I think thats fair. Competition has led to slightly lowered pricing by 2.5%, (but that is more than compensated for by the expected decrease in reinsurance expense of near 10%. So at least going forward for a year or so, it looks like margins may expand slightly...all else equal. And, in spite of the fact that profits for the sector have been super strong, at least two companies have gone out of business....which shows, imo, that FNHC can continue to increase market share and policy count, in the short run, since just like those two, other companies are not as well run as FNHC and they should continue to add new customers.
I dont see where you get that FNHC's current active policy count is lower than a year ago. In the conference call, the CEO stated that policy count increased by 57% in 2015 year end vs 2014 year end; and then in the Q&A he stated that as of the date of the conference call FNHC added and additional 14,500 year to date....basically a 3,000 policy/week average increase. Please tell me where you are getting your numbers which show anything different.
And the amazing thing is they are not adding any policies from Citizens....its all taking market share from competitors because, well, customers like FNHC better for some reason.
especially with this CEO....when things are going poorly, he sounds completey depressed in his earnings pr's.
Exactly Hopeful, and this CEO, for better or worse, wears his optimism on his PR sleeve. I remember when the CEO switched from negative comments about the bleak future to somewhat optimistic when SGMA was trading in the three's a few years back. Within fifteen months or so, the stock tripled. No guarantees on exactly how high SGMA goes, but I wouldnt be surprised at a double in a year or so. Heck, to do that it would only have to trade ten percent over tangible book value.
The January quarter has been their seasonally weakest, so I'm looking forward to increases in sales going forward really levering the bottom line (adjusted for equivalent tax rates). Looking forward to those new programs and customers ramping up....we know they could cause some initial difficulties and lumpiness, but the trend should be steadily up. And we all know that when a company trading at such a low price to book starts seeing operational improvements....the moves can be quick and sometimes crazy strong.
Q1 is APT's seasonally weakest quarter. Their biggest and most important division is their Building Materials division. They will face lots of headwinds from one of the worst winters in a long time.
But Spring's not too far away, Q2 could be decent.
They make only three pennies per share with the big ramp up in infectious control (masks etc.) this quarter due to ebola? Heck, they made more in last years December quarter which had none of this ebola hype.
huahua, just in case there was any confusion regarding your post; the actual total policy count was up a lot at the date of the conf call vs the prior year. thed did nont is not down year to date '15 vs '14.
But there were 14,500 new policies year to date in '15, vs 15,300 year to date in '14. So number of new policies per week year to date in 2015 was about 1,812, and about 100 more/week in 2014. So FNHC organic growth is still very high......still way way higher than any other Florida insurer.
As for competition, obviously they've been saying that for the past three conference calls, so not new, but certainly relevant. However, the positive news is that in the FNHC conf call (and also mentioned in UVE and UIHC), they stated that they believe reinsurranace rates (their biggest expense by far) will once again drop, and they expect a near 10% drop in expenses; which certainly would nicely complement any pressures due to competition.
...nice beat, they made .66 vs .43 estimate and are expected to increase earnings next quarter (as per earnings estimate). Stock not up that much, trading right about $21, up a buck or so.
..., if you ex out the one timers, namely the $1.635 life insurance gain and the $441,000 investment loss; looks like on an after tax basis NSEC would have made .80/share for the December quarter....and that follows a .72/share September quarter, and that follows a .77 June quarter, and a .40 March quarter
OK, there was a life insurance benefit in one of the other quarters as well. If you take out all the one timers for fy 2014 (the life insurance benefit of $3.256 million, and the $441 investment loss in the fourth quarter), NSEC made an adjusted $2.14 for the year. And the stock trades at $14/share?
Oh, and by the way, NSEC has $17.05/share in net tangible assets. KInda head scratchin' cheap.
Now, I understand that the weak March quarter is next, and there was some bad weather...but jeeze, one time weather events shouldn't matter much given the Book Value and Earnings power.
UVE had a solid quarter, but they are up mostly because they are bringing their quota share down to zero starting July 1..............they'll have to finance a ton more reinsurance, but that will add a ton to earnings going forward.
Good news for FNHC two days ago. They renegotiated the State portion of their reinsurance (FHCF) a few days ago for coverage beginning June 30 2015, they were able to get about 11 or 12% more coverage and still get a 2.9% drop in total costs compared to last year (the larger private part won't be done till around June). Of course last years tremendous rise in reinsurance....were FHCF portion went up near 300%....is the reason for the downard pressure on EPS this last June quarter (and still somewhat going forward). Great news is that it looks like from the FHCF negotiations that they are getting a good deal on reinsurrance this year, plus they may only raise the total by a relatively small amount.....so the upcoming September quarter should start some real good comps year over year.
telecom, you do realize that the December quarter is far and away their strongest quarter, and noone was predicting a money losing quarter.....most estimates here were five to ten cents a share profit.
MCZ' strategy, as per Darren on the conf call, was to protect profits, and not sell at just to increase revenue. However, he also admitted that MCZ lost market share. I'm not saying he was right or wrong in his strategy, but often companies are willing to take small losses to hold or increase market share...the theory being once you give up that space on the shelves it is very hard to get back.
