From BGR 8/28/ 5 PM Matt Margolis wrote “According to sources close to Foxconn’s manufacturing operations the iPhone 6 will come built with sapphire cover screens in both sizes,” he wrote. “These sources have also indicated that the 4.7-inch Phone 6 is being assembled in two varieties, a sapphire cover screen version and a version featuring Gorilla Glass. At this point I do not know the approximate mix between the two cover screen options on the 4.7-inch iPhone 6. My latest check on the 5.5-inch iPhone 6 indicates that all units of the device are expected to come protected by a sapphire cover screen at this point.”
Goldman Sachs Downgrades Rubicon Technology (RBCN) to Sell
June 14, 2013 7:16 AM EDT Goldman Sachs downgraded Rubicon Technology (NASDAQ: RBCN) from Neutral to Sell with a price target of $6, suggesting 24% downside from current levels.
In the downgrade report, Goldman analyst Brian Lee highlights the recent move higher on momentum in LED...
So you are talking about GAAP PE all along. Just to be clear. I don't think any analyst uses GAAP PE. If that's what you believe using GAAP numbers for valuation, so be it. I really don't care that you are short or not. The non GAAP PE for F14 is about 30 or close to it, and F15 non GAAP PE is about 25 per analysts forecast. So PEG is very close to 1 since the op income growth is close to 27% which is the number you gave and is a non GAAP number BTW. Don't mix up the two.
The ttm earnings (F14) ended last month is ~ $1.64 plus or minus a few cents depending on the actual June earnings. The ttm PE is therefore ~30, not 49.
LEDINSIDE, June.30, 2014 - 16:51 — LeahRae
Sapphire substrate related manufacturers are unable to meet increasing demands as the LED lighting industry enters peak season and Apple prepares to launch the new iPhone 6. Prices for upstream ingot and downstream substrate increased in 3Q14, with ingot prices up 5-10 percent. Rise in price has driven up business performance for sapphire substrate related manufacturers.
Rising demands from the LED lighting industry and Apple has led to an undersupply in the sapphire substrate market, driving up cost and profit margins. Sapphire ingot prices have increased to US $4 for 2 inch and US $16 for 4 inch. Prices for 4 inch sapphire ingot has seen a gradual increase each quarter, starting at US $13 in 4Q13 to US $16 in 2Q14, and could increase further to US $16.8-17.65 by 3Q14. Ingot prices in total have increased 30 percent since 4Q13. Price for downstream substrate has likewise increased.
Among sapphire related manufacturers benefiting from increasing ingot and substrate prices, ProCrystal Technology’s revenue has grown over 90 percent over the past five months. Revenue for June is hoped to break RMB 100 million (US $16.1 million), according to legal persons. In addition, 2Q14 will see an increase of 15 percent and YoY revenue is anticipated to show exponential growth. In addition to increase in PSS substrate shipments, ProCrystal Technology has the chance to turn loss into profit during the second half of 2014.
PSS market supply shortage exceeded 30 percent, driving up PSS industry performance. According to legal persons, June revenue for sapphire manufacturers Ridgetech and Aceplux Optoelectronic have the chance to see substantial growth, with Ridgetech’s July revenue anticipated to reach a new record high.
A simple example everyone can understand. IF Cree had $0 op income in 2012, it's 2013/2012 op increase percentage would be infinitive.
F14 VS F13: Rev =$1.651B/$1.387B, up 19.1%. Op inc = $2301m/$182m, up 27.0%. Even if FQ4 misses or exceeds the estimates won't change those numbers much. Operating margin improving and operating earnings growing above 20% yoy. If you are getting into q2q, you are counting individual trees as opposed to looking at the forest, i.e. the big picture. Which means you choose to trade than invest.
Wonder if more shorts may cover before close. Those attended might have heard or seen something that gave today's rally. Overnight some news might break or some upgrades. You never know, just a thought.
The Energy Star testing is the standard. The requirement is that the lamp maintains minimum of 91.6% of the initial luminance after 6000 hours. So it is NOT POSSIBLE for CREE's luminaires that have the Energy Star qualification to loose 30% of the luminance after just 3000 hours.
The company submits LM-80 which is a 6000 hours testing of the LED component used in the luminaire, and with that it can get a 3000 hours actual luminaire (bulb) testing to qualify for Energy Star. Based on what you are saying, CRRE's bulbs already degraded to L70 life after only 3000 hours, or ~10% of the warranty time. If so, the third-party lab certified by EPA or DOE must have seen the degradation you claim to exists since they test the bulbs for at least 3000 hours, and need to continue to test after the ES certification according to the EPA rules.
From Energy Star Website under third-party certification:
To ensure consumer confidence in the ENERGY STAR label and to protect the investment of ENERGY
STAR manufacturing partners, EPA requires all ENERGY STAR products to be third-party certified. This requirement includes product testing in an EPA-recognized laboratory that meets international standards for quality and competency, review of the product by an EPA-recognized certification body to determine ENERGY STAR eligibility, and ongoing testing to ensure that products continue to deliver superior energy efficiency and performance. The specific roles of these third-party organizations are described in the ENERGY STAR Process Flow Diagram PDF (97KB).
In addition to the specific conditions and criteria for these organizations, EPA also publishes directives to clarify and elaborate on the responsibilities of EPA-recognized accreditation bodies (ABs), certification bodies (CBs), and laboratories.
EPA establishes partnership with brand owners of products (manufacturing partners). These ENERGY STAR partners must have products tested in EPA-recognized laboratories and certified by an EPA-recognized CB prior to labeling. All certified products will also be subject to ongoing verification testing and challenge testing as described in the Conditions and Criteria for Recognition of Certification Bodies PDF (60KB), as well as directives 2011-04 PDF (80KB) and 2011-06 PDF (52KB). As part of EPA's activities to maintain the integrity of ENERGY STAR, products that fail to meet ENERGY STAR requirements will be subject to EPA's disqualification procedures PDF (59KB).
Manufacturers who label products as ENERGY STAR without obtaining third-party certification put the integrity of the program at risk and undermine the investment of those who honor their commitment. Companies found to be labeling products without obtaining the necessary certification will be required to remove the label from these products.