recent rally started. This stock is broken for the time being. Most of their profits are eaten up in cap ex then depreciated. Most likely deserves a ong term P/e of 10 due to this fact. The game is over for now. Face facts and move on. People who can take profits are taking profits and others are getting their stop loses triggered. Only people left holding the bags are ratial guys believing the stats posted on the yahoo site. The peg ratio in the .50 is based on long term growth of 35%, while 2006 only prejects growth of 16. base the PEG on the 16 and PEG is over 1, not a value. Anyone who does not believe me will be a baggieholder. To be a winner, go back to school, learn how to play the game.
I have no respect for zack or any other website. I have built spreadsheet models that calculate these statistics based on current market prices and current estimates. Websites are stale. Ask Zacks to step up and put their money behind their reccomendations. Send an email to ben himself and ask him to support the stock, buy some shares. I hope that you are also long on this gem. You deserve the returns you will earn. I am not very smart myself. Since PEG equals ((current price/current estimates)/forward growth rate) why is the yahoo site still post a PEG of .55. I would have expected the PEG to be even lower after the 22% hair cut over the past 3 days. One day I might be as smart as you retail amatures, but first I will need to learn multiplication, but that is not until 2nd grade and I am still a 1st grader.
If it means anything I believe you when you say that you saw this coming based on the PEG of 1. You don't need 20/20 hindsight to see this was no value.
One thing is maybe you could touch base with the guys at Smartmoney and Zacks. Maybe Ben Zack himself. It looks like they need some pointers.
You sound like the typical dumb ass that is down on a stock that is up 150% in a year. How stupid do you need to be to lose money on a stock that is up 150%? If you are not up 50% or more on this stock, you can assume that you are a stupid retail donator paying smart money for their leftovers when they are done with a position. Even if you are up on this stock, which you will surely reply to my post telling me how you bought so low and made a killing on this stock even after the drop, all of which is a lie, you still just left 30% or more of the total gain on you plate for other to eat. No matter how you look @ it, you look stupid. Do me a favor and bet all your money on this position tomorrow. Won't be long before you stop "investing" because the game is rigged by the MMs, tree shaking, manipulation, blah blah blah. Enjoy you long and very successful life as a stock market genius. I�m sure I will read about in the papers before long due your extreme success @ investing. I can see it now, net profits are free and clear and you can make millions buying stocks with a yahoo calculated PEG of less than 1. If it were that easy, you still couldn't make money investing. Got any more screaming buys you can let a dumb ass like me in on. I love arguing with retards like you.
So what your saying is raising estimates from .52 cents --> .72 cents this quarter means nothing. Or how about 2.05 to 2.70 on the year?
The growth is real and it's been reported upon in the last 30 days as they raised outlook for the the quarter, the year, and next year.
All the people dumping right now are in panic mode -- over what? How do you explain the recent downturn after a previous week of huge success -- all without any news or changes? Has management dropped the ball in some way? Has the industry all of a sudden changed? Are their prospects any less enticing? Has growth shown signs of downturn? NO... just the opposite has been happening over the last few months... that being said I cant explain the recent drop in price aside from a regular market freak out... but your attempt to discredit their growth isnt rational for the stock price dropping to 35, in fact it has no real validity at all. Analysts dont increase estimates for fun... or on a whim... so unless you have some better reason to believe that the growth expected is exaggerated in some way -- spare us the know it all attitude
Ice, calm down. I will do my best to explain some simple facts about LUFK business model. You are looking @ estimates from 1 analysts, not 25. LUFK has to spend 1 dollar to make a dollar. You are acting that each time they make a dollar it goes in the bank and increases the intrinsic value of the company. Look at the cash flow statement. not the income statement. The income statement tells you what they earned running the business, the cash flow statement tells you what they spent to earn the income. How much is a company worht that earns 2.70 in a year that spent 3 dollars to earn it? Sounds like 0 to me. They consume all of the historical earnings on capital expenses and the capital that they buy depreciates as fast as they earn it. To try to translate it to a retail level. Say you have a job that pays 100k a year, but you need to spend 50k on expenses (lunch,gas,clothes,etc.) to earn your 100k salary. Another job offers you 55k to work for them and it will cost you nothing each year to work their. Which one has a higher value to the worker. The one that pays 55k. Stop looking at the Income statement and use the balance sheet and cash flow statement more. I would advise you to get a book on the subject. I have better things to do then debate you when I know what I am talking about, and you don't. Investing takes the understanding of many variables, not simply earnings growth. Anyway growth next year is @ 16% so if they can even achieve the 2.70 (16*2.70) for 2005 fair value would be 43. Given no stocks sits on fair value I see a range from 52 to 35(plus/minus20% trading range). It was just @ 52, passed fair value @ 43 and on it's way to 35 given current news flow.