Thu, Jul 31, 2014, 7:59 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 1 hr 31 mins

Recent

% | $
Click the to save as a favorite.

Amazon.com Inc. Message Board

investor95000 183 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 29, 2014 4:54 PM Member since: Apr 12, 2006
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    stock drop

    by ohioinvestor100 Jul 29, 2014 3:40 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 29, 2014 4:54 PM Flag

    ohioinvestor100,

    LOL! Pps is trending upward from recent low of $0.15. Pps fluctuated up and down by a penny or so and there is no need to be alarm of $0.19 pps today. Be patient! I have a very good feeling about current prospecting. Wait for the good news.

    GLTA!
    Cheers!

  • Reply to

    TPLM should be $25+

    by jdbaker4272 Jul 25, 2014 3:58 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 28, 2014 10:20 AM Flag

    jdbaker4272,

    Per GAAP, after consolidating the financial, the company has to eliminate transactions between subsidiaries. Based on your comment, one subsidiary sold capitals to the other subsidiary, then those transactions need to be eliminated after consolidation. It is basically the same company and there should be no gain in revenue or capital. I don't why posters kept on pondering about it. The financial were reported via GAAP. I am sure it was audited by 3rd parties.

  • Reply to

    Newbie here.. probably a stupid question

    by dinesh_psft Jul 24, 2014 9:24 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 25, 2014 6:09 AM Flag

    Also, there is a line. Even if you are in front of the line, you may not have the right of way. In another words, you may not get the open price in the morning. It can get very ugly if there is a panic sells.

    Good luck!

  • ...going forward, so that I will see net incomes again, instead of net losses. In AMZN case, growth to top lines is negatively correlated to bottom lines. Doesn't AMZN have analysts to run financial numbers to make sense of their business? Why does AMZN sell products below costs? As the product sales grow, so does the negative margin. Like it or not, fulfillment is part of COGS and AMZN needs to change its policy on fulfillment. Take a look at the data below.

    2011; 2012; 2013; Q1-14
    --------------------------------------------------
    $42.0B; $51.7B; $60.9B; $15.7B - Product sales
    $41.9B; $52.4B; $62.8B; $16.4B - COGS (including fulfillment)
    $0.1B; $0.7B; $1.9B; $0.7B - Losses
    0.3%; 1.3%; $3.1%; 4.2% - Margin of losses
    ---------------------------------------------------
    $4.6B; $6.4B; $8.6B; $2.3B - Fulfillment
    10.9%; 12.4%; 14.1%; 14.8% - Fulfillment % of product sales

    Bottom line will get worse and will escalate even further as % of fulfillment to product sales increases. AMZN needs to charge customers for fulfillment, whether it will be full amount or at a percentage to have a healthy margin above all costs associated with product sales. Of course, this will have negative impact to the growth of top line, but the bottom line will improve significantly.

    To improve bottom line further, AMZN need to focus more on services, because services have high margin. I noticed that services sales grew from 11% to 20% (2011 through Q1-14). Not only does the current policy on fulfillment contribute to growth product sales,but it also contribute to services sales growth. Unfortunately, the benefit from it so far doesn't offset all losses from product sales. Above was based on quick analysis (about 15 minutes of my time). I may be wrong or overlook something.

    Cheers!

  • Reply to

    Flaring reductions/merger considerations

    by jcotton15 Jul 23, 2014 12:29 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 23, 2014 5:50 PM Flag

    jcotton15,

    Thanks.

  • Reply to

    Flaring reductions/merger considerations

    by jcotton15 Jul 23, 2014 12:29 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 23, 2014 3:23 PM Flag

    jcotton15,

    I need to register (which I don't want) to be able to read the rest of the article. Can you cut and paste the contents in a post. Thanks

  • Reply to

    Flaring reductions/merger considerations

    by jcotton15 Jul 23, 2014 12:29 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 23, 2014 2:19 PM Flag

    jcotton15,

    If you don't provide links, I will assume you exaggerated the situation, especially about the considerations part for KOG to merge. As Bakken oil company daily productions exceeded 1 million barrels and will continue to grow further, flaring is a significant problem, in terms of air pollutions. Bakken energy companies were issued warning to curtail flaring or there will be a cap on production. There is no regulation yet that will go into effect regarding such matter. Bakken players should be proactive on this matter and start building natural gas infrastructure to curtail flaring, if they have not done so. Either way, it will affect their bottom line. With natural gas infrastructure, at least, their will be some revenue from it to offset the cost. In times, natural gas revenue probably will exceed costs and improve bottom line.

