Tired of Ohtaegun saying "Been right since $40.."
No you haven't. You've constantly been bashing and then conveniently disappear whenever the price is actually showing some positive momentum.
I'd just like a reply to this thread giving an affirmative that you are actually saying CLF won't beat the current estimates of -EPS
Then we have Surf's revision to: $.44
I'm actually revising as well to: $.16
Imagine, how do you know that the "value investors" or intelligent institutions are ignoring CLF?
First of all, there just may not be enough individual value investors to make a significant impact on CLF's stock price.
Second, most of the "masses who follow the herd" are the ones shorting CLF right now. What does that tell you?
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, there ARE believers in CLF. Casablanca just bought 5% of the entire company's float not too long ago.
I'm particularly fascinated with financial history, and if there's one thing I've learned from studying the past it's this: the ones who are "supposed" to know better, are often the ones most wrong.
Don't trust the wall street analysts. A lot of them are heavily pressured by the funds who own the stocks they cover to give good reports (or bad in the case of shorting) and many have been compromised.
So in conclusion, I'm pretty sure your theory is wrong.
4 more trading days since the market is closed tomorrow.
Doesn't seem like much of a rally into earnings, but we'll know for sure depending on how it trades come Monday morning.
Imagine, most of the @#$%! isn't actually swearing at you- it's swearing WITH you :)
Seriously, it looks worse than it is. I just like to use the phrase "Go ddam" a lot- comes from my days with a super christian room mate who used to get #$%$ at taking the lord's name in vain.
I find that on these boards the only way to vent frustration is to curse when an intelligent, thought out argument is responded to by people like ohtaegun saying, "LOLZ LOOK AT THE CHARTS NEW 52W LOW"
I might have written you off preemptively, and for that I apologize.
Imagine, you can't be this stupid can you?
In 7 of the 10 last years (starting in 2004), CLF has traded above book value. The average for the last 10 years is actually 1.53. So it's kind of borderline #$%$ to try and tell me, "Your analysis and target is too aggressive... because CLF will not achieve book value."
Can you not even find basic information such as historic book value? Kind of embarrassing, really.
CLF doesn't need to get to $100. It needs to get to $40. Don't comment unless you actually know what you're talking about. #$%$.
I think it's funny how all the posters on this board are crying and bashing CLF on the way down, but it seems we've all forgotten how just a short time ago this stock hit an intraday low of $17..
It went up 20% from that low, so it shouldn't be surprising that it's given back 10%
If it starts to move up again, everybody will forget their complaints and start posting threads like "Yeah! GO CLF, about time!"
Last quarter was profitable.
"Company turn around" has already happened, in my mind. Just remain profitable, and I'm happy. The reason CLF is trading so low isn't because fears of "low growth" it's simply because of this massive aura of fear and uncertainty surrounding its future profitability (mainly due to the media/analysts talking about iron ore prices)
If it proves it can remain profitable, the price will move up towards its book value. That's a double, if it makes it back to 1x. I'm fine with a double- not looking for too much else in these reports besides positive earnings/cash flow.
I guess I should just give up on you, ohtaegun. You just fail over and over again on these boards in front of everybody, not being able to comprehend anything other than the "market."
You do realize that the "market" is often very wrong, right?
That this fundamental fact is the basis for the entire field of value investing?
You're so stupid...
Lol, that's a novel idea.
Seriously, though. #$%$. Why is there no press release about earnings?
This reminds me of last quarter when they waited for @#%! 3 hours after the close to do the press release while everybody else was reporting within minutes of the close.
Divine, that's really one thing we can agree on. I don't know what to think of most of Casa's proposals, but I know I'm voting for them simply because current management has virtually no money in the company.
At least they stepped up and bought shares. Actions speak louder than words.
Agreed. I see a 50% reduction- but over a 100%??
Well, it won't be too long now (hopefully) and we'll know the truth..
The farther it falls pre-earnings, the better chance of a short squeeze. If it rises into the report like it has done in the past, then shorts don't have much trouble taking it down. But if it's already fallen 5-10% before earnings... and then earnings beat by 1,000%
Speaking of which, does anybody nkow where that Seeking Alpha guy got those numbers? I sure don't see any insider buying on Nasdaq/Morningstar.
And recall this thread in a week, to prove our respective points.
Primarily, I would like to have Skittle on record with his bashing right now before he can take it back after earnings.
I have an EPS estimate of $.30, and I expect the PPS to comfortably clear $21-22
Surf, that is true- unless for some reason they're not supposed to be talking..
I can't think of a reason why Casa would be so quiet unless there were legal reasons to do so.
"Does anyone understand the implications if CLF doesn't produce a first quarter similar to 2013 Q1. I mean to go from $0.60 earnings in 2013 to analyst guided a couple of pennies is a drop of nearly 100%. This one could get really ugly."
Price swings immediately following earnings are almost always based on two things.
(1.) Earnings beat/miss? Since most investors trust the "analyst estimates," the theory is that pre-earnings those estimates are baked into the stock. So if there is a substantially different result, then investors must reconsider and this is why there can be volatile pricing directly after an earnings report.
(2) Guidance for the future.
So your suggestion that if CLF earns only a few pennies that things "could get really ugly" is downright stupid. Earnings are now a relative game, not an absolute one. CLF just has to have a good showing compared to the estimates, and it will move up.
So even if all the bashing you do turns out to be all true (miniscule chance of that) and CLF earns a measly $.08, a massive decrease from Q1 2013, it will STILL be a positive for the stock provided that guidance isn't terrible.
AND- since any poor results in Q1 would probably be attributed to delayed shipments, that would simply make Q2 have a stronger showing than it otherwise would have as CLF races to ship out all the extra ore laying around.
"New 52w low post earnings."
Really? For a statement like that to make any sense at all, earnings would have to FAIL to beat estimates of $.02
Where are you getting your numbers? Do you really see that happening?
No. You're just a dumb @#%! short who doesn't do any research of his own, and is going to get burned soon. I hope you don't cover until after earnings. That will be fun to watch.
How iron ore delivery contracts handled?
I'm guessing most of that ore is already under contract, which means CLF would reflect the earnings on the Q1 statements- regardless of whether it gets delivered in Q1 or not.
Unless the contracts state paid on delivery, in which case it's more likely it could affect earnings.
mike, I made a similar thread not too long ago. I wholeheartedly agree.
Casa has been loud all along- now suddenly they haven't spoken in weeks! And they're average is at $25 so it's not like they're selling at a loss here..
Something is up.