Fri, Sep 19, 2014, 7:20 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation Message Board

rabies_00 35 posts  |  Last Activity: Sep 18, 2014 3:25 PM Member since: Mar 11, 2011
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to


    by pooroldfred57 Jul 29, 2014 6:32 AM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 29, 2014 12:05 PM Flag

    Previous management related to the bribery charges has already been replaced. The way it is being handled is all part of a formula. Do you find it odd that Smith settled these charges the day before Ruger's earnings? If Ruger misses by just a fraction of a penny, what do you think will happen to Smith's stock price? What do you think Smith intends to do with $150 million in cash? Come on people...the game is obvious. Drive the price down as low as possible and buy more of the company back. They will keep the good news to a minimum until they are satisfied with shares outstanding, and I'd be guessing they are getting pretty close. Maybe they will have some more insiders sell just to add a little icing to the cake. If it were me, I'd be gunning for 40 million outstanding, but they are currently looking at 45 with cash on hand. If they initiate another whopper buy back before Smith's earnings release, it's a good sign the earnings release will be good. If they can reduce the shares and possibly get additional revenue from a government contract, SWHC and RGR valuation will be close to identical. You do the math. The next buy back announcement should be getting real close.

  • Reply to

    2M charge Q4 2014

    by rcapatain Jul 28, 2014 2:34 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 28, 2014 4:26 PM Flag

    Just a little bit more stink bait to hold the price down. Gotta buy these shares back on the ultra cheap. Cheap isn't good enough.

  • rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 24, 2014 1:34 AM Flag

    If they used their cash to acquire themselves as Debney has stated more than once, we can add 15% to share value immediately which would easily put us in the $15++ price range. A substantial, similar to Beretta, military contract would lock in robust revenue growth. If combined with the reduction in share count, debt could be wiped clean in just over a year and PPS in the teens will seem like a distant memory. It's a perfect storm. * If the military is looking to replace their current side arms, Beretta apparently hasn't been able to make the accomodations they are looking for in the M9/92fs platform, which means they are strongly considering a major switch. My gun shop still only has the M&P 45's (no other calibers in S&W polymers). All other brands seem to be well stocked. M&P is in extremely high demand and it's not because it's a super saver bargain, it's because of the quality.

  • Reply to

    I would like to discuss the following:

    by equity_360 Jul 17, 2014 11:09 AM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 18, 2014 2:08 PM Flag

    I don't follow atk very much. Buying Savage and buying Bushnell are two totally separate animals. Atk production/testing facilities are huge with all the machining equipment you can think of. If atk really wanted to get into the firearms segment, they would not "have" to buy an existing company. They are fully capable of engineering, testing, and manufacturing their own product. Bushnell was an acquisition in optics, perhaps an area of engineering atk was looking to better establish or was lacking in. Savage has been around for a long time, but over the past 10 years they have made a big push from a mediocre firearm to much higher quality ones. Sub MOA right out of the box on a $500 rifle is very impressive. The tack driving affect of a $1500 Weatherby at 1/3 the cost is eye catching to many consumers. Remington rifles have a great reputation and are very reliable, but I feel like Remington puts much more innovation into their shotguns ie the Versa Max. If I were to go rifle shopping today, Remington is an option, but is definitely not a priority. Shotgun shopping would have Remington at the top of my list.

    On a Smith note pertaining to the $150 million in cash currently on hand, an acquisition of a rifle manufacturer would bring much lower margin to the table. Smith may be better off fighting for a military contract with low margin rather than acquiring a rifle manufacturer with potentially lower margin. Savage and Remington are private so I have no numbers to evaluate what they might be worth besides some educated guessing. If Smith's inventory is around 90 million carrying a market value for the entire company somewhere close to market cap, both Savage and Remington are presumed to have much higher inventory levels which would likely value them equal to or greater than what Smith is worth. So $150 million to acquire Savage or Remington is nowhere close to what would be needed using inventory as a gauge.

