As the attorneys make their case before the appropriate gov't-regulatory bodies, Time-Warner is adamantly insisting that the deal, even as presently valued at closer to $140 rather than $160 per share, is in the interest of their shareholders. I'd like an explanation. How does it benefit the shareholder?
Meanwhile, Charter is being shut out on its $160 offer (which has a collar, or is firm), and the Comcast offer apparently can't be modified to protect the many shareholders who bought in above the current value of the buy-out offer. The best hope the TWC shareholder presently has, were told, is that Comcast will: 1. buy back many of its outstanding shares; 2. that this action will result in a higher price for Comcast's shares (and consequently the buy-out price to TWC shareholders).
(Dream on.) Time-Warner's reckless, thoughtless actions on behalf of its shareholders have now been compounded by the lies its execs and lawyers are issuing about acting with their shareholders as their foremost concern.
Comcast is down today more than the market is up. Moreover, it's seeing more sellers than buyers by a ratio of 4 to 3. I'm still seeing two wounded birds, clasping each other as they fall, no parachute in sight.
CMCSA has already dropped another 2% today. If that's proportionate with TWC's "buy out" price, TWC shareholders at this moment could expect $141 per share. (No wonder TWC is dropping even more than CMCSA today.)
Can it get much worse. (I'm waiting for someone to give some reasons for hanging on to this loser. Unfortunately, we shareholders are limited to a relatively small amount that we can claim in total losses on Schedule D (2 or 3 grand, as I recall).
I agree. The big "if" is the Charter offer. If the CMCSA bid is approved, chances are slim to none that TWC will recover to the $159 projected when the CMCSA offer was announced. In fact, the shares are likely to remain in a swoon, falling proportionately with CMCSA share price. On the other hand, if the CMCSA offer isn't approved, TWC will be judged solely on intrinsic value and, given the widely publicized gloomy prospects for cable, TWC is likely to fall even faster--below intrinsic value. Eventually, it'll attract the notice of some bargain hunters, but they won't be existing shareholders who are deep in the red, bleeding badly.. Some TWC shareholders will undoubtedly buy back in at these cheap prices, hoping to cost-average their way back to a profitable position. Not me. I'd rather take the loss and invest my money in a stock with better prospects (like TWX, which some advisors recommend ahead of DIS).
In short, even if the COMCSA offer is approved, there's no cause for celebration. At best, it's likely to be the lesser of 2 evils, slowing down the current slide. But if the CHTR offer goes through, or if CMCSA trumps it with a higher bid plus coller, then TWC shareholders would have something to cheer about. Instead of waiting on the moves of greedy CEO's and and the regulatory police, I'm almost ready to put in a stop loss order on TWC and move on to other things.
Two of the major advisory services are saying the Comcast deal has a 50% chance of going through. With the fall in Comcast's price, that's not necessarily a negative.
TWC is currently under $140. Charter's bid will probably fail, even though it would lock in $160 per share for the TWC shareholder. Meanwhile, the Comcast deal, even if completed, may be a loser for the TWC shareholder.
On Friday, with Comcast shares around $50, its offer for TWC was worth about $144 a share, versus $158.82 at the time of the February announcement. For any one who's close to even on this stock, perhaps up or down a few points, it's beginning to seem the risk simply isn't worth the wait.
If Comcast goes down to $45, that's a 10% drop in benefits to the TWC shareholder (by my figuring--I'm certainly open to rosier scenarios). It's increasingly looking like this one will be declared a loss on Schedule D for many of us--though hopefully not excessive.
Obviously you've been reading ZACKS news releases and been led to multiply every number by a factor of 10 or more. Get your hands on the money before believing what you see on paper.
How can Zacks claim this stock has passed the $100 per share mark for the first time? Am I 9 times up in a stock I thought I was down in?
ZACKS has released a news item claiming "PES crosses the $100 per share mark for the first time"! A noteworthy BUY signal! And here I thought I was stuck in neutral at around $13. I'm almost 10 times richer than I imagined. And, of course, after the first 100, the 2nd is bound to be a piece of cake! Go PES!!! (Caveat: the ZACKS news item shows a publication date of April 1. Most other advisory services on read on the internet may as well show the same date.)
The best performing group over the past 3 mos., as measured at TickerSpy, is Energy Storage. Check it out: ENR is the single worst performer of the group (15 stocks, several up over 500% with ENR barely out of the red). For the past 5 years ENR has been smashed by the S&P 500. It's little more than a money market fund for parking spare change, hoping you won't over-pay for the service. Does this company have any "grander plans" than overpriced, unprofitable alkaline consumer batteries? (At one time I read ENR would be the company to extend my computer's and iPod's battery life from 2 to 20 hours. Apple has realized such a battery with its newest Mac Airs. The fast-dying battery of my newest iPod remains an opportunity, but I'm experiencing a loss of trust in the Bunny to seize it (who makes the Duracell batteries that beat out Energizers in a recent CR test?)
Parnassus's recent falling to 4 stars suggests they may be underperforming. I plan to hold because I like the looks of their present portfolio, with only a couple of quibbles. The attraction of Motorola is beyond my comprehension. But the more flagrant loser in the fund's top 10 holdings is Mondelez. If the fund manager had any ground floor experience, he'd see how regularly Hershey crushes this weak competitor at the cash register. Hershey's lock on chocolate is as secure is Coca Cola's on cola. But the real sizzler for Hershey is Twizzler. The company's "Peel n Pull" (cherry-flavored) is the equivalent of candy heroin, flying off the shelves. In fact, I'd not only swap Hershey for Mondelez but move the latter closer to the top spot (currently occupied by Apple).
