Thu, Jan 29, 2015, 3:41 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 5 hrs 49 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Black Diamond, Inc. Message Board

carne8ielaker 203 posts  |  Last Activity: 10 hours ago Member since: Jul 24, 2012
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    What is the gap we need to fill?

    by radar_charlie 13 hours ago
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker 10 hours ago Flag

    sorry...34.30

  • Reply to

    What is the gap we need to fill?

    by radar_charlie 13 hours ago
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker 10 hours ago Flag

    intra day high was 33.99 on Monday (do a 5 day chart on Yahoo and you can see it)

  • amazed how few even mention the new transmission platform let alone believe it is meaningful. In simple terms SBGI will reposition the old spectrum used for analog TV into a "one to many" mobile platform. THat means you will be able to watch broadcast TV from ANYWHERE, without going through your wireless provider, paying for data minutes and getting things at a lag. Advertising dollars will explode!

  • Reply to

    New Revenue Projections?

    by abqnorseman Jan 26, 2015 11:18 AM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Jan 26, 2015 11:48 AM Flag

    I think we need to prepare ourselves for rev projections that are "different". What I mean by that is that this agreement means that UDC will be paid for materials when they are delivered, and a royalty when a product is sold (eventually), and that total revenue per unit will probably be LESS than what we have been seeing in the past. (After all Sid has been very out-front as to how UDC was content to sell materials to LG under the old contract) So if LG bought $100 worth of material for an OLED TV under the prior arrangement, and if UDC was allocating 1/3 of that revenue to material cost, and 2/3 to embedded royalty, then that $100 of rev would show up when the material was delivered. So lets assume that LG will now get a 10% discount for signing the agreement, and the material cost is now $30, and the assumed royalty will be about $60. If the material is delivered in Q1 and the TV is sold in Q2, UDC will book the $30 in Q1 (vs $100 in the past) and won't book the remaining $60 until the TV is actually sold, plus some time to do the accounting. So it might be that the Royalty doesn't hit until Q3!

    Obviously the good news is that LG is planning on producing a bucketful of TVs (which is why they wanted to sign this type of agreement). So 2015 AS A YEAR should show some solid revenue gains vs last year, but the revenue from LG is going to be booked differently than last year, so the comparisons will be "funky"

  • While the LG agreement communicates that there is indeed another serious player in the OLED Display business, the REAL news is that the agreement runs through 2022.

    If you are/were short the stock I am sure you kept saying to yourself "I don't care what Apple might do in the OLED space, but since UDCs patents are falling off a cliff in 2017/18 and their Revenue will be zero by then, I will just hold my short until then. Guess what...that leg to the short story was just kicked out from underneath you today.

    Or lets say you were a potential large owner (maybe you are Fidelity or TRowe, neither of which owned a share as of Q3'14) and you look at the long term potential for the OLED space (so you are excited) but then you look at the short term headwinds facing UDC right now (Samsung capacity utilization; Samsung's use of Host materials, timing on the LG TV ramp) and you recognize that all of those short term issues are already built into the price, but in the back of your mind you wonder about the patent cliff...and if its true, why do you want to buy the stock in front of punky 2015 revenues? Even if lighting and Apple and 75" TVs are all kicking in by late 2016, do I really want to own it with a patent cliff coming a year later? Well...those people now have no excuse but to buy.

    So while the agreement validates LGs commitment to the space, its greatest importance is that it tells the market that UDC's intellectual property is rock solid, and it if you believe in the long term potential of the OLED business, the best way to invest in that is through Universal Display!

  • Reply to

    oled small screen cost down

    by qtmmnutcase Jan 23, 2015 6:48 AM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Jan 23, 2015 9:19 AM Flag

    This is VERY good news. Clearly the price is important, but it is also telegraphing Samsung's desire to sell OLED screens to the broader industry. In 2014 they were reserving capacity for their own smartphones, and when demand for those phones slowed dramatically, they were stuck with unused capacity. And of course that affected UDC's results. While other OEMs were definitely interested in offering OLED screens, they had to be confident that Sammy wouldn't pull supply from them. I think Sammy has come to the conclusion that it is better to be profitable than to hoard OLED screens for only their product. And of course, if Sammy is successful in getting lots of outside orders, then more capacity is sure to follow.