  • Datbe aka Libertee claims that institutions are selling "hand over fist" and they are the same investors that have been loading up on Smith in the past. This is not true. There was only one note worthy sale which came from Eagle Asset Management, which was about 905K shares. All other exits/sales reported 06/30/14 were very small meaning we (just yahoo message board users) easily hold way more than what was sold. The big dogs are holding. I'd expect Vangaurd and FMR to reduce holdings slightly if another big buy back hits to keep them below 10% ownership. This is Datbe logic people. Speaking with a serpents tongue of lies. The definition of a shelf registration is nothing close to the definition of a secondary public offering, but Datbe will keep saying it is over and over in hopes that he will be believed. Looks like we got the same thing again with institutional ownership. Last I remember Datbe's SPO theory, he was swearing it would go below $5 while the stock was around $10. It really went to $17. Maybe his idiocy is an indicator of the next run. If I recall correctly, Datbe always said he was leaving the board never to return again...aren't we getting the same thing from Libertee now?

  • Reply to

    I'm not a Beretta 92FS fan but:

    by libertee4all Jul 11, 2014 10:02 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 11, 2014 10:41 PM Flag

    Um your pulling numbers from 1984...boy you sure do love to reach. I'm not sure if you've heard, but the M&P has a stainless barrel and slide, not aluminum or carbon steel. The most common reason a steel frame would fail is shock....a polymer frame offers flexibility to shock and expansionary properties resulting from temperature change. I'm not sure if you've actually disassembled a polymer framed handgun, but if you look closely, the frame is designed to take on little to no wear. If you believe technology can't compete with 1984, I want what your smoking.

  • rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 11, 2014 10:25 PM Flag

    Regardless of caliber requirements, if the M&P line offers lighter weight and higher quality, it's most definitely a contender. Margin will be affected, however the steady revenue stream and word of mouth testimonial reviews passed from our soldiers to the citizens would prove to be the best free advertising any company could ask for. At that point SWHC would be slamming RGR in revenues and margin. I do not agree with your acquisition theory resulting from the note issuance. I think it's going to be the final buyback move in the program. I'd like $150 million, but it's most likely going to be $100 million thrown at it in the exit. Hopefully, the price will keep falling with the stink bait Debney is using so they get more shares on the ultra cheap. The next step would be paying down the "Revolver" loan that was originally taken for the first buy back. The senior notes will offer more flexibility in terms of maturity and lower rates compared to the Revolver. An acquisition isn't off the table, but it's unlikely without a huge increase in demand most likely to come from a big contract.

  • Reply to

    What are they borrowing another $75M for?

    by jctuttle14 Jul 11, 2014 2:38 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 11, 2014 8:25 PM Flag

    It's been over reacting to Smith's tride and true low ball guidance that is always beaten. It has taken the bait, lets see how far it runs with it. Buying the stock on margin? Lol 5% annual rate on seniors...not even close to margin risk. If Smith gets to 40 million outstanding and Ruger is at 20 million outstanding, what do you recon the price could go to? This cash cow can pay down the debt with no problems.

  • Reply to

    Borrowing another 75mil....

    by libertee4all Jul 10, 2014 7:49 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 11, 2014 12:05 PM Flag

    You might be right about $10 before $16...I hope you are...that'll get us to $30 much faster. Debney's packing the powder for it right now. Comparative valuation among competitors will play a major role in stock pricing. About 15 million more shares off the market would put Smith at $30ish in comparison to Ruger's valuation. $13 is a steal.

