Agree... the putz daytrader shorts took this down in conjunction with the otr "news"... those dweebs all shorted hard with algo blite in the first 7 minutes of trade and will need to cover before the close. LOL
Of course, none of the tape today has anything to do with longer run trendlines being drawn here based on emerging competitive landscape, but it is fun to trade like a moronic daytrader when the gain extraction is so easy. We'll close out our little 12k trade at $66 or so when the pm longs and likely the desk buyback try to skewer the early tape shorts.
definitely sell algos looking to be timed with the otr "news" that 2.0 is going to be received about like a bag of S buring on the front step on halloween.
The surprising thing is that the cheerleaders seem to be playing ostrich with the "cheap shares"... our buyside trader expected this impact to last about 15 minutes, but seems to have lots of good buzzkill dragging in behind it. LOL
Interesting to see how easy it was to shake the tree here, but there are lots of newbies who think all is well... still, we expect at least one bounce a few points higher for a few days before any more rough news on revenue or margin compression or more serious selldown. Where's all the gleeful longs taking this back up into OTR's "global survey" comments?
I don;t follow Greenberg... so you must not have read the post past the title. The interesting part is the substance of what herb said here. I think this is one of those rare pieces where his comments are largely correct (vs wrong 99% as I wrote).
And read what Cramer said down the thread -- he did not "win the battle" with herb here. Toward the end, he is essentially saying, wow, i did not realize that part.
Did you see our long trade this morning? Seems we were the only buyer down below $63.80. Here's to hoping the company turns on the buyback clerk sometime this morning, otherwise we'll let the staff buy their own pizza today. LOL
No f head, our buyside trader wanted to go long and my partner is humored by that. As some may have noted, my partner doesn;t post much these days... he's too busy counting hatched chickens. LOL
I had to unveil you from ignore, so obviously you are a putz ignored prior. But how's your long doing from $89? LOL
That sure looks like a serious sell program testing the bid. LOL
But at $63.75, we'll trade some pizza money long. We don't think we are even close to the buyback plan or momo players giving up yet.
the playbook has played out so far... except the eroding fundamental story here has us uninterested in re-establishing a serious long anytime soon.
goog and Read the article titled "Cramer vs. Greenberg: The Battle of Green Mountain" if you missed it...
We think Greenberg is a wind bag and great wrongway indicator 99% of the time, and we tend to tune out Cramer because the premise of his show is ridiculous and his recommendations are usually wrong and all over the place even though he is a knowledgeable and bright guy.
But my partner sent me the article noted under the title of this post last night after I left. Goog the title to read an interesting exchange that does not show up in the yhoo headline recap here.
all the morons hyping gmcr here... and also the shorts bashing the longs here over the last year. LOL
Anyone reading my posts over the last year plus here, making fun of "einhorning" thesis back then (different thesis and emphasis now) who independently substantiated anything they doubted our comments on prior to following our investment and trading direction made over 300% ytd -- because we did. Ignoring hedging and premium writes, we did that by being long from $18 to $61, then by rebuying at $73 in July and riding that to the high 80s where we bailed on the largest trading sleeve carried all year and hedged out the core at 85ish before selling out the core long and leaving on half the box (hedge) short down to 73 we said, or even $60 or below.
We wrote about all of that and even most of our option trades and hedging as we did them. See, though the chumps don't understand, we have nothing to hide here and, no, we don't use multiple aliases like most of them obviously do as seen in repeated phrases, themes and misspellings.
Just for stockman_1 idiot and two or three other morons calling me names, go back and read my posts as the stock dropped below $74.. you'll see a couple flip trades (short) where we made the point that things were playing out as per the program. We have not been short since we covered the box short. We are rooting for the stock to bounce on committed cheerleader buying, the aggressive buyback plan, and other momo chasers panting as evidenced by moronic hypsters seen here since about our "heads up" on the downside risk coming if they failed to introduce carbonation on Sep 10th -- after mgmt hyped it twice at conferences in the month prior to Sep 10th.
put the chump on ignore... i just did and it cleaned this board well.
the rest of the article is more newsworthy... but file it all under bfd
ccording to Federal Court documents the Massachusetts-based Dunkin’ Donuts corporation is suing the owners of ten franchises across Central Virginia.