    As to the Chinese LCD competitors, if OLEDs have better color quality, are 30% more energy efficient, have the potential for different form factors AND are the same price (and eventually cheaper because there is no backlight and color filter) then it is only a matter of time before OLED screens become the norm for ALL smartphones (including Apple)

  • Reply to

    What percentage of OLED material cost in a TV?

    by abqnorseman Jan 21, 2015 12:35 PM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Jan 21, 2015 2:36 PM Flag

    then rears is ugly head. If yield is only 50% then that means that 50% of the materials used are wasted. So instead of material of $200 you bounce up to $400/panel...and the amortized cost gets doubled to $100 and the labor gets doubled to $20 and instead of a "cost" of $260" you are now at $520. It would also be worse if the line was not operating at full speed, but yet the yield was still 50%...in that scenario, the materials still get doubled, but depending upon the speed, the amortized cost of the plant might be tripled as might the labor component...boosting the cost to well over $600...and of course if the amortized cost of the plant is more like $200/panel (at full capacity and full yield) then the math gets even worse.

    But of course, this is why LG has been running a pilot line first...they want to get all the kinks out so that when the bigger line starts, they can get 80% yields and work their way up from there.

    That is why an agreemnet with LG will be a great "tell"...after all, they don't need a LT agreement unless they are buying LOTS of materials.

    Hope that is somewhat helpful

  • Reply to

    What percentage of OLED material cost in a TV?

    by abqnorseman Jan 21, 2015 12:35 PM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Jan 21, 2015 2:28 PM Flag

    If you are trying to figure out how much product UDC sells into a TV, you are almost wasting your time, since the amount of rev UDC books is much more dependent upon the number of TVs sold vs what $ they get from each (its not unimportant, but just very difficult to calculate). Having said that, if your question is "will UDC have to cut material prices for OLED TVs to be cost competitive?" then I believe that the answer is a strong "NO". From what I have learned talking to people a lot more knowledgeable than me on production costs, the biggest "cost" is the combination of capacity of the fab and yield. For the most part, the "labor" component of a fab is fairly low, but clearly you need people monitoring production and being there to "adjust" or "tweak" the process if need be. So to use an easy example, if your line can only produce 100 units per day, you probably need about the same labor component if your line was producing 1000 per day. And of course if you get up to a full line that is actually producing 100,000/month (or about 3000/day) then you might need a few more people, but the incremental cost is very low, especially spread out over 3000 per day. So in other words, simple operating leverage kicks in on the human capital side if you can spread the "people cost" over thousands of units.

    But the biggest "cost" is yield from the line. Lets assume that the material costs (not just from UDC but ALL material costs) for a TV panel is $200, and if you run the line at full capacity the amortized cost of the line turns out to be $50 per TV (these are not meant to be accurate, just illustrative). Said differently, the amortized cost of the plant is about $5,000,000/month (capacity is 100,000 times $50 = $5,000,000. And lets also assume that you need $1,000,000 of labor per month to run the line...so at full capacity that labor comes out to $10/panel. Adding up all of those you get a "cost" per unit (at full capacity) of $260/panel. But yield...

  • Reply to

    Temporary LG Plant Shutdown

    by dca1125 Jan 15, 2015 9:06 AM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Jan 15, 2015 9:25 AM Flag

    It should also not be characterized as a "leak" since it occurred during routine maintenance when a valve was mistakenly opened. While it is always unfortunate when workers are hurt, or in this case die, it seems that it was more of a procedural mistake rather than a fault with the design of the fab. In addition, it sounds like there was no damage to the facility, so that it should be back up running relatively quickly....and like you say, it was GREAT news to hear that this facility was actually online producing TVs.

  • The mainstream press is covering the 2 guys who are free climbing El Capitan in Yosemite. The Black Diamond insignia is front and center on the tents that hang on the side of the face (where they sleep)

  • carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Dec 12, 2014 1:40 PM Flag

    I'm not on facebook, so it didnt allow me to respond...so if anyone cares to correct one of my pet peeves for me, I would appreciate it...you hoe a "row" not a "road"...and if I had a nickel for every time someone says it wrong, maybe I could buy one of those sweet TVs!!

