..geeze, so tell everyone about NAII's market. You comment that other posts are worthless, yet your posts have added no info at all, and have been completely insipid.
So tell us what you know about the beta alanine market.
I agree with the two of you. With what looks like solid forward growth, low current valuation, high tangible book/share, an .08/share gimme in added earnings due to the closing of the Ayreshire facility, Royce just about done in dumping a ton of shares.....KTCC looks like a good buy.
..I actually thought the CEO ran an excellent conf call. Straightforward, answered all questions intelligently and completely. She stated in the last cc that all the restructuring and other charges would occur this quarter..and thats what happenned. She articulated how MCZ would move going forward to try and become profitable. So, she was impressive both in the cc and in her actions.
But.....the balance sheet is still horrible. I dont know if MCZ management will be able to generate enuf cash from operations to continue operations in the mid term. Just becoming break even may not be enuf.....they have too much debt. The other problem is, while MCZ is moving towards simplifying their structure and offerings, they still have too many skus, too many brands, and operate in too many places across the globe...which increases costs.
Finally, we all know the balance sheet is bad. But its really even worse than it looks. MCZ has a $9.5 million dollar asset, deferred tax assets. Most of that asset was added a year or so ago when MCZ estimated that they would make lots of money on RB, and they would be able to use that tax asset in the short run against the big earnings they would generate. That did not and will not occur. So the asset aint worth much in the forseeable future, and should probably be take off the balance sheet. Lets say thats six million dollars of the $9.5 million. Then, MCZ net tangible assets would drop from about $1.5 million to negative $4.5 million.
So, imo, MCZ remains a very speculative play.
... it was "the most active severe weather experienced in the first quarter in Florida in company history,”...would have made what, another $5.6 million on an after tax basis ex the bad weather events.
...between $7.33 and $7.39. I think its a very good value here, trading below book with expectations of better quarters going forward...lots of optimism by management.
Now, KTCC management has been optimistic before and followed with mixed results. So thats a risk. But I think the evolution of KTCC ovre the past few years....losing some major customers, replacing with small to mid size customers, prepping for the long ramp time of new customer products, then spending money on the ramp, expanding into more of new customer product lines.....has come to a point where KTCC should start to benefit more with revenue growth, and that revenue growth should lever eps growth.
Now there are negatives. Its kinda weird when I see other small cap EMS'ers whose earnings benefit quickly from new custumers, while KTCC seems to need a long ramp time. And of course they're dependent on how the economy effects each individual customer, sales projections can change quickly.
Overall, I dont think the shareprice has risen nearly enuf to reflect KTCC's progress. And if KTCC has achieved that inflection point, she could start looking like a snowball heading down a mountain.
Ok, maybe that last sentence with the snowball image was laying it on too thick. Point is I like KTCC's risk reward here.
with those nonsensical fantasyland MCZ projections, my guess is the only company you CFO'd went six feet under a long time ago.
But I must admit, the projections do prove that your move from Wall Street to the message boards certainly makes perfect sense.
Weak? It was way less than weak....it was completely meaningless. I know SA makes its money by having longs pump and shorts wack, so you always have to read knowing theirs some (or lots of) bias.....but still, you can get good info and ideas out of some 'articles'.
But geeze, how do the editors allow such a silly and insignificant piece like this get published. A hit piece saying NAII's press release about some patent was actually done a few weeks after the patent was issued? OMG.
Woodward and Bernstein they ain't.
You do know Borg amassed his huge position illegally and got stuck with it for years while NAII languished until this most recent turnaround. Borg...who has been taken to court by the SEC for stock price manipulation and intentionally not filing required docs, is the sociopath, thats pretty obvious.
I mean I dont luv NAII, but you are certainly not making much sense regarding Borg.
..I think fair value is around the mid three's for BOSC. I expect it to break lower than that, probably to three or so in the coming weeks. Of course could go higher first.
My largest position is usually somewhere between 8% and 15% of my portfolio.
I guess having a large number of positions is more work, but its what I do full time, so no problem for me. And it may cut down on returns (compared to if I went more focused). Flip side is it lessens the risk.
I've been doing this full time for about 10.5 years. During that time I've had one year with negative returns, in 2008, but my loss was only about 3% vs a much larger loss for the market. I've easily beaten the returns of all major indices (R2, SP, DOW, NAZ) every year. I think a large number of stocks in the port helps.
Plus, I dont know what I'd do all day if I only owned a few stocks. Just sitting and staring at quotes all day would drive me crazy. Plus, when you do that, you tend to find much more 'manipulation' and weird trading patterns (that actually mean nothing) then their really are.
Quarter was underhelming, or maybe whelming.. They would have hit, or just missed the low end of eps guidance for the quarter if the tax rate wasnt so low (they were taxed at 15% rather than the 30% they guided for).
