Sat, Nov 1, 2014, 5:02 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. Message Board

dogma_blade 63 posts  |  Last Activity: Oct 30, 2014 8:27 PM Member since: Feb 16, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    SNS expanding nicely

    by bigjim1437 Jul 29, 2014 6:24 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 4, 2014 4:34 PM Flag

    From quarterly reports.

    As of April 11 2012 Company owned and franchised S&S outlets 493
    As of April 9 2014 Company owned and franchised S&S outlets 530

    That is 37 new outlets over that last 2 years.

    Where are the 63+ outlets you are mentioning?

  • Reply to

    Conspiracy Theory

    by bluestem1 Aug 7, 2014 1:37 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 8, 2014 9:40 PM Flag

    All you have to do is go back and look at the call and numbers from the second quarter last year.The company had a hit against it's numbers(over 400,000) from issues from the factory and Kombucha labeling.

    The gross margin dropped to 25% for the quarter due to all the problems .

    The company had over 32% gross margins last quarter, if they get any where near that this quarter they will add over half a million to the gross profit for a near break even quarter without any sales increase.

    For every 10% sales increase add a little over 300,000 to the gross profit number.

    Not saying that they are going to do this well, but if they have are able to achieve the same margin as the first quarter and get 20% sale growth, gross profit for the quarter would go up over a million, from 2457 to 3655.

    Even with numbers slightly lower than that all they really have to do is not have a big issue in the quarter and the stock could see a little action.

    If we are lucky enough to see that, it will be time to look for an exit price for the third time, as with the current management they have not proved themselves able to string more than a couple or so quarterly reports without a nasty surprise.

  • Reply to

    Too funny

    by dogma_blade Jan 6, 2014 5:17 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 8, 2014 9:59 PM Flag

    Thanks for the agreeing with my assessment. about 1.75 being a good re entry point back in May.

    I never thought that I would get a nice 25% gain in 7 trading days.

    Then again I am not one to look a gift horse in the mouth, a nice jump from Najarian's mention, then a nice bounce off of 1.75.

    Looking for another re-entry point. Do you think there will be another chance to re-enter the stock below 1.80 this quarter?

    I will be sure to let you know when I re-enter the stock again as it appears you are unable to understand how someone can make any money trading long in a stock like this one. ROFLMAO

  • Reply to

    Conspiracy Theory

    by bluestem1 Aug 7, 2014 1:37 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 12, 2014 4:23 PM Flag

    Missed the 20% growth due to a small drop in store brand sales, but otherwise everything played out as expected. The hit against numbers from last year did not happen this year, the margin back up into the mid 30% range and near 20% top line sales increase.

    This is the third time anyone who bought after the company stubbed it's toe has had a chance for another ride up. The only question at this point is how long to stay on board.

  • dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 15, 2014 10:43 AM Flag

    Gee a 25% to 30% return in the three days following the numbers being released.

    I am so disappointed ! ROFLMAO

  • Reply to

    Food for Thought

    by bigbangchester Aug 14, 2014 12:10 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 15, 2014 11:11 AM Flag

    All anyone has to do is look at the chart for the last few years.

    The company only needs to put a good quarter or two out there for the stock to move back to the 8 range.

    That is a nice 60% return from the price before the quarterly numbers were reported.

    It will be great if the stock brakes 8 before the next quarterly numbers are released solely based on this quarters numbers, that would take some risk out of things, but if it does not the company just needs 15% to 20% top line growth without any negative surprises again and the stock should not have any problem at least matching the moves of the last 2 year (8 and 8.5)or doing better.

  • dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 15, 2014 1:43 PM Flag

    What takeover speculation has their been about any player in the industry other than Monster?

    DPS' down .09
    JSDA- flat
    Fizz- down .02
    Cott- up .15
    REED- up .72
    The only thing that the two stocks that are up have in common are that they have recently released very good numbers.

    All you have to do is look at numbers the last two years.When the company reported positive numbers for a quarter or two the stock broke out over 8.

    On both occasions the stock was knocked back down by bad news in quarterly reports.

    The heartfelt love that you seem to have for Monster not withstanding, why should it be any different now, especially when the numbers are not only improving from the set backs, but improving from last years numbers?

    Hopefully for the sake of your portfolio you were in Monster for this bump. Now the question is whether to stick around with the price now almost twice the growth rate waiting for a possible buyout premium a few years down the road or take a profit and find another place to invest.

