HAB

Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
comments3
  • Positive ratings 0
  • Negative ratings 0
  • Net rating 0
Filter comments by:
Highest rated Latest comments
Or filter by symbol:

Latest Comments
3 Comments

    • Mon Dec 1st 18:38 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Looking Good: Genco in Particular, Shipping in General
      Your "theory" is off base for a few reasons. First, at the U.S. just now recognized it's in recession, the rest of the world will follow. Global recession is a very bad thing for shippers of all kinds. Why? During the boom a lot of ships were brought online, and more are under construction due in 2009 & 2010. This causes over-supply and you might have mentioned in your article the BDI is down nearly 95% as a result. Now, not all shippers are tied to spot rates - but you didn't go into that in your article either. Next, those that have contracts are soon to be renewing some/all over the next year at very depressed levels.

      A major financial magazine (can't remember which of the ones I read had it) mentioned the shippers (many of them) are violating their loan covenants due to the asset values of their ships dropping - again due to over supply. This creates the problem where in order to get their value ratios back in line per their loan covenants, they sell ships - yup, you guessed it, that brings asset values down more, and the cycle has begun. Now throw in the fact that most ships operating at spot rates are doing so below cost and you have a real problem. Investors are pricing these companies as though they can't make their payments and keep their covenants in good standing - something that only a few will do. As one person commented, Diana is in the best position to survive with it's low debt. The other may be TBSI since they have a unique niche of smaller ships.

      Still, you just didn't address any of this critical material in your blog/article which is why more than a few have flamed you for it. Next time, take the time to research the sector you write about and what is influencing it beyond the fact that the stock prices are down to ridiculous levels.

      I for one won't buy ANY of these stocks until the carnage is over - and that means 1, probably 2, will bite the dust. My bet is DRYS could be the first, but with $1B in debt, GNK isn't looking all that great either.
      View article »
    • Sun Jun 22nd 21:24 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Microvision's No Show Hands the Pico Projector Market to TI
      I can't believe the ignorance here. A focus wheel is somehow not inferior? C'mon, name one serious consumer that would opt for a focus wheel over infinite focus. The teen market alone would ridicule any lame-arse that dared show off photos in the hallway with something that required them to keep focusing every few seconds as they moved - all the while being upstaged by those with infinite focus.

      Until both are on the market, how can anyone say DLP is cheaper? I can't believe some of the early LED entrants with $400 price points.

      An no OEM in the world thinks business users are the only primary target audience - to say that shows a complete lack of research. Wait, maybe that is the primary target for LED systems that can't embed into higher volume cell phones and devices for audiences with higher quality expectations.

      Further - do you really think leading-edge companies like Apple would dare use something like a focus wheel when infinite focus is available? How un-chic and un-cool that product would be - maybe the Zune would use a focus wheel, but I'm pretty sure you'll never see one on any iPod with a projector embedded in it.
      View article »
    • Sun Jul 1st 12:31 PM
      |
      Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Cowen Advises: Place Your Mobile Internet Bets On Google, Not Apple
      I can't believe what "analysts" are getting paid to churn out. It would seem only Munster and Wu "get" where AAPL is headed - surely Cowen & Co. doesn't. Based on the prior conference call, it's painfully obvious that AAPL will be sharing in the revenue of the iPhones from AT&T. Some have estimated as little as $5, but more realistic numbers are within the $8 - $12 per month range. At just $5, and using the conservative 10m units in one year, that will generate an additional $600M per year in cash and profits - $1.2B at $10 per month. Since AAPL is reinventing how activation and other things, it's safe to say they will get a tad more than RIMM's $5/mo - I use $8 for my estimations. At that number it's $960M per year.

      Those numbers are cumulative - just imagine what happens as they sell anything close to 45M in 2009 as Munster would suggest - I for one don't think they'll get the same revenue share outside the U.S., but they will get something.

      AAPL = brand loyalty, something the carriers are drooling for... and AT&T now has.

      If that's not enough, look at what the Apple TV unit will do after online movie rentals go live (anywhere from calendar Q3 (rumor) to early 2008 (analysts estimate). That alone is a multi-billion dollar industry and it will only grow as bandwidth speeds to the home increase.

      Finally, look at Mac sales - they're absolutely on fire and getting BETTER. This quarter alone could see 50% growth YoY instead of 30% as new MacBooks have been flying off shelves. Leopard will be a catalyst for additional sales in Fiscal Q4 as well. Leopard alone will bring in over $300M in Q4 alone - not bad for ONE quarter.

      Oh, and one more thing , SJ hinted at a totally new product coming later this year - no telling what it is, but you know it's going to make a splash.

      The bottom line is that AAPL is BASF of the electronics industry - they don't make the products (first), they make them better.
      View article »