@ truth: Thanks for providing the last profitable year for CIEN. You'll notice that the question mark indicated that I wasn't sure, so I'm happy to now know that CIEN has turned only 5 years of consecutive losses instead of the 12 that I had guessed. Still, 5 years in the red is nothing to crow over.
I see CIEN as overvalued by its actual earnings, not judging by apparent growth. If you believe that a company coming off 5 years of losses and going into the black is growth . . . well, some people like to invest in stories of growth, but I prefer more conservative measures of real value.
You're welcome to ignore book value if you like, truth. We all judge companies by our own yardsticks. As for the false choice between board clown and dull basher, I'm sorry that you resort to name calling. Life is too short to parry with board trolls.
I've had my say, taken my profits, and won't hang around either dealing or accepting abuse. Good luck to CIEN longs and enjoy your ride.
If (and that's a big "IF") CIEN earns a buck in 2014, that's still a forward PE of 22. With the historic average S&P 500 PE is just under 16, CIEN had better be a sterling performer for the foreseeable future because there's zero room for error even though CIEN has a rich history of underperforming expectations due to unforeseeable circumstance. Touting CIEN because it's not carrying stratospheric value like Tesla or Chipotle is setting a mighty low bar for value. Lastly, I hope that you realize that analyst price targets are simply a joke. For real value, check out the Book Value: -0.81.
CIEN shareholders should wish that they were lumped in the into the same pile as CSCO. CSCO pays a dividend, regularly turns a profit and has a net $34 billion cash in the bank after deducting debt. CIEN has never paid a dividend, has a net debt of $730 million and has turned an annual profit since -- when . . . 2001? CIEN will be buffeted by the same technological winds as CSCO and is much less able to withstand the hit. This is essentially the same company that sold for $13 a share a year ago and has only lost money since then. Now, why should a value investor see CIEN as anything but a short play?
"Zillow Pro for Brokers program has reached a milestone with more than 200 participating real estate brokerages." A year and half after this program's release, fully 200 brokerages are using it. Boy, I'll bet that'll generate tens of thousands of dollars profit for Zillow. What's Zillow's market cap now? Oh yeah, $2.9 billion. Why????
All too true. Rascoff talks Zillow up as if it were 1999 and the idea of online real estate is an emerging industry instead of a saturated, mature market being fought over by Zillow, Trulia, Move and many smaller local- and regional players. Ten years into it, and Zillow still doesn't know how to actually make money in this business.
Deutsche Bank analysts' judgment is clouded by Euro-bank envy. $6 target? In your dreams. Since 1997, Santander has dipped to around $6 briefly three times during major crises. All the data points to this moment being early in Santander's recovery, not slipping back down for no reason.
It amazes me that one of the world's largest banks reports 3Q earnings and it seems that only a short wire story covers the event. If Santander were headquartered in New York, this turnaround would be the most talked-about financial story of the day. Anyhow, congratulations to Santander, Emilio Botin and Javier Marin Romano for another sterling quarter. Thanks for guiding Santander through such treacherous financial waters -- from grateful, longtime shareholders.