  • Reply to

    You don't pay taxes unless you expect a profit.

    by philybroker Aug 14, 2014 8:03 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 19, 2014 3:04 PM Flag

    Don't really want to rain on any ones parade, but you might want to go and read the quarterly.

    The reason the tax money was entered is that the company does not own Goslings outright, it is held in a 60/40 partnership with the family in Bermuda that produces the rum.

    That partnership showed a profit for the quarter and taxes will need to be paid on the profit.

    The profit in the partnership is not going to be anywhere near big enough to cover the red ink for the rest of the company.

  • Reply to

    Too funny

    by dogma_blade Jan 6, 2014 5:17 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Aug 22, 2014 1:03 PM Flag

    Looks like it might be a good time to slip back in at 1.73.

  • dogma_blade by dogma_blade Aug 22, 2014 1:22 PM Flag

    Looking like another pretty good entry point at 1.72.

    Nice pop at the beginning of the year on the Najarian statement
    On Jan 8 I posted that I hoped everyone had cashed in on the gift.

    On May 22 posted about a good re-entry point and of courses bingbong doodiehead sarcastically posted that i should buy, great call,only a little over 2 weeks to get a nice pop.

    Now lets see where the stock goes from 1.73 today.

  • Reply to

    USAT 2014 Stock performance + 3¢

    by watchisle Sep 2, 2014 4:55 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 2, 2014 6:23 PM Flag

    You have the annual time period wrong. It does not run from the end of the first day of trading on the first day, but from the closing price of the last day of trading for the prior year
    2011, 1.03 - 1.12
    2012, 1.12- 1.74
    2013, 1.74-1.81
    2014, 1.81-1.88 ytd

    You don't really want to bring up numbers like this though or the village idjuts will start throwing out time periods that fit their argument like 16 months or the beginning of time.

    All you have to do is look what happens when they throw out standard time periods. While the stock is down a nickel in the last year, in the last 2 and 3 year period the stock was up over 30%.

    When Michael Moore went from saying that sales did not increase sequentially to claiming that sales were dropping no one bothered to respond to the bs because the response would have been an avalanche of obnoxious posts about the poster being from Malverne and about a billion percentage drop in the stock price in the last few decades.

  • dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:27 PM Flag

    They have already put provisions aside for bad debt of 61,843,000 for the first six months of the year.

    This drop occurred because the amount doubled from the first to the second quarter from 20 to 40 million.

    While this is a nice speculative buy at this price, I wouldn't put too much money into it.

    Combine the companies high borrowing cost and a possible 120 million in write offs for the year and the company not only might have change the way they do business, but might not have the cash lying around to keep adding stores so quickly.

  • dogma_blade by dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:54 PM Flag

    While the board fools keep moaning and carrying on about the end of the world.

    -Remember how revenue was supposed to drop by double digits in the fourth quarter last year because of the loss of pepi's not pepsi

    -Fat Mickey was screaming about revenue dropping in the first quarter and screaming that he didn't want anyone to claim it was weather related!! ROFLMAO This of course was with the company showing double digit revenue gains. Why would he make that claim? Well he said that it was because the very important sequential number dropped. Well now I know why he didn't want anyone to say that it was weather relater, it was the sales portion of the number that dropped, the portion more likely to be affected by weather.After all the lease and transaction numbers continued to rise quarter after quarter.

    Now it is 500 posts about a lawsuit and leasebacks and options given to officers.
    -Oh look at the size of the lawsuit it is going to wipe the company off the face of the earth. ROFLMAO
    -Congratulations for finding the only publicly traded company to give it's officers options without making it to difficult to achieve the goals LOL

    Now my favorite, acting as if the leaseback deal is bad. Lets see they have secured 8 million dollars worth of equipment and 8 million in cash for a program that had been costing 2 million a quarter.The company was 2 million short of break even with equipment cost each quarter but had no money for the next quarters equipment.

    Lets go to revenue now. A 15% increase raises the gross profit over 550,000 and a 20% increase raises the gross profit over 660,000 if the margin stays in the 36% range. That should be enough to cover most if not all of the lease expenses for the first quarter.If sales continue to rise the growth in gross profit should cover most, if not all of the lease price for the year. Then the question would come down to, will the company still grow over 15 or 20% the next year. Everything else is white noise

  • Reply to

    Revenue???

    by dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:54 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 6, 2014 4:30 PM Flag

    This explains quite a bit, you seem to be seeing different numbers than everyone else!!!

    trailing 4 quarters revenue 40,823,346
    last years trailing 4 quarters 34,158,249
    giving a sales increase of 6,665,097, or somewhere between 19 and 20 %.