  • while the stock has been weak today (and yesterday), it has been characterized by fairly low volumes, for example, today is only slightly ahead of avg. daily volume. To me this is not a sign that anyone knows anything, but rather a sign that people believe that the risk of a lackluster Q (in terms of PPS move down) is worse than the reward of a decent to good Q. But if you look at stocks that have been weak, but then post a good number and a solid outlook (SWIR is a good example today) then not only will the longs pile in, but the shorts will have to cover as well.

    My view (and backed up by a large position in the name) is that sales to Customer A (SME) will be down a tad sequentially...sales to Customer B (ie host sales that go through Nippon Steel) will be also be down a tad (both A & B driven by SME end market softness not by lost host sales, and importantly some of the handset losses will be made up in tablet sales) but the strength of LG's ramp (ie Customer C) will make up for the revenue lost to A. And since LG does not have a LT agreement (yet) the margin on sales to LG is significantly higher than the margins of like materials to SME. The key to look for is in the "royalty" line item. Since this is Q3, there will be NO license fee from SME, so the vast majority of the Q3 royalty will come from the "allocated" percentage of the sales$ that went to LG....So revenue will be in line or a tad light, but EPS will be stronger.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • Reply to

    A question for the tech savvy here.

    by hajosy Oct 26, 2014 2:36 PM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Oct 28, 2014 9:15 AM Flag

    Hey Dutch or perhaps Greta....Carne I can live with...laker is probably better...but Carnie?! Makes me sound like the guy with no teeth who works at the travelling fair...:)

  • Reply to

    A question for the tech savvy here.

    by hajosy Oct 26, 2014 2:36 PM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Oct 27, 2014 11:45 AM Flag

    It think it all comes down to "risk reward" for the panel producer. With the first question being: Is the risk of being caught (and having product seized at a port and destroyed) worth the risk of trying to save a few percentage points on cost? More importantly, however, is whether the quality is the same and would it affect the production process? While I am not a chemist, I am pretty confident in saying that PHOLED materials are not like sugar or flour, where it doesn't much matter what brand you use. These fabs have VERY little tolerance for error/blemishes etc. Remember, if the PHOLED materials is, say, 5% of the COGS (which I think is way high) and you could conceivably save 1/2 of that with "bootleg" PHOLED and host (again, if PPG is producing a gazillion grams for legitimate users, their cost to produce is going to be much lower than some outfit trying to produce a few thousand grams...so the "saving" for "bootleg" might not even be possible) then you as the panel producer would have to be confident that your yield wont go down much, if at all...because if yield goes down by a point, you are not only wasting the materials that were used (both OLED and glass etc.) but also the fixed portion of costs need to get spread out into fewer units. In other words, if you lose any yield at all due to inferior materials, you have the potential to lose ALOT more than you will have saved on the price of the materials.

    And of course if 1 million panels are being produced by ABChinaPanel and ABC is not buying much PHOLEDs from UDC, methinks that UDC will be going after them hard!

  • carne8ielaker by carne8ielaker Oct 21, 2014 9:57 PM Flag

    the troubles for OCN could actually be a silver lining for WAC. While higher regulatory costs will affect WAC, it is clear that the price for new MSR deals will have to go down; especially since OCN is in no position to get approval from regulators...so if WAC can continue to be the "only buyer standing", then it is quite possible that we will hear about attractive acquisitions in the weeks/months ahead

  • Reply to

    Question on guidance

    by thefrickingreedglandishere Oct 21, 2014 5:55 PM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Oct 21, 2014 6:57 PM Flag

    nope...guidance traditionally is announced with Q4 results...and then (historically) it has only been an annual revenue range...no profit guidance...but expense and margin guidance

  • Reply to

    2014 Investor Presentation Aug vs Sept

    by litespeed2011 Oct 11, 2014 6:20 PM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Oct 13, 2014 10:24 AM Flag

    litespeed...thanks for calling out the changes; I don't think any of them is material, but always interesting to monitor. Two comments:"Customer C" is LG...the reason they lump customer A&B together, is that they are essentially Samsung...Customer A is Samsung Display (SMD), and Customer B is a Japanese firm NSCC, and UDC sells them the value add component of the host material, and NSCC then mixes it with their own more commodity material and sells it to SMD...that is also why the sales to Japan are as high as they are...really going to Korea but through Japan...

