The dividend is solid and growing. It was just raised last quarter so it is more likely that it will be raised next quarter not this one.
There would be no point in buying the loans if they were not highly acreative. Medallion loans tend to have a very attractive spread and I think these competitors are bailing out because they want no part of the uber hupla. It's such a small part of their business you can't blame banks for exiting. I hope they give details in earnings.
#$%$? What is in Pakistan? The medallion is just retrieved from the city government, sold and the any leftover value sent to the borrower. It is much easier than any home, consumer, or even business loan.
Fry you short fool!
from prospectus filed with the SEC friday
" We estimate that the average loan-to-value ratio of all of our medallion loans was approximately 37% as of March 31, 2014 and 36% as of December 31, 2013. In addition, we have recourse against a vast majority of the owners of the taxicab medallions and related assets through personal guarantees. For more information, see “Business—Medallion Loans.”
Insiders are not allowed to profit like that. The obvious thing to do is to repurchase the shares they just sold a couple months ago for over $16/share at the top. If Uber really did hurt medallion lending then this would be an obvious way to use the proceeds at a hefty profit! Of course the share price would jump on the news so not many shares would be bought.
My take is that the shorts recognize this is played out so they are talking their book to try and get fools to let them out of the position.
No movement in price or volume. Does this indicate all the fools are already short? End of play? Load up the truck and bring on the squeeze?
TAXI is a bank that is clearly well isolated from any loss the taxi industry may see by super low loan to asset value ratios. The earnings will continue and you will have a huge short position in a very illiquid stock that yields 8% plus the short borrowing rate which will increase.
It is sad that so many investors are so ill-informed. TAXI financing metrics are quite impressive -high interest rate spread with extremely low default rates. The other aspect that they don't get credit for is that efficiency of collection in the case of default. Because it is a business loan for what amounts to a licence, collection is as simple as going to court, getting the ruling and changing the ownership record of the medallion - one stop, no waiting period, no consumer protection. Much more efficient than homes or autos or any other business loans. The medalion is auctioned off and TAXI pays off the loan balance and any expenses and sends the remainder to the debtor. This brutal efficiency is likely the reason there are no delinquent accounts.
Dan Niles was just on CNBC. When asked about Uber he said the regulations are already in place and Uber is going to have to spend lots of money to change or evade them in the future. The last funding round valuation was crazy.
The question I see is why would cities tolerate violations of their regulation? These companies operate in clear violation. The idea that regulation is bad is not new -one of our political parties is based on it -but you can't just go out and violate the law. You have to change it first.
How long will it take to realize that Uber and Lyft refuse to carry most passengers? Minorities? Bad neighborhoods? They violate employment laws by making drivers their own business and don't pay local taxes? They are nothing more than gypsy cabs for the rich -why wouldn't the city tax and regulate them the same as conforming cabs?
I don't see taxi as a buyout target because it is closely held -family management that gives no indication they want out. If they were willing to sell the shares would jump.
A more logical explanation is short interests. The shorts are selling and making "news" that taxis are going extinct in favor of Uber. If you look at the short interest it has been rising. If my theory is right this afternoon they will try to spike the share price down just before the close (gunning for stops). If you have a stop order in beware. If you just want to make money put in a GTC buy order in 3 to 5% below bid today.
The switch clearly did not meet the spec from the very start and if it had gm would not have the huge legal mess it has today. The Eaton quality systems were pretty antiquated (possibly non-compliant) and there was a lot of resistance to moving to Delphi's quality systems even by the time I arrived in 2005. It still seems odd to me -missing a spec like that is a very big deal. Missing it all the way to PPAP is pathetic. In production? I just have a hard time believing that anyone in the DG office knew the link to accidents and fatalities before 2006 or so -there would have been major activity in a relatively small office. Why weren't corrected parts on test? In my entire time there I think I heard someone talk about it once and I didn't know it was our part they were discussing.
If there is knowledge of liability documented it will come out. The one thing for sure is they are not criminal masterminds.
There is no way the recall would have derailed the bailout. In fact, identifying the potential recall would have protected the company completely under bankruptcy law. The only reasons to not disclose it in bankruptcy would be 1 they didn't know or underestimated the liability, or 2 at some level managers understood the liability but suppressed it because of laws that would make them personally liable.
As I said, I think it is #2.
One last note that may be important to shareholders -GM from the late 90s to the bankruptcy was absolutely brutal with it's suppliers. If you look at the number of suppliers that went bankrupt or terminated business with GM in a pile of lawsuits to try to save themselves you will find some explanation for why GM was a mess. It started with Ignasio Lopez but it never ended. The release engineers were then faced with trying to force suppliers to make changes for low price when the supplier was better off walking away. Delphi got the worst of it. Not only were they the largest supplier to GM but GM gave them the expensive union contracts that said the workers get paid even if there is no work for them. In short Delphi could not walk away so GM just killed them.
I could go on and on but the point is this -more than half of every car GM built was designed, validated and produced by people who were treated like crap, bankrupted, layed off, pensions and health care eliminated, and defaulted on while GM handed everything to the UAW. GM didn't get bailed out, all the money the Fed gave GM went directly to the UAW which under bankruptcy law was an unsecured claim -below bondholders, above shareholders. There is no shortage of technical experts for the lawyers to call detailing how cheap GM was.
The other fact -if liability is established but GM bankruptcy protects the new GM why not go after the $50billion the UAW took in bankruptcy? It has absolutely no legal precedent or support.
Ralph BOZO Nader is on now blaming executive personality flaws for loss of life. As you watch consider a more direct and logical answer
how much does each job pay?
engineer responsible for making things work -mid five figures
manager responsible for eng -low six figures
CEO resp for managers and shareholders-low seven figures
Lawyers responsible for NOTHING but blame low eight to ten figures!
If we want a better system, why don't we take some of the money we blow on lawyers and fund a real NHTSA that can step in and take the engineers from the car companies and directly assign them to fix each problem that comes up?