    If for some reason in your world you are only seeing 7% increases it is no wonder you have been such a myopic one note fool on the stock all this time.

    After all only the king of the narcissists would believe that no one on the other side of the trade could make money, when after all most stock do go both up and down, it all comes down to timing.

  • Reply to

    Revenue???

    by dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:54 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 6, 2014 8:53 PM Flag

    #$%$ are you smoking.!!!!!

    I can say without a doubt that is one of the most idiotic postings that I have aver seen on any of these boards and that is saying quite a bit.

    Where did you come up with this metric of comparing 2 quarters in the same four quarter period to try and come up with annual sales increase numbers. I have never heard of it being done anywhere ever before.

    By the way, if you are trying to say that there was only a 7 percent increase in sales between the first and the fourth quarter you are wrong, The first quarter is 7% less than the fourth, but the sales increase from the first to the fourth quarter is 8%. Anyone with more than a rudimentary grasp of mathematics would understand why this is so.

    I do truly understand why you do not want to look at the annual sales increase number , because between 19 and 20% is a pretty good number. ROFLMAO

    .

  • Reply to

    Revenue???

    by dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:54 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 6, 2014 10:36 PM Flag

    That is correct.

    They are growing between 19 and 20% year over year. Slightly below 20%!

  • Reply to

    Revenue???

    by dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:54 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 7, 2014 8:02 PM Flag

    Please tell me you are joking and not really trying to be serious!

    Besides using a metric no one else uses you are not showing the sales increase over the last four quarter, but only 3, which is useless.

    If you are showing the sales increase over the last 4 quarters, why are their only three changes in the percentage?

    The reason is that you are only showing 3 quarters worth of increases.You need five quarters to show the change in sales over four quarters/ a year.

    I realize that it is very hard to get the math on a metric right when you are making it up from scratch!!! ROFLMAO

    I stick by my original post, if sales rise over 15%or more this year in comparison to last years comparable quarter I will be happy.

  • Reply to

    Revenue???

    by dogma_blade Sep 5, 2014 2:54 PM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 8, 2014 12:17 PM Flag

    Evidently in your spastic need to try and prove your genius, even when having trouble with basic math , you seem to have forgotten my first post.

    In my first post i pointed out the gross profit change that would occur with both a 15% and a 20% growth in sales and a similar margin to the last quarter.

    I pointed out that over the last year sales did in fact increase between 19 and 20%.

    I put the 15% out there because the weakest quarter in the last four showed only a 16% growth.Because of this I mentioned both ends of the spectrum based on last years performance.

    Notice that there was not a single digit increase in any of the quarters.

    Did you really through out the coke question for about the 100th time to try and cover up your math deficiencies?

  • Reply to

    Revenue

    by shanghai_group Sep 8, 2014 9:33 AM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 8, 2014 12:46 PM Flag

    You do not seem to understand how this sale leaseback works on a balance sheet. The costs will be dropping this year, but will go up next year.

    Lets see the company gets close to 8 million from the leasing company.

    The company pays 2.6 million in lease costs this fiscal year.
    Instead of 8 million in expenses for this years jump start equipment it has already been paid for by the lease.

    8 million - 2.6 million= 5.4 million drop in fixed/jump start costs for the first year

    Now the fixed/jump start cost will rise in the second and third year until the end of the lease and after that they will either have to buy, remove or keep paying a lease fee on the equipment.

    With a 5.4 million drop in fixed/jump start costs this year and an increase of nearly 8 million dollars in cash on hand it all comes down to whether the sales continue to rise or not.

  • Reply to

    Revenue

    by shanghai_group Sep 8, 2014 9:33 AM
    dogma_blade dogma_blade Sep 8, 2014 12:58 PM Flag

    8 million in jumpstart cost removed for the next 12 months.

HAIN
108.25+1.59(+1.49%)Oct 31 3:59 PMEDT

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.
Groupon, Inc.
NasdaqGSFri, Oct 31, 2014 3:59 PM EDT
Imperva Inc.
NYSEFri, Oct 31, 2014 4:01 PM EDT