Another question about INFN. In that Nov conference the INFN guy acknowledges that Ciena's coherent is superior to INFN's at this point in time.
(I don't mean to imply that concerns me much about INFN because I get it that their superiority in PIC is a much more durable technological trump card)
But as someone with an engineering background but not in photonics, I am curious exactly what is that advantage that Ciena has. Does it mean that the signal they can transmit onto and receive off of a fiber is higher quality in terms of signal to noise ratio or something?
Does this issue perhaps involve a highly integrated PIC not necessarily being able to achieve as fully optimized performance of its photonic components as hardware that is based on discrete photonic components that can each be hand picked to use the most optimum photonic materials?
Volatility is just opportunity. What matters is what is this company's prospects? If it is destined for a share price of let us just hypothesize $40-50 two years from now, whether it is $14 per share today or $20 per share today in my view has absolutely zero bearing on where we will be two years from now. But it does mean that you will get a lot better return if you are able to get some today at $14 rather than $20.
Listened to their archived investor presentation from some conference in November. The company's guys put a lot of "uh"s in his talk, but either he got over that or else the material was just so compelling I didn't even notice it once I got focused what he was discussing.
The case they make for their business is incredibly compelling.
If I were an investor analyst the one question that first pops into my mind is: They feel that the metro business will be very beneficial to the company in appealing to customers that are increasingly wanting to reduce their vendor count, and perhaps go so far as to get all their stuff from one company.
They said one limitation for Transmode's market has been breaking into non European markets, trying to get potential customers to view them as a trustworthy vendor rather than an iffy small company from scandinavia.
Which makes me wonder: What is INFN's business plan for the Transmode operation? If the metro market is as big and fast-growing as it sounds, and if the combination with INFN open's Transmode's doors to a whole lot more of the addressible market out there, what would be the plan to deal with potentially rapid growth? Is Transmode in a good position facility-wise to handle a huge expansion? If such growth does occur, would part of the gameplan be to build new facilities in other parts of the world, e.g. US and/or Asia?
Not sure how much of those strategies they can divulge, but INFN does tend to be pretty forthcoming in discussing the business including future scenarios.
Not sure why I exited to begin with. I guess in the recent market slump I decided to shed my stocks that held up better to go after ones that got hammered really hard to where they were very cheap.
But I just listened to their quarterly and geez, what's not to like about this company! Now Universal Robots is a bit weird of an acquisition since Teradyne openly acknowledges it is not very synergistic with the rest of its business. But it seems like a great business so what the heck. Expected 50% revenue growth in 2016, and I would guess similarly huge growth for years to come. Maybe eventually they will want to spin it back out, at which time perhaps it will be worth a couple billion.
The reason I am curious is I'd like to eventually get a better handle on how competitive their products are and of course a prerequisite to that is to know who their competitors are.
From last 10k form
The Company’s measurement systems compete in the broad and highly competitive market for measurement devices for manufacturing and industrial applications, which, in addition to portable articulated arms, laser tracker, 3-D imaging and laser scanner products, consist of fixed-base CMMs, templates and go/no-go gages, check fixtures, handheld measurement tools, and various categories of surveying equipment. In the FARO Gage product line, the Company competes with a number of manufacturers of handheld measurement tools and fixed-base CMMs, including some large, well-established companies. In the FaroArm, FARO Laser ScanArm, FARO Laser Tracker, FARO Focus 3D and FARO 3D Imager AMP product lines, the Company competes primarily with Hexagon Metrology, a division of Hexagon AB, and with Steinbichler Optotechink GmbH and GOM Gmbh in the 3D Imager product lines. The Company also competes in these product lines with a number of other smaller competitors. The Company competes on the basis of technical innovation, product performance, quality and price with respect to all of its products.
Sounds like the company they refer to in their conference presentation as their major competitor is probably Hexagon AB.
Listening to FARO's Needham presentation. They say they have one big competitor and other small ones. Yahoo shows their competitors as Hexagon AB, MKSI, and IPGP. Anyone know which is their big competitor (assuming it's one of those 3)? I guess they probably talk about that in their 10k or 10q forms so I'll try finding it there.
Noticed at least one law firm seeking to take legal action at GPRO. Do they have any legitimate complaint or are they simply trying to exploit sour grapes? GPRO does have cash, so they are certainly a tempting target for looters.
They have about 30 mil shares. Legal settlement would appear to put about 50 cents per share more cash on their balance sheet. But stock didn't go up. Maybe already baked in the cake? People already figured they were going to win the appeal?
Listening to the conference call. Sounds like they do have a good argument that the challenge is to make it more convenient to share and edit content. It seems to me how good and on time the new software is may be what makes or breaks this company.
Cisco buying out Jasper. I gather Jasper is a big fish in the IoT biz while Digi is a small niche player. Wonder if there are companies they could merge with to gain greater critical mass. When you're in the business of connecting things it's a natural question to ask whether your business might benefit by being connected to some others.
I know very little about this biz, all I know is Digi's numbers look like a great tech value and thus I own some.
The one thing I tend to forget is sometimes companies with net cash take on debt because the cash is offshore and would be hit with a big tax bill if repatriated. Not sure whether that's the situation with RTEC. Hopefully they can retire the notes without a tax hit.
I thought, well here we go, one of those tech high fliers that is finally coming back down to earth. But I look at their numbers and no, by golly, they are very cheap based on my value criteria even before today's drop.
At least based on the quick 5 second bot feeder yahoo analysis: Enterprise value to gross annual profits ratio around 1.5 or so, I consider anything under 2 to be very cheap.
Doesn't mean they're a good buy if their business prospects are too dismal, but they are definitely the type of stock that should be of interest to bottom feeders. I will be studying them a bit more.
One would figure there might not be much drama in ACLS for the next 6 months or so. Stock price is depressed, the implanter business is weak at the moment.
But there are some things that could add some drama. A buyout offer for example. I really don't see why someone like Lam doesn't try to snap this company up for 5 bucks a share or so. Perhaps they feel implanters are a slower growth segment of semi eqt than the areas they are already in. But besides the business aspects which seem to me to make it a good idea, having an implanter product line in their offerings makes them a more full service vendor like AMAT.
Another potential positive- if they can sell a machine to Intel. One thing I'm not clear on, when ACLS refers to "leading edge logic" as an area they want to start geting some business in, is that just Intel or is that also TSMC (and whoever the other big foundry is, Samsung or something?)
On the other hand, I guess the nice thing is that leading edge logic is actually not as heavy a user of implanters as ACLS indicated that it is only 15% of the implanter market, so ACLS is already heavily immersed in the markets where they use a lot of implanters.
My OLB shows bid 2.29 and ask 2.41, seems like a pretty typical wide off hours spread that just indicates there's not enough trading to set much of a price on it off hours.
Sure, easy to understand .13 drop on 205 shares, somebody had 205 shares to sell to clean up their portfolio and who cares about losing $25 unless you are one heck of a penny ante investor.