Nevertheless, thats water under the bridge. Good news is forward guidance is solid. Glad I added.
I agree that NAII has a potential for a nice move up before earnings...But there's only about a dozen other posters that can still use these boards and see/comment on these posts...so for the most part we're just talkin to each other.
Yahoo really destroyed the boards with this upgrade or whatever it is. I thought the Yahoo Finance section was one thing they got right....not perfect, but better than any other combination finance site and message board. The new version is so bad in every way, that Yahoo must have wanted to gut their finance users for some weird reason. What a waste.
Nope. Their normal tax rate is not 16% (although it may have been for this year). KTCC guided for a 30% rate last quarter, and are guiding for a 25% in the current quarter. 2014 taxes were what, 24% and 2013 taxes were over 40%.
sc, imo, the liability is a reserve for losses or possible losses that come up now, but were incurred in the past. It makes no sense to me that the reserve has gone down dramatically every single year...even when policies have increased. If you look at all other insurers.....just look at them, that liability (the reserve) increases slowly as policies increase. Those other insurers are increasing their reserves in response to addtitional policy count. Each time they do that, their earnings decreases by the same amount. On the flp side, UVE has lowered their reserve every single year, almost every single quarter, by large amounts.
Now, I think for whatever reason UVE was way way way over reserved four years back, and they needed to drop that number. I'm not saying they did anything wrong. At this point it is very low. They can't continue to reap the benefit of the reserves going down. And the benefit they are getting has nothing to do with the current operations. Just look at the numbers, That decrease is helping eps. In other Fl insurers, this same reserve goes up with policy growth. So this cant continue, imo.
The liability 'Loss and Loss Adj Expense Reserves' in Millions:
12/31/12 = $193.2
12/31/13 = $159.2
12/31/14 = $134.3
12/31/15 = $98.8
3/31/16 = $85.0
Btw, I still think UVE is a good value, just not nearly as good as their earnings, which includes this benefit, shows.
micro re: 'restricted cash is to pay back fanus loan'........yup..
'(4) Restricted cash
Cash accounts that are restricted as to withdrawal or usage are presented as restricted cash. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had $5.8 million of restricted cash held by a bank in deposit accounts. This amount represents payments from customers into restricted bank accounts on December 31, 2015 that were subsequently automatically swept to repay borrowings under our bank loans.'
I have never been short UVE, nor do I know anyone who is short UVE. I am not saying UVE is reporting earnings incorrectly. I am saying they decreased their Loss Adjustment Reserves for four straight years on an almost quarterly basis....and each time they decrease the reserve, it helps their earnings. This past quarter, the reserves decreased $14 million sequentially. This benefit cant continue much longer since the reserve has already dropped from $193 million to $85 million the past four years. Soon UVE will be reporting earnings without the benefit of a reserve decrease to boost eps. This will hurt their quarterly earnings.
I do not believe UVE 'better reinsured' on average then their Florida competitors. However, the loss reserve was far higher than the others in the past (on a per policy basis) so it is now coming down to a level that is more normal (although I think UVE has actually gone past normal at this point.)
Also, remember, that for the most part reinsurance is re-upped yearly, so any insurance company can change coverage dramatically on a yearly basis.
As you said, everyone should verify for themselves.
guppy, 'Unpaid Losses and Loss Adjustment Expense' is a liability that UVE (and other insurers) carry on their books....as a kind of reserve claims. In December 31, '15, that Liability equaled $98.8 million,and decreased to $85 million on March 31. As I understand it, that $14 million reduction in the 'reserve' goes straight to increasing before tax income for the quarter. So, on an after tax basis, my understanding is it boosted earnings by about $10 million this quarter, or about twenty-eight cents/share. So if you ex this out, UVE made about .43/share for the quarter.
The reduction in 'Unpaid Losses and Loss Adjustment Expenses' has been virtually continuous since 12/31/12 when it amounted to $193.2 million.
The liability 'Loss and Loss Adj Expense' in Millions:
12/31/12 = $193.2
12/31/13 = $159.2
12/31/14 = $134.3
12/31/15 = $98.8
3/31/16 = $85.0
So, on an almost qtrly basis, my understanding is the reduction in that Liability, which is a reduction in the reserve, goes straight to income.
I'm no expert, I could be wrong, and would be grateful if someone would correct my understanding of the issue.
I want to point out I am not claiming that UVE should not have reduced their reserves. UVE explains in their filings why they are reduced......namely, it was way too high to begin with, and they have greatly increaed their efficencies in their adjustment and claims programs.
Nevertheless, the liability is now down to $85 million. UVE can't keep on lowering it forever, its already gone down dramatically. Therefore, that boost to UVE earnings should end soon.......of course all that is if my understanding is correct.
Now, UVE would still have strong earnings, but if I am right, it would be lower by a non-trivial amount.
Again, if someone thinks I am wrong, please show me.