due diligence". I'd bet the big short interest did. You were outmatched I guess; but what do I know, I'm just a moron.

      I wonder what the shorts know about SKUL.

    • What happened to your due diligence here you losing big

      this was a short at what 13 to 14

      I can't wait to hear your BS at 20

      Your think I can predict a company gets in a patent lawsuit

      you are a MORON

    • What happened to your due diligence here you losing big

      this was a short at what 13 to 14

      I can't wait to hear your BS at 20

      Your think I can predict a company gets in a patent lawsuit

      you are a MORON

    • So, you did due diligence here..... but.... not on MITK? What happened with your take on MITK? Are you sure you're not making the same mistake here? I don't recall any hard number analysis or mention of the risks involved with this stock. Aren't there any risks?

      It seems that for MITK, contrary to your evil-shorts thesis, the real enemy turned out to be management, right? They jumped ship. It is hard to dispute that the shorts were proven right, right? Look at the chart, down 19% yesterday, and another 11% today to close at 8.34 on monster volume. It's a mass exodus. It is over for MITK. It's headed for delisting. On integrity, I guess I missed your apologies to those who put up the $11 million dollars for management parachutes.

    • One point can disclose who he is
      take his picture
      register at seeking alpha
      and write a credible article on why SKUL and ZAGG are bad investments but good luck on getting them to post his flawed logic

      but that might take some integrity

    • Ok fair enough - I didn't think the article was sketchy at all - I thought the idea that someone posted the article and you responded with a post that only said "great article" was very sketchy. But if you tell me you were just being sarcastic and it was obvious, then I take your point ...

      Turtle -

    • I am recommending the stock not pumping

      The main reason for that article was to bring the shorts to there senses

      I have no problem with shorting stocks but 85% percent of the float.

      Then they get Cramer,one point , and all these other distorters. I loath this breed of short.

      And good luck to them

    • Turtle, I appreciate your watchfulness, and it is great having you on this board but Payne is being transparent here. We know it is him talking about his own article. It would be dishonest if he were talking about his own article anonymously through a proxy account.

    • I think it is an excellent article. I like that there is no reference to magical Fibonnaci numbers, Bradley turn dates, moon cycles or other astrological and superstitious nonsense.

      His holiness OnePunk is the one who needs a reality check here. If I had listened to his advice "Short at 14" I would have lost big, and here he is pointing the finger, AGAIN.

    • View More Messages
8.07-0.22(-2.65%)Sep 2 4:00 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.
Exelixis, Inc.
NasdaqGSTue, Sep 2, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
Under Armour, Inc.
NYSETue, Sep 2, 2014 4:02 PM EDT