The other thing that keeps me in Parnassus (and out of Yachtman) is a reasonable fee ratio. (Yachtman has not only be underperforming but over-pricing their services to customers who haven't noticed or don't care).
I think I got into this thing because KMP was going nowhere and some Seeking Alpha writer made an attractive case for Pioneer as a dividend stock. Suddenly it exploded, blowing away all of the competition in 2013. Time to take profits, but now it appears to be back on course, gearing up to do the same. Why? Is there really no dividend? Is it really a bet on controversial shale extraction, which looked bad last week when CEO litigated against the very extraction he supported 100% (but not in MY neighborhood). How high can PXD go? Is it subject to a falling knife reversal and therefore a stock to trail with tight stops?
I just pulled up the AMZN front page and there was my personal model walking the run-way, but not upstaging the dress or the promo for more like it. Maybe Jeff has just the incentive he needs to keep his mind on the store instead of buying up more newspapers and brainstorming 30-minute delivery drones. In any case, don't ask Cramer about ZU's product, presentation, and delivery. Ask your wife.
Only because it's now being seen as synonymous with Amazon, thanks largely to Cramer's recommendation and comments. (I asked my wife, since I'd never heard of Zu, and it turns out she's shopped at both. She says ZU is no Amazon. That's good enuff for me. I'm neither selling any AMZN nor investing in what could turn out to be another Overstock. With AMZN all of the former short sellers have learned to ignore the PE and to keep their shirts tucked in--if they still have one.)
It's happened 4 times in the last several months and is quite frustrating if you're building a portfolio and changing it on a daily basis. Reconstructing it takes a lot of time and is never accurate. How do you notify Yahoo? Any other similar experiences? Should I be paranoid because I haven't accepted Yahoo's invitation to link it to my brokerage account? (Tried that with Yahoo many years ago, before Yahoo discontinued the feature). Are there better or equal alternatives to Yahoo portfolio pages?
I'd like to know who attends these things. Certainly not Cramer, Maria, Larry, or the talking heads from CNBC and FOX. Maybe not even the Motley Boys or Chuck. I wouldn't be surprised if these are staged events with the CEO and select officers addressing the rest of the staff. And after the internet revolution that has taken audio from the Real Player Dixie-cup and a string audio of 5 years ago to the full-fidelity realism of Dolbyized multi-chanenl sound for your Bose, JBL or Klipschhorn system, what's the explanation for the ATROCIOUS AUDIO? If the company wants to pump numbers, give us some accompanying "audio presence"--I mean state-of-the-art audio from 1932 would be a huge improvement.,
The stock is up to 39 in after-hours trading. But who's trading? And how may trades are required to post those numbers? I've been suckered before by lofty after-hours numbers that plunged instead of soaring at market opening. I'm tempted to put in a LIMIT order at 37. On the other hand, I'm already deep enough into this stock that I can afford to wait for the full shake-out before putting in an order--probably a market order south of 40.
Haven't owned anything this hot in a long while. Why is it able to resist the stalemate of most other NG stocks--Golar, Kinder-Morgan, Chesapeake, Anadarko, Teekay--practically every one has be a loser or status quo. (Marathon has been a pleasant surprise--MPC). Can Cheniere hit $50? Yes. Will it? Probably, but no guarantees. It's rising on its own fumes and the dreams of investors. Be ready to sell half your position if it drops below 40. This is not a lock-box hold like a Chevron, Conoco, or Amoco.
Haven't been to my hometown (50 miles N. of the Dells and about 30 from Ed Guin's place (the model for "Psycho"). I remember the smell of the poluted emissions from each of the mills--Byron, Port Edwards, Nekoosa, Wis. Rapids, and the foaming waste on the Wisconsin River along with the taste of its fish (cook your newspaper). I even met Mr. George Mead, the founder of Consolidated Papers, who graciously hosted me in Miami Beach (and lived on an island in the Wis. River during the summer). The company fell on hard times (not sure if Stanton Mead was still with them) and was bought out by a big Swedish fish, which apparently had little more success. It had "Svenska" in the title too. "Svenska Storer," as I recall. But this Swedish maker of baby paper products looks like a real mover--if you'd been there a couple of years ago. Is it headed toward $50 and $100, or has it made its big move? (Perhaps it depends on the birth rate.)
This one was a falling knife that cut faster and deeper than most. My price point was 70 and the selling price proved to be 56 and change. Did anyone receive more favorable execution?
You don't need to have any idea about a given stock. "Efficient market theory" makes a convincing case that, at any given moment, literally ALL of the information and knowledge about the stock is factored into its current price. As an individual your "research" means nothing compared to all of the advisors, committees, funds, computers, TV personalities, etc., that have collectively gathered all there is to know about a company and come with a price.
That simply means that as an individual investor, and as the beneficiary of all of all that info, all you're left to do is to play a "hunch" about the stock's "future." No human being can predict the future with precise, unerring accuracy--not even close. But for a stock that's tripled in a single year, any gambler who plays the odds will take money off the table.