IBM probably has been buying shares but there are rules on buy backs in the market that restrict what a company can do. I'm not really familiar with these restrictions but they are designed to prevent a company from supporting its share price. That's legitement in some cases where the shares are going down on fundamentals but by my calculations this is manipulation. It's too bad these people are protected by well intened rules (I guess SEC rules) WW
CSCO is falling due to temporary factor, low holiday volume, media negatives, and buyers waiting for some sign of a bottom. My guess is that this will not occur until after the next earnings report and it's anyone's guess what the reaction will be. The next time it may move up if it falls into the teens first. WW
The blitz of negatives being aimed at IBM is indicative of planted material to boost the gains of short sellers, There are always frivolus lawsuits filled against major corporationss and we don't see them hyped like this latest NSA thing. The attack on IBM shareholders is criminal really. These people have absolutely no moral restraint in pursuit of profit and many small investors unsophisticated enought not to see the market is being manipulated are being cheated. There is a place in hell for them because justice comes to us all. Sure they'll make some big bucks but decent people do it honestly. They have used the after market and low trading days around the holidays together with a blitz of manufactured negative media to drive the price down while probably using options as well as short positions to accomplish their myschief. It's an opportunity for those who can see through the games they are playing and I too will take advantage of it but deplore the activity. WW
txtrader77 Your IBM bashing post are typical. They are opinion without substance.
IBM and ACN will become more and more competitors. In the past I don't think direct competition was all that significant because their solutions weren't incompatible. 'I think both companies could be working on projects for a business at the same time each focused on different areas for improving efficiency. 'That won't be true going forward because IBM's Watson's intelligent computer system will be ubiquitous in operations within a company. A possible merger of the two might offer compelling synergies improving revenues by capturing the customer fields of both yet allowing a great amount of internal cost reduction. Both of these, IBM and ACN have world class organizations and together they would have a lock on consulting/service. It would be a move of the size of IBM's acquisition of the cosulting arm from a major big 10 accounting firm some years ago. This hasn't been the pattern in recent years for IBM however. WW
That IBM is not rallying yet is no surprise. Buyers wait for solid evidence of a floor and this plays into the hands of the manipulators for a week or two. The Druckmiller interview with the twisted facts together with an attack in the thin after and early markets set the stage. I'd bet that the manipulators are holding a big option position and know it's easy to #$%$ the num nuts institutional money managers. IBM financials are strong and it's doing just fine in the arena of the Cloud. Its easy to make a lot of wild statments not supported by verifyable evidence. The only thing that stands up is a relatively small miss on revenues largely do to currency translations. Hardware has cycles of several years. Companies don't go out and buy very expensive equipment until the new improved models arrive which doesn't happen every quarter. Anyone following IBM expects Hardware to be weak most years if they understand the company at all. WW
First for the short term, IBM is headed south. Potential buyers will wait for it to firm up before taking a position. Warren Buffet's decesions aren't made entirely by himself as the media portray it. He has people with expertise in many segments advising him and he allows them considerable flexibility. I won't be selling shares because I have very large capital gains in my IBM holdings and the tax consequences make short term speculation by selling and buying back impractical. I have taken option position selling PUTs . I've seen these swings many times in IBM's shares. Since it's valuation is very reasonable at $180 it will recover soon unless the whole market takes a correction. That's possible because many people are skeptical of the big move in the averages this year. WW
Do any of you wonder who the num nut money managers were who dumped stock because of this guy's, Druckmiller, comments coming from someone with no technical qualifications and offer only one supportable complaint, revenues. If you check, the revenues weren't down all that much. The report shows much of it as currency adjustments. It's obvious many of these clowns managing money are incompetent followers of people twisting them around.
buter.jack, The company I was with often promoted talented people into Mgmt. jobs taking them away from the work place where they were talented and putting them in a job which they had no aptitude for and left them no longer in a position to apply their talent. I think for engineers, and research people it's better to have everyone being paid very well but not paying managerial people much more than those who are expected to produce innovation. If managerial people are paid considerably more, then everyone becomes politically motivated and the mangerial people are held responsible rather than the people expected to produce results. This wouldn't work where low skills were the factor but for technical professionals individual responsibility is where the empahsis should be and their peers should be part of the weeding out process. Like a football or basket ball team, they don't win individually so they want the weak ones out. (This assumes projects compete and those that consistently don't deliver anything are eliminated.) WW
If I was CEO of IBM I would be riding very hard on the people in R&D. I think in many companies the people in reserch get complacent. One good productive scientist is work 100 mediocre because it's the rare individual that creates the future, that's why you have to hire the best and not accept anything less than results when your compay has telephone book full of Phd's and not very much in innovation that is taking your company where others haven't tred. I learned during my working years that it isn't always the smart people or the highly educated that have the genius to make things happen. The history of the modern world is full of examples that prove that. I think it's common for management to drive hard all aspects except these people whose results should be expected and often not much useful is happening. IBM gets the most patents but I'm not sure that's good measure of the kind of results it should be getting from these people. I'd be interested in what others think on this subject. WW
You need to do a 1 for 5 reverse split. Five billion shares are way too many. The day when small investors put up only a couple of hundred dollars and ignorantly looked for low priced stocks instead of quality died in the 1970s. To many shares outstanding gives a negative quality image to the shares. WW
Yes, you and I are on a different planet if your personal experience supports the 1.2% inflation rate. Everytime I get a new insurance policy, go to the grocery store, or do much of anything the price is up a lot. The deficit is shrinking? You have to be looking through a very narrow window. The goverment's debt is growing out of control and I support any politican who would aggresively oppose the spenders. WW
You are correct. Book value is a meaningless number. If a company's physical assets are obsolete or are not depreciated sufficiently its book value is inflated. In any case many companies with low book value are very profitable and in others the opposite is true. If security analyst really understand how book value has nothing to do with the investment quality of a company they would never bother to look at it. In bankruptcy the book value will bear no relation to what the stock holders are likely to recover for many reasons. WW