The doughnut giant claimed that CDG Virginia, which is affiliated with each location, didn’t pay mandatory fees and lagged behind on lease payments. The franchise owners then counter sued. A temporary agreement reached in May, crumbled in August leaving an endless stream of hungry customers on the outside looking in.
“They need to get their stuff figured out,” Caswell said.
A court mandated mediator will try settling the seven-month saga now winding its way through Federal Court.
Charlie Kamtchoum,who managed a Dunkin’ Donuts in Maryland thinks of the workers left without a paycheck.
“I know from working at a Dunkin’ Donuts, people love their Dunkin’ Donuts, man. It was super shocking,” says Kamtchoum.
“First of all it is a minimum wage job. That $7.25 is big– especially if you’re a student. You need that money and paycheck,” he added.
An endless stream of frustrated customers say its time both sides strike a deal.
“I just hope they can resolve their problems,” says customer Lulee. “I’m very sorry. I’m disappointed they’re closed.”
Customers say it is time to make the donuts, so they’re left looking for them elsewhere.
“Consistency. It is always the same doughnut,” says die-hard customer Chris Caswell. “Dunkin’ Donuts is very important.”
At last check with Dunkin’ Donuts crossed off his to do list, we watched Chris Caswell walk off heading to Panera.“It’s only a block away but bagels aren’t the same as donuts.”
If a deal cannot be reached between the bickering sides a trial date in US Federal Court is scheduled for October 24th. At least four other area Dunkin’ Donuts locations remain open for business and unattached to the legal case.They include the Short Pump store at 4050 Spring Oak Drive, 7300 Staples Mill Road, 5113 Oaklawn Blvd. in H
My comment on short calls (writing calls) were ironic, but we doubt einhorn is buying any calls of any duration. LOL We also doubt he plans to cover down 30%... if he didn't cover at $18, he's not going to cover at $48, especially if his share erosion comment (25%) has already happened. We do know sbux has the biggest ss share already, and, licensing fees aside on those (none for Peet or Whole Foods growing share), no one would believe each of those pods is driving the same operating leverage as proprietary gmcr produced/distributed brands,
Next, size of market is part of the math, so is share. The bigger pieces are new and premium product competitors rapidly capturing share gains and sustained margin compression. See einhorn's comments in Forbes and the cnbc interview and post on dnkn's new 1/3 off promo for the next 40 days comments today.
Goog ss to see dozens of new promos/products and sellers, both licensed and not.
Here's another data point underscoring the emerging pricing "competition" has only just begun in the SS market. Starting Thursday, Dunkin donuts will be selling their various kcups "through the holiday season" at a price roughly one-third off their "regular price" for this brand preferred by many DNKN customers. Rhetorical, but might other "new competition" referred to by Kelley in Sep and again last week offer similar discounts on this fat margin business? PEET and Whole Foods are not paying GMCR any licensing fees, and they are well positioned to use that margin advantage to step up premium pricing discounts even more than DNKN is here. DNKN is a licensed partner with GMCR, but the margin and operating leverage compression seem bound to become more pressing near term.
From the new DNKN campaign and blitzing on their website among their Holiday gift ideas:
..."beginning on Thanksgiving, November 28, and continuing through the holiday season, guests can purchase Dunkin' Donuts' K-Cup® packs, for use with the Keurig® K-Cup® Brewing System, for the special price of two boxes for $19.99. Both offers are available while supplies last at participating Dunkin' Donuts restaurants nationwide."
quality comments, but read what you wrote -- you don;t really believe the partnered/license fee generation is pari passu operating leverage and pretax contribution at the same level as GMCR controlled sourcing, production/packaging and distribution, do you? As for why they do not want to disclose the arrangements, clearly that would hinder future term negotiation, but do you think they could provide a relevant range and comparison for transparency purposes? We do and believe they do not for the reason in my first sentence.
