Maybe this is marginally related to Yahoo's stock price, but the Yahoo Portfolio and Finance pages strike even many "Googlers" as being the best on the internet. What's a tad frustrating, however, is the changing feature set Yahoo offers its portfolio users. Moreover, it's virtually impossible to write a note to Yahoo and to receive a timely response (if any at all).
When I first started using the portfolios, I would be able to set a low and high price for every stock in a portfolio and count on the triggering of an up or down arrow when either price point was reached. Then Yahoo appeared to take the feature away. Then Yahoo appeared to reinstate it. However, for the past week or two, Yahoo appears to have withdrawn the arrows in response indicating that a stock's price has gone below or above the user's high and low settings.
Does anyone have a solution or even a clue about the cause of the "disappearing arrows"? Does Yahoo possibly introduce them only occasionally, perhaps as a way of enticing the user to pay for some service?
There was no good reason for it to go up (though I'm glad it did so I could sell before suffering more damage). The company released a promotional flyer of its own products, including the much maligned LeapPad Ultra. Why sould that cause a temporary stir--except among naive buyers? It may represent a good opportunity for buying--but not for the near term.
I feel fortunate to get out at $8.40 and to contain my losses to single digits. But Leap Frog is hard to dislike, esp. for an adult. I'd probably consider jumping back in at 9 and hope not to have my head handed back to me--again. It's hard to ignore the historical chart for the stock, when it shot up to $40. Why can't it do it again? (People no longer listen to pop music in the same way as the once did Ellington, Rodgers and Hart, Cole Porter, Gershwin. Why should we assume they're still interested in the same degree of literacy as in the past? Leap Frog will continue to be a niche player until they go heavily into texting, chatroom prose, tweeting, hip hop, and whatever else has replaced reputable grammar, syntax and diction.)
This fund had a 5-star Morningstar Rating when I bought it at Schwab. Since then, it's fallen to an inferior 2 stars. I see no reason to sell, because it's up about 15% since purchase, in the middle of my portfolio gains. Schwab had another 5-star fund, the "Permanent Fund," promising good performance in all kinds of markets through a disciplined, back-tested, rotating mix of stocks, bonds, commodities. I'm glad I went with Appleseed, because in a bull market Permanent Fund is positioned to be a perpetually static stock, its lack of movement threatening those who don't factor in inflation numbers that make some investors losers even when the fund doesn't lose money.
The problem with Appleseed dan be seen in its electic, and eccentric, portfolio. Why would a fund with a name implying faith in the growth of a new nation become obsessed with the dead metal, allowing it to occupy 20% or more of the total portfoilo? George Eliot's Silas Marner comes to mind as someone who placed a similar bet, struck to his guns, and may as well have aimed both barrells at his head. Moreover, what's with the purchase of "physical gold" through Sprott distribution? That sort of thinking smacks of right-wing, Glenn Beck-type hysteria, or paranoia. It's a regressive rather than progressive view of America and its future. If you feel compelled to be in the tarnished metal, why not GLD, which gives you the convenience of in-and-out adjustments according to the metal's price action, or lack of it?
Sometimes it pays to go where no one else does. Who would have guessed that Western Union would be so successful in the age of Paymate? And if Priceline can reach $1000 per share, what's to keep Expedia from reaching $100? What was wrong with Nokia at $2-3? And instead of Titan, why not the dependable, A-rated (by Schwab) Dana Holding? Anyway, a fund that comes within just 2-3 percentage points of matching the S&P500 in this hot market is a "hold," Morningstar ratings be damned..
Cheap low-priced biotechs are all about timing, and usually become highpriced heartbreakers. I feel fortunate to hit it on 1 out of 4, which is what happened with NPSP. But other low-priced techs have also produced fairly easy doubles, with promises of more for the courageous: MU, NOK have been good to me, but I sold half to ensure against a loss. RNDY has shown signs of deaccelerating and reversing directions, but Schwab still gives it an A. Look at the chart of AKAM, and you'll see one of the few supercharged missiles that hasn't gone up with the market. That'll change if the market remains friendly. The most pleasant problem is whether to simply let DDD run with your investment or to load up this freight train with even more of a payload, since it's ignoring all fundamentals and moving on the fumes of a manufacturing revolution that will replace the industril one: your printer doing the work of steel mills and industrial presses. Finally, don't overlook the new kind of ultra-high resolution, flexible screen being produced by OLED for Apple and Samsung.