    As to your comment on Guidance (slide 30), I KNOW you cant infer anything from that chart....that is the chart they have been using all year, and in the conference calls they have reiterated the high end...that is not to say that they won't guide down a tad after Q3 due to the Samsung weakness, but you cant get there from looking at this chart.

    What is amazing about the stock action, is that while it may be true that Q3 MIGHT come in a little light, we have every indication that SMD (which is UDCs client) is expanding their own customer list beyond parent Samsung Electronics (SME) such that in the future, there will be other outlets for the panels....which is actually good news. After all, while SMD is your client, if SME is SMD's only client, then SME is in effect your client...but if SMD sells 60% of their capacity to SME and the other 40% of capacity to 4 other OEMs then UDC has expanded it effective customer list.

    The same can be said for LG's TV panel production...LG is producing for themselves, but they are also selling panels to other TV OEMs...not only does this diversify the customer risk, but it also expands the marketing message that will come out in support of OLED TVs.

    So if anything...the strength of 2015 revs should be must stronger; thus presenting an incredible buying opportunity....and one that I would think the company is taking advantage of with their share repurchase plan..

  • The problem with "trading around" positions is that you have to get your exit AND entry points correct, especially since you will be realizing gains along the way (and paying short term tax rates)

    For those who have held this stock for over 10 years, the problem 10 years ago was the valuation was stretched and the fundamental horizon was far away...the "valuation" didn't really start to jibe with reality until the Samsung deal was announced in 2011, and of course at $45 the company was brilliant to have sold more shares to fund future IP purchases (and give the company negotiating leverage vs deep pocketed customers). Bad for those who bought on the deal, but great for the company.

    So here we are in 2014, and the company has about $6 of cash on the balance sheet, and is making money every quarter...even without the SMD royalty Q's. We have customer number 2 ramping up fast and furious, and we have customers 3,4 and 5 etc. fast on their heels. The company will earn close to $2 in 2015 (if not more) and the market for their product is expanding (mobile phones to tablets to TVs to lighting) meaning that revenue should be able to grow in the mid double digit range (ie 30-50% per year) for the foreseeable future. Given the business model of selling IP and high value materials, the company's cap ex needs are minuscule, and the gross margin should stay north of 70% while the operating margin will continue to expand as the revenue ramps.

    So with all that said...you are going to sell the stock when it gets back to $40?!?! If you do, in 2020 you will ruefully be telling people that you HAD Universal Display...you SAW the potential...but you SOLD the stock....at a fraction of where it will be in 2020.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

  • Reply to

    LG flexible OLED TV 2015

    by qtmmnutcase Oct 1, 2014 8:40 AM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Oct 2, 2014 8:56 AM Flag

    I know you were being facetious, but one of the issues with 4K TV is "energy management"...a. 4K LCD generates LOTS of heat....further incenting manufacturers to focus on OLED.

  • Reply to

    LG flexible OLED TV 2015

    by qtmmnutcase Oct 1, 2014 8:40 AM
    carne8ielaker carne8ielaker Oct 1, 2014 11:38 AM Flag

    If LG reads these boards they really should figure out a way that when the TV is flat, that it sits flush against the wall, and then when it needs to bend, it comes out from the wall. I have always believed that it is more practical to have an additional "box" that houses all of the electronics/connections rather than trying to fit it all into the back of the set. After all, almost 100% of us also have to use a cable box, so adding another box to the stack is not a problem...then the only thing the TV will need is a cord to the box (and maybe an additional power cord, if the power cant come through this feeder cord)

BDE
6.50-0.12(-1.81%)Jan 28 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
McDonald's Corp.
NYSEWed, Jan 28, 2015 4:00 PM EST
Exelixis, Inc.
NASDAQWed, Jan 28, 2015 4:00 PM EST