Yeah June 2014 was when the yoy declines started. So the comparisons going forward will be easier. Revenue has stabilized sequentially for a few months as well -- another good sign that the bottom may be in. Of course that doesn't mean things don't get even worse but I think that's unlikely and the long term value is there anyway. I can't tell you where the stock is going for the next few months but I do believe the stock will go much higher over the long term. What mpel has is extremely valuable and when the downturn ends the stock will reflect that.
Mpel is doing better than the vegas stocks. The ggr number was fully expected if not a little better and June's number will be closer to a 25% decline. The worst yoy comparisons are over and should flatten out by year end. IMO the upside opportunity is much better than the downside risk. Mpel is one of only six casino operators in what is the largest gaming market in the world by far and for a long time to come. Even during this downturn it's still profitable with a decent balance sheet and will only grow in the years to come. A no brainer long term.
Yeah it's those funds that racked all that debt, bought bry when crude was at its high, paid out distributions much higher than real cash flow could support, issued units like crazy, etc etc. It's the markets fault.
It's always been a ponzi. Why do you think they issued so many shares over the years and accumulated so much debt? They've basically been lying about how much they spend on maintenance cap ex -- the spending required to simply maintain the same level of production -- in order to fool everybody into thinking all that massive borrowing and share issuance was for growth capital instead of maintaining the distribution. So they sold new shares to new investors to support a dividend to existing investors. How is that NOT a ponzi scheme?
So all you're saying is that they called the bottom before and they were wrong. Now they're saying there's more downside so that means they're right? They have more data points? Well, in another month they'll have another data point and another and another. At which point do they have enough to make them right about something? The point is that sell side analysts always ALWAYS ALWAYS tell you to buy high and sell low. In the last two months they almost all gave up and slashed their price targets drastically. Before that, they were calling bottoms every week. And before that they were telling us the Macau market will double every five years (that's not a joke). So you listen to these clowns?
Morgan stanley had mpel at overweight and a $28 target in january. So they were recommending a buy at much higher levels -- and they were terribly wrong -- so now they're recommending a sell at much lower levels. They've been wrong at every juncture so why do you think they're right now?
Assuming no taxes, share prices as of today
BABA stake: 384Mx$94 =~ $36B
Yahoo Japan stake =~ $8.4B
Net cash at Yahoo =~ $4B
Total =~ $48.4B
Per share =~ 51.5
Then add whatever you think YHOO is worth. I believe it's probably $6B or more.
48.4B + 6B = 54.4B
Per share =~ $58.3
Of course, if you think taxes will be a problem then the calculus changes drastically. The market is worried about that so there's a discount. Considering taxes are 35% or so, that's significant and so the market is probably justified in discounting the shares until that uncertainty is removed.
So tax Baba and YJ at 35%:
23.4 + 5.46 + 4 =~ 32.86B
Or approximately $35/share. That would mean YHOO core is being valued at +$9 right now if you assume BABA and YJ will be fully taxed.
You only get Spinco shares. I assume it won't be called Spinco when it lists. When they value those shares, they will announce a ex-date and holders of YHOO on that date will get Spinco shares and YHOO shares will trade less the Spinco valuation per share price after that date.
Or they could just give a press release about the IRS situation if it's possible the Spinco tax treatment will be affected in any way.
"But the Berry deal was a huge winner."
Really??? Buying another E&P when crude prices were at their highs, when that company was hitting on all cylinders? How has it done for LINE's performance? Are they any more profitable than they were before? No. It was a terrible loser of a deal. Spinning it any other way is absurd.
Galaxy got exactly the number of tables expected, so expect MPEL to get at least 150. There's a hope that MPEL could get more because of the greater non-gaming attractions, but don't rely on that. I believe if May GGR is about ~20-21B the bottom will be in. But that's a couple weeks away. The stock might slide a little or just trade sideways before that. June comps will be much better, so the bottom is close. I don't see anything on the horizon that could be much more negative than what's already happened unless the GGR takes another leg down, which would be a very big surprise. So never say never but I think the long term upside outweighs the short term downside at this point.
The same analyst had a buy rating on MPEL and a $51 price target in June 2014. She called a bottom nearly a year ago and kept calling bottoms all year. Now she says it's too early to call a bottom. Boy, those analysts are really worth listening to, aren't they?
I don't think anybody thinks Macau is finished and that it will never grow -- and grow significantly -- from current levels. The only issue I see is in the short term, the next couple months or so. Does gaming revenue continue to decline -- though it's nearly flattened out sequentially? And how much lower does MPEL go given the lower earnings expectations? I don't know (nor does anybody), but I think it's near enough a bottom to start scaling in, though of course it could always drop another couple bucks before it recovers. YOY comparisons will look much better after May.
One or two years out $19 will seem like a steal IMO. As far as sell side analysts go, the same ones that were predicting doubles last February -- Nomura chief among them -- with "conviction" buys in the 40s are the same ones with sell ratings now under $20 -- that's how much you should trust analysts.
Did they not say explicitly MANY times that they do not need to raise capital for PMIERS??? They said they could take care of the entire 500-700M through derivatives and retained earnings and current holding company capital. They repeated this many times. Now they're saying they've sold a portion of Aus MI in order to meet the US cap requirements? And pay off debt? Which one is it? This management team is utterly atrocious. As cheap as this stock is, these guys have no clue, they give investors absolutely no confidence, and maybe it's already too late to turn it around. If you are sacrificing the good parts of your business to support terrible parts of your business (LTC) you are getting it all wrong. The insurance companies that have made successful turnarounds (like HIG for example or even AIG) have purged the bad parts of their business and invested in what works. Not the other way around.