  • Reply to

    Borrowing another 75mil....

    by libertee4all Jul 10, 2014 7:49 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 11, 2014 11:19 AM Flag

    Debney knows what he's doing guys. His "somber" demeanor was necessary to take some of the fire out of the stock. I wouldn't be surprised if they withheld shipments in Q4 once they beat Q4 for the previous year...this might explain the increase in inventories. Until it's FOB, it doesn't hit A/R and remains in inventory. Flatlining growth forecasts is a key metric during a buyback process. Insiders selling options is a nice little addition to help stave off excessive stock gains as well. It looks like Smith is going to make another stellar move and I'd bet it's going to be for another $100 million buy back. My gun shops haven't had any shields or bodyguards for a long time. CTD only had 1 listing for a body guard a few weeks ago, which is unusual. Demand is still outpacing supply for these concealables, which explains the wide spread in the NICS and Adjusted NICS. CCW permits are still going up which is great news for the Shield and Bodyguard demand. It's a shame they aren't on the shelf to buy. Ammunition availability is much better, but pricing may be discouraging range enthusiasts. If orders were held last quarter to make the earnings appear to be plateaued, Q1 results should be good...possibly better than good and if they are planning another bulk buy back in the very near future. Debney knows his opportunities to buy back Smith on the ultra cheap are growing thin. Like I've been screaming for a long time...if there's good growth PE should be 17 or higher, stale but still profitable should be close to a PE of 13, and a PE below 10 is for companies struggling to stay in the black. Another bulk buyback may have a more positive affect than the first one especially if the price keeps dropping on the stock. Enjoy folks.

  • Reply to

    Gun demand has peaked!

    by buyrightone Jul 8, 2014 4:04 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 9, 2014 4:37 PM Flag

    Growth is irrelevant. Smith has never received fair valuation based on past, present or future results. I'm watching inventories and they are steadily up ticking. They couldn't secure a contract with previously low inventories and demand at ultra high levels. The buy back will secure earnings as long as the market continues to give unfair valuation.

  • Reply to

    Gun demand has peaked!

    by buyrightone Jul 8, 2014 4:04 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 9, 2014 1:45 AM Flag

    very true...some bought in way before $9. The fact of the matter is PE is ridiculously low. There are tons of companies out there which can't put a penny to the bottom line carrying PE's of 17 or higher. In that respect alone, Smith's revenue stream could drop by 20% carrying a PE of 10, and it would still be extremely undervalued. The further she falls back to earth, the more valuable this stock will become with the buy back program in place. Let it fall back to $3/sh. Debney and the board will keep pulling shares off the market more aggressively the cheaper it gets. If it drops to $10, kiss another 10 million shares available good buy. It's going to be a long game to play, but there is a method to his madness.

  • rabies_00 rabies_00 Jul 1, 2014 2:44 AM Flag

    How long can management hold the stock price down to maximize buy back value? At what point, if there is a point, will management be satisfied with the number of shares outstanding? Low balling on their forecasts and selling small amounts of their option awards will only work for so long. What is the end game? There's a few more prudent questions for ya.

  • rabies_00 rabies_00 Jun 25, 2014 5:13 AM Flag

    I'm going to say this again as it appears there is a gross misinterpretation of the term "warranty". It warrants against DEFECTS in material and workmanship. Worn out firing pins, slides, barrels, mag catches will never be covered under warranty. I feel like I'm explaining what a Secondary is to datbe. Smith and Wesson does not offer a lifetime guarantee. Learn the difference.

  • Reply to

    Strong projection for fy2015

    by equity_360 Jun 24, 2014 8:06 PM
    rabies_00 rabies_00 Jun 25, 2014 3:43 AM Flag

    Forecast low to slow the uptick during a buy back program. That's all this is. Smith didn't want to say buying at $18 was too salty, so they held their authorized buy back on a slightly weaker forecast (but still highly profitable). They know what they are doing as should the rest of the longs. This is a text book move. Short interest will go through the roof long enough for them to complete the buy back. If this is the last round of buy backs, expect Q1 to be exceptionally good against a low forecast. Then debt reduction, and if nobody tries to buy them out, a dividend. It's blatently systematic. Beating 2014 earnings and sales will be unlikely, but that won't change the cash going to the bottom line by much.

9.80-0.24(-2.39%)Sep 19 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

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.