Not sure if being cheaper is better or not, but thought longs may be interested.
To read the Bloomberg article, check out today's 7:03 AM Bloomberg article "Whole Foods Plays Bargain Grocer in Manhattan"
For those who do not bother with the "news" under YahooF quote:
Morgan Stanley downgraded AMT from overweight to equal weight with 98.00 target.
"The firm cited fair valuation and overhang related to the holding company's international expansion."
While driving to work this morning, I saw a truck with "Northeast Foods Dayville, CT"
Knowing that UNFI has a presence in Dayville (and its corporate headquarters were once located there), I wondered if Northeast Foods was a sub of UNFI.
My thought couldn't have been further from the truth!
"Northeast Foods has been a key supplier to the McDonald's fast food chain since 1965. NEF has grown right along with McDonald's and is now the largest supplier of buns in the United States."
At least you followed through with what you posted where you suggested last week's action would determine the fate of vape.
When I was much younger, like you and many others who have followed, I lost a few bucks on some speculations.
I quickly learned a lesson and it didn't cost me too much.
Something that will never change: "There's a sucker born every minute"
I agree it is not reasonable to compare a company that is in its infancy with established ones.
Did you mean to write "fundamental" analysis???
Why retail "investors" insist on buying stocks based on the number of shares they can buy v the amount they wish to invest is beyond me.
Percentages rule, not the number of shares one owns.
I'm pretty sure Yahoo's chart shows Total Returns.
I just ran Total Return calculations, on a Bloomberg, for both IBB & FBIOX for the time frames I noted earlier:
IBB V FBIOX
5 Y: 255% v 263%
2 Y: 104% v 105%
1 Y: 41% v 35%
6M: 5% v (1%)
Bottom line: IBB & FBIOX has performed relatively the same, hence I don't think Kaul deserves accolades.
I imagine IBB may be more tax efficient.
Hard to beat indexes, and that's why my largest holding by far is Vanguard's Total Market Index Fund. Almost all of my future cash that will be deployed into equities will go into VTSAX. It's fun to try to beat the market, and although some years I have beaten the market, I have finally realized that the "fun" can be costly!
Nice posts yourself, Dave!
Using the "logic" of those who "care" about splits, I imagine they always ask for all dollar bills, instead of a five or ten dollar bill when receiving "change" from a cash purchase?
When I review my statement, I gloss over the number of shares owned, but do look at the VALUE of my positions.
I do "care" about the value of my positions and I do "care" when dividends are increased, but owning twice as many shares at half the price? No Deal!
When all else fails, resort to name calling...how's that working out for you?
File under: love it when a poster's emotions take over!
Of course, Seeking Alpha is simply a platform for many people to publish posts.
Different people, different opinions, hence the "contradict" confusion you are experiencing.
No conspiracy here.
"A lot of people care..."
Dare I write that they should not care whether a company splits its shares or not!
Splits occur because a company's share price HAS appreciated. In other words, splits are an end, and not a means (over the long run re share appreciation).
My one positive take from a split is that it may be a positive signal from the board that they anticipate business to continue to be good. Oh yeah, perhaps one more benefit: it's "fun" to own more shares???
Do you agree with the following?:
Over the long run stocks are valued based on their fundamentals
Since stock splits do not affect a company's fundamentals, and it's a company's fundamentals that drive its share price, why "care" about stock splits?
"Care" whether a stock you own appreciates or not, but do not "care" whether its share price is 100 or 50.
From a different perspective, have you ever invested in a equity mutual fund? When I, and presumably you, invest in a mutual fund, I first determine HOW MUCH I wish to invest and then I execute the trade; the resulting number of shares of the fund I buy does not factor into my buying equation. Same should go for investing in individual equities, and does for me. I want to invest X dollars into XYZ. I divide XYZ's share price into X and round up or down a few shares and buy that many shares.
sno, remember: RIF!
Lafley "only" received $2M in salary; add in his bonus and some perks plus $12.2M in stock and you get $19.5 million! Yowsa!
Hmmm....$12.2M in stock; is that more or less than the value of your PG holding?
As a weed investor, I imagine you are familiar with the MJX Marijuana Index.
For the week, the index was up 92 pbs, while vape was DOWN 9.6%!
Of the indexes 43 components, only four decreased more than vape today...39 out of 43!
"This week will tell us how this companies (sic) long term stock lookout will be."
The week is over; here's my take:
vape traded just shy of HALF of the previous week's volume (not good)
vape closed at 2.08, just shy of its weekly low of 2.05 that occurred today. (not good)
Yup, this week's trade was rather telling.
What is YOUR take?
It has not been unusual for STKL to have some volatility in its share price.
STKL is my only non-US based holding; I hadn't considered the tax inversion angle...maybe someday STKL will be acquired. Today's action IMO is STKL being STKL.
"Commodity exposure is probably the largest story here. Analysts should be paying close attention to that right now."
I may be reaching here, but I'm thinking the analysts surely have and are considering commodity exposure!