I'm averaged at the same, and I wouldn't be surprised if we didn't see the best moment to sell today, at $8. I''ve got a limit order to sell at $8.06, simply because that number will save me from a double digit loss. Common sense plus a little empirical evidence (4 grandchildren who, unlike last Christmas, don't perk up at the mention of "LeapFrog" or "LeapPad." An Apple Nano at the same price as a LeapPad Ultra may appear to be "no-brainer" in favor of the Ultra, but my 9-year-old wants a Nano just like all her friends. If LeapFrog recovers, it's priced for easy re-entry.
LeapFrog's best hope is those consumers with upscale resources and willingness to invest in their kids' future over instant gratification. That profile doesn't fit the average Walmart shopper. As for LeapFrog and facts, the market is far more sensitive to "appearances," and since its release, "Ultra" has looked like a loser. What are the prospects of a buy-out before the stock drops to 5?
The question is probably usually the same. How well are sales of the tablets actually going, esp. the "Ultra"? And 2ndly, how much is the company's success / profitability dependent upon those tablet sales? Traders are either too uncertain about either or both questions, or they're placing their bets. (The 2nd question interests me more. I've seen little in the way of promotions, and heard less about compelling features of the tablet to spur sales or incentivize a switch from a Kindle Fire, etc. My 9-yr.-old grand-daughter wanted an iPod Nano, like her friends have.) Sales of the tablet come down to "loyal" LeapFrog customer support, and many in that loyal customer base bought a similar tablet in 2011 or 2012. Finally, traders are speculating whether or whether not the company represents a realistic buy-out candidate.
OK, it's there. I may have missed it yesterday. Today I see it mentioned once, and it's in tiny font with a "muted," "understated" color. After the publicity re: the Ultra, you might think the company would loudly proclaim and highlight it much like a big development on the Apple site. But that's clearly not the case. They're hedging their bets a bit, should sales of the Ultra prove disappointing, leading to a stock plunge due to a misperception that "as Ultra goes, so goes LeapFrog."
It's hard to get a clear, objective reading because you're always going to be influenced by personal experience. Last year I bought the LeapPad2 for two grandchildren, and my own kids say they like it, though none asked for an additional $20 game or toy. They all have iPads, iPods, Fires, Touches and are accustomed to $2 and even free "apps." I've never heard a complaint against the Mini (my wife much prefers it to the big iPad). And now its lower price (for last year's Mini) will make it all the more competitive, unless the even lower prices of other makers' tablets as a result of Apple's lowering its price, leads buyers to a Kindle Fire or Google or Microsoft tablet that's virtually the same price as the Ultra.
Anyway, why would a LeapFrog fan, who's probably already bought their kids LeapPads, choose a year later to spring for an Ultra? (I don't think there's much of a market for year-old LeapPads like there is for Apple products.) And why would a new tablet purchaser select an Ultra over all of the more sophisticated, powerful, and cost-efficient tablets costing $300 or less? Moreover, for the first time ever, this year I'm seeing commercial spots on cable TV for a highly attractive and low-cost children's tablet, and it's not a LeapPad.
Hope I'm wrong. The tablet bubble may have another year left. "Ultra" suggests that this is as good as a children's tablet will get. It could be a surprise hit.
I've just come from the LeapFrog website, where I see no mention of the new Ultra tablet. But now I see that the Ultra is there. It's just not getting front-page billing. This could be a smart tactic on LeapFrog's part. The company is de-emphasizing this expensive toy in a tablet-saturated market in favor of solidifying consumer relations. Moreover, toys like "LeapFrog Phonics Factory" are priced so low ($15.95) as to act like "loss leaders," provoking practically unanimous praise from satisfied customers and encouraging consideration of a tablet of comparable quality. I'm less concerned now about one major disappointment (if it should come to that) holding down the frog. At worst, the stock remains a good hold.
