Thanks Grade, it does help. It's good to see the formula laid as you've done. But if the figure you came up with is about 70 cents, I'm still wondering why the analysts are so far off with their average estimate of 49 cents. If you throw out the low ball revenue estimate of $219, the remaining avg of the 6 analysts is in line with Jason's guidance of $270M. They're in line with revenues but not earnings. Anyways, no biggie, just crunching numbers for fun and trying to get a better understanding.
By the way, the loss of NOL's to cancel out taxes is going to really cut down on my original estimate of $3.75 in FY2016 earnings. Say you lose 13 cents in both the June and Sept quarters (no add back in the reconciliation to Non-GAAP earnings), 18 cents in the December qtr, and say 15 cents in the March 2016 quarter, that's a total of 13 + 13 + 18 + 15 cents = 59 cents. This leaves FY2016 earnings at $3.75 - 59 cents = $3.16. With a 15 PE, that's $48. With a 20 PE, that's $64 by March 2016. The hope is that Cirrus does far better in Dec and March qtrs. than we anticipate. Also, without the NOL's to artificially inflate the earnings, Cirrus should be able to command a higher PE purely due to math, say, 25. $3.16 x 25 = $79.
Grade, what I'm wondering about is when will smart phones have 3D holographic displays? And one that you can manually interact with. In 3 years? 5 or 10 years?
Thanks Doug, I looked it up in detail on a couple of websites. I have a much better understanding now....not total or perfect, but better.
I was just looking at the newly revised earning estimates for Cirrus here on Yahoo. The average earnings estimate listed for this June quarter is 44 cents. This is the new revisions by all 7 analysts. At first glance, I thought that it couldn't be right. The lowest estimate was a ridiculous 15 cents. I threw that out, and it raised the average to 49 cents. Still to low, I thought. In the March qtr, Cirrus pulled in $255 million in revenue and came in pro forma (Non-GAAP) earnings of 66 cents. Cirrus is now guiding $260-280M (midpoint of range is $15M higher than $255) for June quarter, so how in the hec can the earnings drop from 66 cents to 49 cents?!? That doesn't make sense. The math can't be right here (recall that I had estimated 75 cents in other post). It's because of the income tax that's going to kick in now! Recall that Cirrus stated in their presentation that they've run out of the NOL's to save them from income taxes. In this past quarter, for their GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliation, they were able to add back 11 cents to arrive at their pro forma (Non-GAAP) earnings of 66 cents. Without it, it would have been 55 cents. So now, looking to the June quarter, with a revenue of $270 M, take away that 11 cent add back in the reconciliation (let's assume a little higher since revenue is higher), instead of what I had previously estimated to be 75 cents in earnings - but let's drop it to 70 cents since I had predicted $290M in rev, rather than the $270 we're working with, take away 12 cents it is now 58 cents. Even if you take away the low ball analyst with the 15 cent estimate, which brings the average from 44 to 49 cents, this still doesn't jive with the 58 cent number. It's a difference of 9 cents. Can anyone explain this gap? It's not huge, but it is sizable.
I know about options and how they work (derivatives), but I've never completely understood the implications for the associated stocks. I've seen posts over the years about "max pain" and such. And that given where the concentration of options lie, it affects where the stock price eventually will end at options expiration. So basically the implication is that the stock price can be willy-nilly manipulated at will to benefit certain parties. So how does this compete with the basic, real supply and demand for stocks? So why couldn't "they" FOREVER hold down a stock price (regardless of earnings?) to satisfy an options profile? Why couldn't a hedge fund just load up on options, and just forever hold down a stock? And make billions upon billions? And just do this forever? Seriously, if they can hold down and manipulate a stock for many weeks, and months, why can't this forever do this? Why can't they just hold down Apple forever to a market cap of 3 billion (instead of $700 billion), and buy options to profit off of it? I know there is a middle ground here....but what is it? How is this all done? Can anyone explain in detail? Not just some generic hand waving of an explanation?
cwb88, can you explain what's in your post? Why does the MT6735 being adopted by these 3 makers mean that Wolfson has the opportunity to be incorporated? Who's being displaced? Does the MT6735 lack sound components that need to be filled? Can you explain?
yeah, I'm so relieved that Cirrus snapped back today after such a bad start. If you look at the daily chart here on Yahoo, the volume had a nice surge towards the end of the day as the price kept slowly creeping up. I think that's a good sign. I say we break through $35 again and may even come close to $36. Yeah, the BP project was 5 years ago...I can't believe it. It felt like last summer. Your buddy also. Looking.
