I expect you are right, Mark, but my cash position is over 40%, so it would take over 3 years at the rate I am going to be all in. I know I will never find the bottom or top, I just want to be positioned right when it happens. It worked last time - I got my cash position to 40% in early 2013, and then kept it there. I was early, but now I have plenty of dry powder. Assuming you are right, as I think you are, I will be loaded with stock at the bottom. That's good enough for me.
I got an exchange offer for my Goodrich Petroleum debt - suffice it to say it looks like they will be declaring bankruptcy very soon, and debtholders may get nothing. So far, I have gotten about 20% of my investment back, so it won't be a total loss, but not good.
As for the market, if you are not fully invested, think about very slowly increasing your exposure to stocks. I made a purchase in January (SFL, in fact - I posted it here) and I will make another one in February. Not a lot, but enough to make sure that when the bottom does come, I will have more money in stocks than I did last summer. One modest purchase a month, averaging about 1% of my portfolio each time, is about what I am going to do.
An old, old indicator is to look at the ratio of the Dow Jones Transports to the Dow Jones Utilities. It used to lead an upturn in the general market by several months, and it uses more than one stock, which can always be problematic.
Ethanol is not required in gasoline. You can buy ethanol free gasoline here where I live, in Idaho. I'm sure you can buy it in most places around the country (probably not the corn belt). It is more expensive than gas with ethanol and there doesn't appear to be a lot of demand for it, at least around here.
I think AA is a good medium term buy. Longer term, I would be concerned about technological obsolesence. They aren't known as great innovators. On the bright side, neither is any other aluminum company, and if Alcan had any good ideas brewing, they probably got cut when they went private.
Good buy, in my opinion.
OK, I just noticed Bob said the preferred is cumulative, so that explains why they are paying the dividend. Sorry about that. But still, the strange goings on with the debt make me want to stay away.
Thanks for the kind words, Mark, but I'm afraid I have little to offer on the subject of VNR except to look elsewhere. There should be no dearth of distressed oil and gas debt showing up on the markets in the next year or so.
As you say, the preferred does look overpriced relative to the debt - the preferred is perpetual, and appears to be non-cumulative, although I am not sure about that. If it's not cumulative, and they have no intention of paying a common dividend, there is no reason for them to pay it at all, and I'm surprised that they are paying the one coming up in February. Before I would touch this preferred, I would make sure that it is cumulative. If it is not, I would run away - although even if it is cumulative, as you say, it looks overpriced.
The biggest question surrounding VNR is the debt exchange going on right now. The deal is you hand in $1000 of your 7.875% notes due 2020, and get either $450 or $400 of new 7% notes due 2023. Looks like a terrible deal, the only reason I see for doing it is if the new notes have a senior call on the assets. That would be one of those ironic Wall Street deals that only works for the investors if some take it and some don't, which means you are dealing with slimey management. I'm not sure that's what's going on, but there are just too many red flags here - as I said, there should be plenty of other places to look appearing very soon. Oh, and by the way, the new notes may not be tradeable, so you are locked in until 2023 or the next exchange offer.
Index funds look pretty good right now.
I think he meant Boeing, not Bank of America. I think Boeing is going to make a lot of money in the next few years.
Then the preferred will rocket back to $25/ share. The common may do better, but it seems an unlikely thing to count on.
I don't know the company like you do, I just like to play the percentages, that's all.
Interesting. I love senior securities of troubled companies.
If you get the shares, you will be getting at least a 25% yield, with the next ex date about 2 months out. The stock trades at a big spread, so there is the possibility that you will have trouble selling it once you have it, so you might own it for a little while. The stock sold at close to par last May, and since then lost about 60% of its value. If the OP is right, and the company turns it around, it could go back near par again - a double or better. There is also enough shareholders equity that it is possible you will get something if the company fails.
The common of shipping companies can yield tenfold returns from trough to peak, this will not do that - you might get a triple from appreciation to the redemption price, and if you hold it for 4 years you get your money back again from dividends. But timing the purchase and sale of the common perfectly is essentially impossible. Timing this, from this purchase price, is easier, assuming the company does prosper, and the common goes up at all.
If your plan is to hold the stock for a few weeks, sell on news, and book a short term gain, the the common is more liquid and the better play. But for anything longer than that, I like the preferred.
Don't forget Lampert over at Sears - KMart. Also, Fredricksen's inner circle has some legal difficulties right now, and that can't help matters.
I own a big slug of CXO, and also like oil service company HP.
I have posted here before about the idea of buying bonds of bankrupt/near bankrupt oil companies. That will be much harder to research, but that is why there is some real opportunity there. I have some Goodrich petroleum bonds, which are very cheap now, but they may be a little too speculative.
The big problem for FRO right now is that their customers are wishing they hadn't signed the contract. Anyone who chartered a tanker for storage in the past two years is wondering if it might be time for a career change. FRO will continue to rake in charter fees for a while, but you can't make a living by beggaring your customers.
Things could turn around, and I am in no way guaranteeing that FRO will go under, but I still think it is more likely than not, and I think it is extremely likely that they will cut or suspend the dividend, which will hurt SFL.
The future earnings depend on the health of the affiliates, which is anything but solid. Golden Ocean is essentially gone, which means SFL's balance sheet is not as good as it looks, and it will be even more geared if/when FRO and SDRL go under. SFL has stopped getting dividends from most of its affiliates. Soon it will stop getting interest payments and charter fees. That will take a bite out of earnings.
I think SFL will be a survivor, but there will be some pain between now and then.
Ah, yes - thanks Kee. It's hard to keep track of all the potential bankruptcies. There could be some unpleasant years for SFL, but I think they will survive. I owned Gotaas-Larsen back when they were an independent company - they were a big moneymaker, it was kind of a shame when they were bought out.