    Another issue we may want to take notice. There is safety issues about railroad transportation of oils. Regulatory department is contemplating to reduce the capacity of transportation and, also, lower the speed of the railroad. Can the railroad keep up with the booming oil productions?

  • Reply to

    Emerald Oil the next TPLM...and buyout canidate...

    by mjpeoria Jul 22, 2014 11:56 AM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 23, 2014 11:52 AM Flag

    nypd2726,

    I used to hate spam posts. 99% of those spams are usually for worthless stocks. But, it doesn't hurt to spend few minutes to check it out. I am adding Emerald Oil (EOX) to my Keep Track Portfolio. EOX's pps performance was very poor. From above $40 at early 2011 down to about $6 at end of 2012. Since then, pps fluctuated sideways. For the same period as above, EOX financed its ops mainly through equity and diluted common shares (from about 21K shares to 66M shares). EOX has minimal debts prior to 2014. With insignificant growth to the operating cash flow for past years, obviously, EOX was unsuccessful with their capital projects. On the bright side, it's has positive operating cash flow. For past few quarters, EOX spent a lot on capital (2 or 3 times more than the usual). Early this year, EOX borrowed about $170M to finance it's capital expenditures. Whatever capital projects they have right now, EOX can't afford to fail this time with such high debts. That's my take on the initial few minutes of due diligence. It's worth to investigate further, especially on the capital projects. EOX has about $500M market capital. We all know that successful E&P will be in billions. I would wait to see significant improvement in operating cash flow before I invest in EOX, based on EOX track records and to minimize the risk.

    Out of hundred spams I saw, an oil company, AOIL, caught my attention and has potential of high returns, IMO. Even though it is a penny stock, I like AOIL financials and recent management directions. I decided to purchased 6 figures shares. The company will know if it has hidden gem in about 2 weeks, after drilling reports. If the company is successful, I will rake in millions in a couple of years. At this point, IMO, AOIL is a low risk and high return investment.

    Cheers! :o)

  • Reply to

    Coiled Tube Completions

    by g8trgr8t Jul 17, 2014 12:17 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 23, 2014 10:18 AM Flag

    lexpress56,

    LOL! Ignore him. Don't waste your time on the doofus, Welbie100.

    Cheers! :o)

  • investor95000 investor95000 Jul 16, 2014 11:13 AM Flag

    harpbtrotter,

    Sorry, my bad. I skim through your post and assume you meant KOG purchase date will be the conversion date. :o)

  • Reply to

    Quarterly Results

    by hokiestock Jul 15, 2014 8:06 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 16, 2014 11:07 AM Flag

    fred_red_oak,

    I think you are wrong. Either stock will move in tandem with the other stock, depending on impact to top and bottom lines to either stock (dependency goes both way). The focal point will still be .177 ratio. If KOG's earnings is stellar, KOG's pps will jump and WLL's pps (benefit from it) will move in tandem with it. Of course, there will be some divergence to .177 ratio, but it will be small. If KOG's earnings is really bad, then both stock will be lower.

  • investor95000 investor95000 Jul 16, 2014 10:27 AM Flag

    harpbtrotter,

    Wrong. The purchase date for KOG shares remain the same. The stock conversion is non-taxable. When selling after the conversion date, profits will be based on KOG's purchase date and WLL's selling date.

  • Reply to

    Drilling

    by ohioinvestor100 Jul 15, 2014 4:35 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 15, 2014 8:06 PM Flag

    financewise,

    Thanks for the info. Looking forward to August 7 for the results.

    Cheers!