...25/share beats the estimate of .24, plus CPSS has pulled back a bunch from where it was trading a little while back. Seems pretty cheap here trading at an annualized forward p/e of what, just over 6? Still has good growth and earnings are expected to expand in '15.
Analysts have average price target of $9.75 on this one....lots of room.
Hey hopeful, my valuation method (15 times forward p/e) was somewhat arbitrary.....you could give it a two times tangible book ($27.00 target) or 18 times forward p/e $28.50 valuation if you like.
Just trying to make the point that for years, and up through now, RCKY has been given a valuation below its peers.....some of that was for good reason, but circumstances have changed. And maybe RCKY is now starting to be revalued at a more appropriate multiple relative to its industry peers because of RCKY metamorphosis.
....flip side is all that could be bunko, and RCKY could slide back.....we'll see.
For us long time RCKY traders (I've been trading since this thing since it dropped to the $2's) RCKY has always been valued on the cheap. Some reasons for lack of a earnings multiple might be because it used to sell alot of goods through vans/trucks direct to factory workers; it sold a significant portion to the US Military via government contracts; Western footwear was considered cultish and not a growth market. Well thats changed...they still sell direct to some factories, but through kiosk's and the web; military contracts have been small and non-steady...although they still sell direct to military personell without govt contracts; and Western has become more of a norm in fashion. We still carry very large inventories and are tethered to the weather and big seasonality.
Point is, maybe RCKY should be gettin closer to industry valuation averages. Right now, analyst estimate is for 20% growth in 2015, and another 20% in 2016...that is strong growth.. Its just an estimate, could be off, but thats what the analyst is estimating.. So backward earnings of $1.30, forward $1.60, and tangible book of $13.50...those are strong numbers.
Maybe its time RCKY trades closer to industry averages. I mentioned the 'apparel footwear and accessories category' as per yahoo carries an average p/e of 27.6, and an average price to book of 7.10. Maybe those numbers are too strong, but it still leaves RCKY plenty of room to get fat.'
Kinda arbitrary, and RCKY has not received these valuations before, but @ 15 times forward earnings, you get a $24 fair value target...seems reasonable to me. Especially given the strong tangible book value. Now RCKY has never gotten that full valuation before, so it may be reasonable to sell some lower, and hold the rest.
The estimate for the March quarter is at .12/share. With all the snow we've been getting, I think thats easily beatable so no reason for short term eps concerns. Also, RCKY should be announcing its next divvy any day.
westy, you do know that the price you sold at has nothing to with whether someone can be excited about the progress of RCKY? The world doesn't revolve around where you bought and sold this stock.
...In the CC q&a they stated that $3 to $3.5 million in sales were pushouts from q3 that they mentioned would occur back in the Sept quarter earnings conf call. Even if you ex out the earnings from those sales, RCKY would have beaten by a lot. And the second actual earnings, easily beat the second half estimates.
Also from the CC, they expect another solid year of growth in 2015. Their expectations are for gross margins to remain stable, SG&A to increase moderately, and "earnings to increase much faster than sales".
Later in the Q&A section, the CEO stated RCKY expects five to seven percent revenue growth in '15. He then stated that even if they get five percent revenue growth, they should be able to leverage that to twenty percent earnings growth. Thus, you gotta expect that a 7% increase in revenue would lead to a 28%+ increase in earnings. Seems to me their are estimating 20% to 30% increase in earnings for 2015.
Tangible book is around $13.47/share...pretty strong (the negative is RCKY does carry more inventory than most competitors). As per Yahoo's industry browser, the 'apparel footwear and accessories category carries an average p/e of 27.6, and an average price to book of 7.10. (not sure if the link works,but here: http://biz.yahoo.com/p/321conameu.html ) Now, I'm not saying RCKY should carry those valuations, but it sure make it seem that RCKY has plenty of room to increase its market value and share price. And it really points to what a great value RCKY would be as an acquisition even at far higher prices.
Now, the caveat is that these these guys have been more wrong more than a few times with their forward estimates. But no matter what, RCKY is cheap right now given the info we have.
Uptab, last year in q4, MCZ had a $1.7 million dollar operating loss, and a $1.9 million dollar loss before taxes. The only reason their net loss was close to zero was because of a $1.64 million tax benefit in the quarter. So, my scenario of a $750,000 operating loss would require much improved margins, gross profits, expenses etc on a lower revenue base....maybe $18 - 19 mil.
In any case, its a relatively small loss, .01/share, nothing earth shattering and it would still be a big improvement over years q1 operating loss.
And its all about the second half of fy '16. CEO stated that he expects big improvements in sales in next December earnings vs the one they just posted. If MCZ can do that, they have now have the operating leverage to turn increased revenues into large profits......I mean if you ex out the one time effects in q4 (for exchange losses and additional air shipping expense), MCZ would have made .02/share in the December quarter, on only $30.5 in sales.
I'm basing the $750,000 or greater loss in q4 by that exact quote. He said they won't return to operating profitability in fy '15. Through nine months they have an operating profit of $652,000. A small operating loss for '15 would be $250,000 ....which means they'd have to have an operating loss in q4 of around, $900,000.......add interest expense and a few more bucks to that for loss before taxes, then add back your tax credit due to the loss.............and you're around a $750,000 net loss.
micro, in the conf call, they did guide for a loss of what, at least $750,000 in q4, so it certainly won't be a surprise.