Fri, Jul 11, 2014, 4:38 AM EDT - U.S. Markets open in 4 hrs 52 mins

Recent

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

Nam Tai Electronics, Inc. Message Board

s12stocks 8 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 6, 2014 9:13 PM Member since: Aug 19, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • s12stocks s12stocks Jul 6, 2014 9:13 PM Flag

    re:#4 You read my post wrong. I don't believe your numbers are wrong. I believe that number is right.
    re#2: I don't understand your confusion. You answered your own question... policy count is up over 100%, that's the reason reinsurance is up over 100%. That's what's supposed to happen.
    re#3: See #2.
    re#1: if there is a .25% decrease it's totally fine with me.

  • s12stocks s12stocks Jul 6, 2014 12:20 PM Flag

    That's strange. I don't remember any talk about lowering rates. What did they say? And when did they say it?
    Reinsurance is up because the number of policies is up. They were not under insured last year.
    Your reinsurance calculation is not incorrect. As you stated they will pay $117M in reinsurance and there will be an expense of 1/4 of that each quarter.

  • s12stocks s12stocks Jul 6, 2014 4:20 AM Flag

    Let's consider this. The amount of protection they are buying is 2 or 3 times more than what they bought last year. We also know that they have been ramping up the amount policies each quarter for the past year/year and half by a lot. If you look at the amount of in force policies each quarter you can see why they have to buy more reinsurance. We know that reinsurance costs have not been going up as their have been no major disasters in the past several years and it seems the reinsurance market has become very competitive as a result. If you are concerned that we are just paying an increased price for reinsurance, there's currently no evidence supporting that. A more likely conclusion is that the rising reinsurance costs are correlated to the amount of new policies being written and currently on the books. We obviously have more exposure to hurricanes because we're insuring so many more homes.
    You raise a good point about the impact in the near future. There may be an impact to q3 that might cause the ratio between number of policies and reinsurance costs to skew, because of timing as we're writing more and more policies. Over time, everything should even out and the trend is definitely a significant upward trend as we move forward.

  • s12stocks s12stocks Jul 5, 2014 1:11 PM Flag

    This doesn't affect q2. And going forward, this is a good thing. I can't tell from reading your post if you see it as good or bad.

  • "Raymond James raises price target to $26 from $22. Rating outperform"
    Seems to be happening with greater frequency lately. After all this time, looks like we're getting the recognition we deserve. Still undervalued though, even at the raised price target, but headed in the right direction.

  • s12stocks s12stocks Jun 3, 2014 1:34 AM Flag

    I agree with ballen2123. The number of shares sold by the CEO is tiny in comparison to how many shares he has. Also, we're in the middle of a huge turnaround. Not too long ago the stock price was in the middle single digits and now it's over $20. It's totally natural to want to sell a few share after such a huge run up. And might I add, nobody has been selling in these past few years. Having said that, I still wonder why the stock made such a huge move in one day yesterday on very heavy volume. Absent of any news, I wouldn't worry about it. But any time something like this happens, you have to wonder a little bit about what's going on.
    The minor stock selling by insiders doesn't concern me, but I'm curious about the irregular stock price movement. One theory would be that some entity with a big long term position decided to take their profits here after making X times their money and exit. Who knows? If anyone has any idea, please let us know.
    As for earnings, I agree with ballen2123 again. I think $1+ is definitely do-able in Q2.

  • Unfortunately, I don't think they'll be enough of a pullback for me to increase my position. Especially with Q1 numbers coming soon. After that, there won't be any chance to buy. I think people on Wall Street are starting to catch on and pay attention to our stock here which will make it really hard for people trying to go long at a bargain basement price. Although even at $20 it's still quite undervalued, I think the days of fire sale/bargain basement prices are over.

  • s12stocks s12stocks Apr 14, 2014 11:13 AM Flag

    If that's the case his $1.75 doesn't make any sense at all. These "analysts" just aren't doing a good job at all. Without going into too much detail, let's just take the most glaring inconsistency. If his estimates for Q1=.59 and Q2=.67, that's $1.26 right there. Those numbers quite possibly are off but I don't even need to go into that to prove my point that these analysts are off. Anyway, using his numbers, that means he believes $1.75 -$1.26 or $.49 will be made in Q3 and Q4 COMBINED. How does that make any sense??? We made almost that much in Q4 of 2013 alone and revenue is going to be a helluva lot higher in Q3/Q4 2014 than it was last year.
    Whatever analyst is in charge of this company, really has no idea what he's talking about.
    Needless to say, I still think this stock is grossly undervalued, and judging from the stock price action, I think a few more people are finally waking up to this fact on Wall St. We'll see how long it takes for these guys to figure this out.

NTE
7.020.00(0.00%)Apr 21 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
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.