Welcome to GuruFocus Investment Space.

Please Join Us to share your investment ideas with more than 100,000 GuruFocus users.

Join      Log in

The Science of Hitting Message

The Science of Hitting's Space » All messages
The Science of Hittingmessage



  • fletchercole 2015-06-09 07:33
    The Science of : Fletcher,

    Didn't see your friend request (from a few months ago) until right now - sorry about that! Thanks for the kind words and hope to talk some
    No problem.  The notifications for the gurufocus site can be hard to pay attention to sometimes.  I usually focus on the articles!  I don't write/contribute on gurufocus, but occasionally like to "friend" contributors that I feel are well-worth reading.  Thanks for your contributions.
  • mike.crew 2013-01-24 09:54
    Science:
        I have read your comments and analysis with great interest. I am a value manager with a smallish portfolio ($163 mill) and would be interested in establishing a dialogue. If you are interested drop me a line at [email protected]
                                   Thanks Mike
  • leycrjb 2012-10-26 02:41
    The Science of : I wasn't pointing to the increase in allowance for doubtful accounts as the explanation - that's what the Securitization Program part was about. What
    Oh I see. No worries.

    I just find the massive increase strange, even moreso that they don't explain it at all. I guess they've been giving their customers longer to pay them in order to keep their business, but I'd have thought there'd be a sentence somewhere in the 10-k to explain that.
  • leycrjb 2012-10-25 05:29
    The Science of : Take a look at the May 2009 Securitization Program in the 10-K filed in March 2010; in that instance, the allowance for doubtful accounts matched (rou
    I don't understand. Why should an increase in the allowance for doubtful accounts lead to an increase in receivables?
  • leycrjb 2012-10-24 02:55
    Hi Science. I've been looking to Staples a little since reading your articles and have a quick question for you. Looking at the pattern of receivables points out a strange trend. In 2009 trade receivables jumped massively, from 822 to 1841, with no apparent explanation. It has since stayed at a similarly high proportion of revenue. Any thoughts?
  • Cogitator99 2012-08-22 20:42
    The Science of : Yeah, the volatility doesn't appear to be dissipating, so I'm just trying to stay level headed on JCP at this point...

    Beyond that, focusing a lot on
    What's the story in SPLS? I saw the large drop but I haven't been following closely.

    I bought CSCO (before the run-up) because it was selling at 5x FCF basically. LAZ might be interesting if management executes on cost-cutting. I've been looking at ARCO because it seems to have long-term growth potential, but I find it too expensive at the moment.

    Trying to figure out GM; strong balance sheet, low valuation, but the pension obligations, though reduced, keep me away. Also, their China numbers remain quite strong despite the slowdown there, not sure what to make of that.

    Do you invest mostly in the US, or do you have international names as well?
  • Cogitator99 2012-08-21 21:31
    The Science of : Very insightful commentary right there, which I agree with 100%. The one thing most people aren't willing to give is time - and I'm starting to find m
    Yeah, I was lucky enough to buy at an average of $20, so it's up a bit. But we shouldn't kid ourselves; those gains can disappear overnight. Haha.

    It sure is an interesting situation though.

    Anything else you've been looking at?
  • Cogitator99 2012-08-20 19:43
    The Science of : Yeah the analysts did a great job yet again - predicting the company's impending doom without taking the time to look at the balance sheet or the cash
    I agree. I don't normally invest in turnarounds, but I thought this had as good a chance as any, since you had great management come in and a great investor on the capital allocation side.

    It was quite interesting to see the media write the entire thing off after one bad quarter. I mean, it was a really bad quarter, but taken in context, something that should not have been entirely unexpected.

    Also right on the balance sheet. They have enough to get them through for a while yet. And they have noncore assets that they can sell. No one's talking about how they can fall back on the cost savings, and how that's enough to bring the stock price up even if the transformation isn't fully successful. But I guess something like "JCP is starting to look a little better" isn't newsworthy; much better to talk about how it's about to go bankrupt. I saw this all on BP during the Macondo spill; you won't hear anyone from business TV apologizing for their "expert" (yet inaccurate) comments then.
  • Cogitator99 2012-08-20 00:52
    The Science of : Hey Cogitator,

    It was about what I expected (was looking for a -20 to -25% comp); clarification on some balance sheet items was helpful. Besides that
    Sorry for the late reply, didn't log-in for a while.

    Thought it was okay. If you were to believe all the negative press, it sounded like JCP was going to go bankrupt in half a year. No one likes to see sales continue to drop as it is, but in the context of a turnaround, I wouldn't say it's unusual.

    I do wonder though. You know how Johnson has said that because they have chosen not to answer all the attacks made on the company, there is so much misinformation? If Ackman is characterizing the current situation as a PR blunder, then maybe they should speak out a bit more. Of course, they may have their own reasons for not doing so.
  • Cogitator99 2012-08-13 12:00
    Hey Science, what did you think of the latest Q?
  • C.W.R. 2012-02-16 11:56
    The Science of : CWR,

    Thanks for the very kind words! To answer your questions:

    I prefer using 10-K's; generally, I'll do a full read through of the most recent one,
    Thanks for the reply.  I am really interested to know your top 5 metrics for analyzing the value of a company.  If you could somehow work that into a future article, it would be great!

    Cheers,
    CWR
  • C.W.R. 2012-02-15 02:46
    Since you are obviously a highly sophisticated investor (with a capital I) and well-versed in the practice of analyzing companies, I have a few questions for you.  First, do you prefer taking your fundamental data from company annual reports or SEC 10-K's/20-F's?  Secondly, how many years of annual statements do you go back in your analysis?  Finally, as far as record keeping goes, what go-to data do you keep in your personal files vs. relying online financial resources such as gurufocus' 10-year financials?

    Thanks for your time.  (and wow! your articles pretty much personify the home run your avatar suggests...)

    Cordially,

    CWR
Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)
FEEDBACK