Cirrus is almost trading now at the level of the close at 4 pm yesterday. I can't believe it was down to the mid 32's at one point this morning. If the overall had done better cirrus would be positive.
Grade, what are you referring to? Are you talking about Cirrus now being the leader in the audio space?
So no one has been able to get the new price target by Pipar Jaffray? I saw it on "the street" website with the title stating that Pipar has raised its price target on Cirrus, but to read the rest of the article with the target listed, you had to get "premium membership".
So far, as far as I know, both Northland and Pipar Jaffrey have raised their price targets. Northland raised from $37 to $44. But I can't find what Pipar has raised it to....anyone have that information? I'd also be particularly interested in seeing the commentary from the analysts as well.
Rusty, I'm virtually positive that it's substantially beyond $3 earnings for FY16 (June qtr 15 to March qtr 16). This current quarter June should yield about 75 cents in earnings. And worst case, Sept is also 75 cents. And worst of worst case the Dec and March quarters (3rd and 4th fiscal quarter), are also 75 cents....that right there is $3 earnings for FY 2016. We KNOW that the 3rd and 4th quarters will be close to MONSTROUS (much higher than 75 cents), esp X-mas (Dec quarter). $3.50 to $4.00 is almost assured for fiscal year 2016. I'm sure Grade will chime in tomorrow as to his expectations. He may have more detailed numbers.
Rusty, once Cirrus can move their high content chips into the mid-range phone in Androids....watch out. They already have a nice foothold with Apple and the high end of Samsung. Once they can expand into Samsung's midrange, and expand even more through phone mfg's numbers 3 through 10 (Apple and Samsung are #1 and 2 obviously), man, the revenues are going to come pouring in. As you said, Cirrus could be the next Skyworks for 2015/2016 in terms of stock performance.
nschauer, after today's report, much better things to come. I don't think that I've ever been this optimistic about the company. You can tell Jason is too with what was stated in the Shareholder's Letter and the CC. And yes tomorrow is a new day. There HAS to be upgrades and new price targets coming soon.
nschauer, there was no "buzz kill". The stock spiked to around $35 and change at around 1:30 PM....it continued trading pretty much at that range for the next 2.5 hours. In other words, it had already leveled off. It's not like it was continually climbing. I just checked the latest after hour prices. It's right at $35 and change. In other words, the halt didn't really affect anything. If the market wanted to really buy and drive it up, it would have happened with or without the halt. It just didn't happen. Cirrus had the spike with a large surge in volume at 1:30 to 2 PM, and that was it. Obviously, the numbers were leaked somehow at that time.
That's a good point Rusty. What also provided some comfort was Jason stating that this year is only the "first layer" of their strategy for growth. He's implying that there is a lot more to come in the following years to continue the growth. In other words, hopefully, going forward it won't be like 2012 all over again when Cirrus popped big in 2012, but then deflated big time in 2013/2014.
Rusty, yes. That's what he means. Historically, there's a rise from the 1st to 2nd quarter (June to Sept quarters), but for whatever reason, he thinks that typical jump won't happen this time. Not sure why...some sort of a product mix shuffling. It could be that by taking on Samsung, their ramp up for new products was this past 2 quarters (March and June quarter). That ramp up levels off in the Sept quarter, hence the flattening. Apple does ramp in the Sept quarter, but I'm guessing Jason is playing it safe by lowering expectations.
Thanks Doug. But just remember, this is a rough "back of the envelope" calculation. It could be slightly optimistic, but my guess is that it's probably conservative, potentially very conservative. I'm just very surprised by the afterhour reaction. I would think with these numbers and projection, it would have really popped. Have a good night
Did you guys notice one of the analysts asking about the forgotten LED business? He said something to the effect of "I guess LED is now on the 'back burner'"? Jason's response was that well, we've shifted all our employee and resources to the mobile phone market where our opportunities are much bigger. He followed that with... "and as to what "level" of burner the LED is on, back burner or otherwise, it's NOT on ANY burner". I got a nice chuckle out of that. First time I heard an analyst laugh out loud during the CC's.