My key point wrt SJM is that they note their premium SS product is doing ok... the lesser brands, the mass of GMCR level products we think, are flat, dead flat in the latest quarter due to what SJM described as "new competitors emerging" in the SS space in recent months. Put simply, players like SBUX, DNKN and Whole foods are "suddenly" taking SS share. You know we made fun of Einhorn's 6 point thesis last year, but his key point is relevant for GMCR and has them shaken up enough to be talking about it every call -- and now a focus of EVERY sellsider where it was not prior. This issue is the shift to premium and ultra premium brands, cloud over future share, margins coming down for all players competing for SS share, the implications of all of that for GMCR's operating leverage the specter of other brewers/ formats coming about.
We also can;t quite get to your conclusions either paragraph, but thanks for the thoughtful comments as they at least make for a rational thought process to consider... something missing in all of these momo #$%$ comments being foamed about here since early September.
You can't even write a sentence without syntax. Let me guess though, you have read a FINRA pamphlet? Was in in #$%$ or farsi LOL
What a gumptard... clueless and wrong on every point, and you can;t even write without syntax. #$%$ trading club? yeah, You must be part of the TPX and HLF self impalation trading club tart group. And man or man is this of your multiple aliases a valuable resource for comparing discount brkoer fees as a public service. ROFLOL
Add to soutbuckeye's insight that shorting stock provides cash paying down margin debits... Most retail investors are likely using less than $1m or so of margin and likely paying at least 4-5% to borrow money, short shorting to reduced net net long capital invested (reducing debt) is saving that money, which, even tax effected, is still considerably more saved than paying a small dividend. Further, leverage lines in place for most hedged funds are less than the small dividend yield, even before incorporating tax deductibility of the debt interest.
Last, guys short serious shares here are likely hedged, perhaps with short calls and or long shares, the latter of which can be purchased the day before the ex date if desired to neutralize the dividend impact.
So this complete schmuck is calling me names? LOL at what a moron will write. But a few stomps:
First, we are not putting down individual investors, only morons trying to dis me. There are several here more analytical and brighter than anyone following the sector for the sell side. We enjoy sharing with them.
Second, I have only one sign in name on yhoo and no time to waste with any idea of multiple aliases like this f head suggests. Same for my partner. If you have been reading this board over the last few days, though, it is clear schmuck uses several aliases.
Our record on names and ideas and perspectives we choose to share on yhoo is not about influencing retail traders who do not matter to the tape. Sometimes it is to provoke counterpoint, others times to counter what are obviously the posts of morons paid to post dog S all day long. Case in point is revealed by those who search the terms "enihorning" and "einhorner" right on this little message board. selfdschmuck can suggest we work for Dave, but that speaks for itself last year as we advocated owning this from $18 to $61, and then $73 to $85+, and then bailed, explaining why we did on the day we exited the trading sleeve, then again as we hedged the core and then sold out the long from the fund while retaining half the box (hedge) short for the run we anticipated down to at least the low $70s if not back to sub $60. Hello? As we said the week before the CC, the risk reward had mollified the near term downside so we took off the short just below $60. Facts...
The moron suggests I need a course in option strategies. Who is panicking underwater here? LOL We sell premium regularly to morons like him who think weekly call options are a great way to speculate with massive leverage. That's how option monkeys find themselves living with mommy and working at the carwash again.
He also thinks he knows ICA and other rules, but apparently has never read a pamphlet on private, unregistered funds. LOL
Thank you. If you have read our views since last october here and had core long and trading long positions when we did,you've made a bundle -- on the order of the 300% or so we have here excluding hedging costs. Yet our analysis of the stock's risk reward math is flipped from that we had up until Sep 10th and the carbonation delay for 2-3 years.
Instead of growing rev and earnings in excess of 50% as things were two years ago, or even 15%+ guided for 2013 and the "new norm" here during each of the last 3 Q, mgmt is now guiding for high single digits for 1H14 and hopefully rising to mid teens for 2H14 if no further slippage in share and no unanticipated new entrants -- both of which happened unexpectedly during the Sep Q.
If Einhorn's thesis continues to unfold on that pathway, revenue, cash flow and eps growth are all destined for further compression. Mgmt should be thinking about buying back stock alright, but it may be wise to consider watching how things pan out on the SS market for a few Q before being aggressive on share buybacks for this company... perhaps that timing would line up beautifully for the carbonation rollout in 2016.