  • investor95000 investor95000 Jul 15, 2014 3:00 PM Flag

    ewienert,

    I think you and others are missing the point. Everybody knows the deal - 1 KOG share for .177 WLL share. You and others don't need to keep on repeating it. The deal was filed on July 13. Based on the previous closing prices (Friday, July 11), with .177 of WLL, KOG was worth $13.90, which is below recent high, below recent average prices and below Friday closing price. This indicates that .177 ratio is low and unfair for KOG shareholders, raised red flags and warranted for investigations (over a dozen investigations so far). As I mentioned before, I think the ratio was determined months ago and is outdated. They need to update the ratio with current data. Some posters already rationalized it really doesn't matter, because in the long run, WLL will be above $100 and KOG share will be above $17.7 (based on .177 ratio). Even if WLL will jump above $100, you cannot use it to justify cheating current KOG shareholders with an unfair deal. We will see if the ratio .177 is fair or not from the investigations.

  • Reply to

    VOTE -No -NO

    by kogbearx1 Jul 15, 2014 9:34 AM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 15, 2014 11:43 AM Flag

    jcotton15,

    I am also curious about that too. IMO, until the deal is finalized, KOG and WLL pps aren't link directly in the system. .177 of WLL pps will be the focal point for KOG pps. KOG pps trading below it will be undervalue and vice versa. Anything below the focal point will be an opportunity. I thought the divergence would be around 10 cents, at most. That 20 cents above the focal is about 1.3% overvalue.

  • Reply to

    Looking for some clarification

    by driegel24 Jul 14, 2014 11:21 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 15, 2014 12:43 AM Flag

    Driegel24,

    Let's put it this way. Let's say that analysts provide WLL's target price to be $150 and WLL acquired KOG for .127 of WLL's shares or $10 per KOG shares. Are you are fine with such deal? .127 of $150 will give you $19.05 pps. We all know only doofus like wilbie100 will accept such offer, but investors in the right mind won't. The question or issue at hand is is KOG worth .177 of WLL's shares? Many think KOG is worth more. That is why there are about a dozen of investigations initiated on KOG's senior managements and BOD.

  • Reply to

    Don't be mislead by the BS...

    by captnstubing38 Jul 14, 2014 4:42 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 14, 2014 9:38 PM Flag

    welbie100,

    Duh! How do you think numerous (make that a dozen) investigations started? The deal was compared to recent average stock prices and to recent high. Again, you are too stupid to realize that KOG's shareholder should get more of the pie from the deal. In another word, it is worth more than .177 of WLL shares. Investigations will shed light into the matters.

    Again, you should seek professional help about ED thingy. LOL!

  • Reply to

    Don't be mislead by the BS...

    by captnstubing38 Jul 14, 2014 4:42 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 14, 2014 8:57 PM Flag

    welbie100,

    First of all, you should get your head out of you #$%$ to see clearly that I am not Ed. You need to seek professional help on your fixation of Ed and associating Ed to other people.

    Secondly, you are such a doofus, very eager to give stupid lesson to other people.

    I, as well as others, am not arguing about the potential synergies and even more robust growth for both WLL and KOG as a whole, DUMB@ZZ. I am arguing about the deal itself as unfair to KOG shareholders. The deal was TAKEUNDER. WLL acquired KOG for less than the market value. KOG closed on Friday at $14.23 vs $13.90 from .177 of WLL shares. Clearly, that was unfair and warranted for investigations on KOG's BOD. KOG's shareholders should get more pieces of the pie. I guess you are too stupid to realize that.

  • Reply to

    Why did WLL rise 7.69% after buying KOG

    by nsleesman Jul 14, 2014 6:29 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 14, 2014 8:03 PM Flag

    Welbie100,

    LOL! You are such a doofus. WLL acquired or bought KOG. Method of payment for receiving KOG's assets was .177 of WLL shares (which in many relevant viewers mind is low). FYI, method of payment for any acquisition could be all cash, all stock or combination of both. It's you who need to refresh M&A and you should read carefully what is stated in Form 8K filed.

  • Reply to

    Don't be mislead by the BS...

    by captnstubing38 Jul 14, 2014 4:42 PM
    investor95000 investor95000 Jul 14, 2014 6:22 PM Flag

    captnstubing38,

    KOG is worth more than .177 of WLL shares... PERIOD! You and other so called KOG loyal longs gave WLL to much credits and more credits than KOG for future growth. There are lots of investigations going on right about the deal which reflected dissatisfaction of many parties involved. Perhaps, they should adjust and add 10% or 20% to .177 to quench those investigations and satisfy those parties.

    Cheers!

AMZN
322.51-2.47(-0.77%)Jul 30 4:00 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.