Ever since Google crossed the $1000 mark a few days ago, the share price shows in all of my Yahoo portfolios in RED, preceded by a downward pointing arrow, or "inverted carat" in red. Anyone else see the same and have a clue about the reason/cause?
With its extraordinary rise this morning, Google's stock price in my Yahoo portfolio is showing in red font preceded by an adjacent downward carat ("V") in red. My high limit is set at $1100 and my low at $600. Anyone else notice the same anomaly? What gives?
In the last month I've noticed grey stars to the left of symbols in my Yahoo portfolio. Today, for example, FB is one of the few securities with a yellow star (are there other colors being used?). The stock is up six cents; otherwise I see nothing to explain the yellow/gold star. Is it possibly a "sell" signal? Perhaps FB has gone as high as it's gonna go. (Maybe I'll invest in Yahoo.)
My holdings of AT&T , designated by the single symbol T in my Yahoo portfolio, is suddenly not recognized by Yahoo. Has the company changed its name? its stock symbol? Is the fall of T another effect of closing down the government? Did the company simply go belly up overnight?
I've been with Chase, TD Ameritrade and E-Trade among others. Nothing compares with Schwab for anyone who has an ounce of brains. Sure, they'll manage your retirement money for several grand per year, but they supply every type of portfolio for the retiree to do it himself with little to no effort. But more importantly Schwab offers the best and cheapest ETFs and Mutual Funds of any outfit, including Vanguard. While Yachtman now has a fee ratio of 1.3%, (too high for a Consumer Reports recommendation), Schwab offers comparable funds for .06%--below Vanguard's cheapest. And their latest ETFs based on fundamental value (instead of total capitalization) is a singular opportunity to those savvy enough to understand the difference. In short, Schwab rules!
No. It's down. But as a company it's best of breed and can only go up, not down. I'm not selling.
Priceline's gimmicky "negotiatiiable" prices are being seen through, especially by consumers who have found Expedia gives them a quick and often bigger bang for their buck. It's like comparing eBay with Amazon. I'll take Amazon any day. If Priceline is worth a grand per share, this one should soon be a rocket headed straight up. If not, I'll know enough to stick with Berkshire-Hathaway instead rockets headed nowhere.
I started at under 20 and am shocked to see that I started taking big profits after 2005. In 2010, I committed to re-accumulate and never to sell. Of course, I was buying on the way up to over 700 and disappointed to see it fall to 400. But the crazy of the market is insufficient reason to sell a stock that's currently: 1. cheap; 2. best of breed. Apple would not continue to be the most respected brand if they had a magic show introducing a new gadget every 6 months. Instead, they've infiltrated consumer consciousness much like Coca Cola. More than a brand, it's a symbol and a trusted one--it's an ecosystem and way of life. If you're broke, sell.
I'll buy your shares. Then you'll have money to throw at stocks like Priceline.
The lowest P.E. of virtually any stock let alone a growth stock--and even a sizable dividend! Why does it keep threatening to be worth nothing in the minds of the general investing public? How can it continue to receive F (occasionally D) ratings from my broker (the largest indie)?
There's got to be some explanation--some mega investor with voluminous shorts. Some incentives to influential powers to keep the price falling. Maybe a conspiracy or the "specialists" that Richard Ney used to rail against for regulating the markets and taking our money.
Look, Steve Jobs was on hand for the introduction of quite a few products that went viral. As a result, Apple became a human consumer eco-system that cannot tumble on someone's say-so or because of too few disappearing elephants at the latest exhibition. If Apple insisted on introducing a "Wow" gadget every 4 months or even every year, don't for a minute think that it could continue to hold its place at the top as "most-desired," "most-respected," "most-trusted" brand in the world. The company is continually being faulted for insufficient "novelty," but it's no longer a dog and pony show. It's evolved into a world-class leader in doing the things it does best. If you want David Copperfield, try Vegas.
I started when Apple was below 20 and, like many, regretted to see it fall from 700. But the absence of a "smart watch" at a circus-like exhibition is no reason to sell. Use common sense! (The younger consumers targeted by this industry no longer wear watches, smart or otherwise, if you haven't noticed.)