They are soon callable. Why wouldn't you wait a couple of weeks? You expose yourself to a short term loss not in line with your investment goals. I'm curious though - at what price over par did you pay today?
No subsidy on corn ethanol, says staggman... hmmmm...
It was once in the interest of the King of Germany for his subjects to consume more salt than they wanted. So he forced them to buy it in quantity, each month, from his salt mines.
The rest is history - changed the German diet and cuisine.
However, our corn ethanol subsidies are more insidious and harmful.
Your presentation is an abuse of numbers without context.
3.7% is a huge number - a number that jumped to its position quickly. Putting this to food production can have an equally huge pricing impact.
And your closing, that exclaims the righteous position of putting food into a gas tank is laughable.
Lastly, I note you totally ignored the changes in US stockpiles.
If corn ethanol is saving the world, it is a world we won't recognize.
It will be a "1984" world in terms of political structures.
It will be a world facing severe food shortages.
It will be a world with water quality problems.
And in the US, we will have large cities fighting each other for the basics - like food and water.
glass half full... hmmmm.
Its interesting to note SFL got a large ownership position in Horizon for exchanging its debt position.
Funny how this didn't happen when FRO needed restructuring. Instead, JF, who owns both SFL, FRO and FRO2012, denied SFL independent shareholders full value for what was exchanged in the restructuring.
Another cash flow hit for SFL. I sure hope JF isn't winding down his off balance sheet structure. That would not be a long term "half full" glass picture for SFL.
Here we go again...
>>>FRO's upside may have been gutted, but certainly not SFL's.<<<
No supporting rationale for this statement. As I wrote consistently and repeatably when SFL last reported, SFL is the hub for JF's off balance sheet structured empire. JF, by changing his modus operandi with FRO2012 ignoring SFL financing, has indicated that SFL's strategic importance is waning. I leave it to you to guess why and what his future intentions are for SFL.
Now you can disagree with me. But please, don't ignore that SFL's biz, after so so many years, still is JF centric. And if JF companies are ignoring SFL - tell us how SFL will solve the loss of so much current and future business.
To say SFL has plenty of time is nonsense. Better, note how it has not been able to effectively diversify from JF enterprises, JF ownership and JF soakings of independent shareholders!
As for the statement:
>>> I do believe that SFL will get involved with FRO2012.<<<
SFL may very well get involved - in a process that will once again steal from SFL's independent shareholders and give to FRO2012 insiders (JF!!). And should this happen, note that SFL helped float FRO2012 by not fighting for hte rights of its independent shareholders in its SFL -FRO contract.
If see you prefer to disregard JF's picking your pocket just a few short months ago.
Victims tend to exhibit selective amnesia.
Drifting? I see no drift in my posting that you respond to.
SFL, to me, has now been re-channeled lower. Instead of its "historical" $15 - 30, it is now half that. In doing so, JF picked your pocket.
So I really don't see your point.
A merger is always a possibility - the FRO.SFL financial construct is an artificial arrangement. It is an off balance sheet financially engineered operation to hide risk, assign an artificially low cost to risk, while enabling a low tax cost way of distributing "profits".
I put "profits" in quotes because these are boosted by hiding risk and assigning low cost to risk. By doing so, financial costs are lowered and capital valuation is enhanced.
Once the benefit of hiding or reducing the cost of risk is gone, it is time to fold the entities together again.
Independent shareholders have been plucked by JF through the recent SFL-FRO contract adjustments. As well, JF carted off assets of FRO into his FRO 2012.
There probably needs to be another round or two of plucking the independent shareholder before JF will merge the entities (at the independent shareholder expense).
if you want to present historical examples, you are most welcome to do so.
But ethanol has changed the equation and has no historical precedent. The planting of corn has increased substantially at the expense of many other food crops.
This switch to corn is artificial - based on uneconomical ethanol incentives (of various types and diktats) that have distorted the marketplace for food and fuel - all at the expense of the taxpayer and consumer.
As you are into corn farming and an unabashed lover of ethanol, how does it feel to be enjoying Government largesse? You don't have to apologize, but be respectful of your fellow citizens who have to pay for your crony benefits.
Well, JF just ripped off the SFL independent shareholder when he realigned the FRO-SFL structure and took assets out of the relationship into his FRO 2012.
Now is a much better time to do this, from his point of view. Before, he would have had to more equitably share with independent SFL shareholders.
stagg, re your thought:
>>>Eighth, all grain prices (corn, wheat, soybeans, rice and etc.) will remain strong because many factors, less tillable farm ground, weather conditions, prices of/available fertilizer, quality seeds to plant, people want better food to eat...a lot of people around the world are tired of eating snakes, rats and lizards (no joke)...i.e. UAN, RNF, TNH and etc.,...<<<
As long as America wants to inefficiently and uneconomically put food in their gas tanks, grain prices will be supported explicitly and implicitly.
There's a lot less wheat being planted because corn is going into the gas tank. There is also a lot of environmental damage being done because of this stupidity enforced by Govt crony activities.
I wouldn't give out this info. That would give customers and competitors the weapons to destroy SFL and FRO!
There has been a nice divvy cash flow from SFL. But anyone who bought at its opening day close is under water today.
Anyone who purchased during most of its trading history is 25-50% under water.
Your glee seems a bit misplaced. As for your comparison to the banking industry - banks don't trade on a stock exchange to mainly service one client (JF) unless they can find naive independent investors. When such an entity does get born, history presents spotted success with some horrendous falls. Look up the Scandinavian "Match King" Krueger who had his version of an off balance sheet finance company that spun off gagging amounts of divvys to hide risk.
let me get this correct, morenatgas. Your argument is that only people who have drunk from the cup know if it is good or bad?
Are you that naive or just an ever willing submissive?
There is no reason to compare SFL to NAT.
NAT is a full functioning shipping company. It does not have an exotic financial engineered structure.
SFL is an off balance sheet finance company to shipping companies. SFL-FRO is an exotic financial engineered structure.
Comparing this to "fleet size" is ridiculous.
Most of SFL's biz is from one referrence point - JF. And here he abandoned SFL after picking the pockets of the independent shareholder!
I can tell you what independent shareholders is NOT about. ...
SFL is not about letting deadbeat customers off the hook. Yet that is exactly what SFL did for FRO. Is it because JF controls both SFL and FRO?
SFL should also NOT be about letting the risk increase at FRO, because FRO is loaded up now with less efficient ships. Being that FRO was rescued by SFL, why should JF cart off the efficient ships from FRO into a new, non-affilliated entity, FRO 2012?
Why? because you are so adamant in announcing slogans and idealistic goals. Roll your sleeves up. While you tell all how you sell chocolate on valentine's day, someone stole your inventory!
stagg, oh you lawyer you. Here you go again.
A distinction with no real business reality difference.
C'mon, surely you can disinform better than this.