Tuesday, July 14, 2009

This is It!

Apologies? Too late. Ditto.

Do I deserve it? Should he do it? Is it important? Would this heal the past? I guess it is too late.

I always think that God has everything planned and He has to arrange for us to bump into each other today! But what the heck, I am not any anyone whom you can have company when you need someone to be around or just toss it away into the trash bin when you do not have any use for it.

Well, I can tell that his life has been good so far - married with kid, cushy life and even looking extremely prosperous. Congrats, and you can cross your bridge and I will walk my path. If this was something which I owed you in previous life, I hope the debt is paid. And should I owe you anything this life, I hope those have been dutifully paid as well. On the other hand, if you had owed me anything, be it last life or this life that were outstanding, please, I am willing to write off all of them and have nothing to do with you. I do not hope that our paths will ever cross again. NEVER EVER.

I know this will affect close friends (you know who you are), but it hurts me more. Who can truly experience the agony and pain which I went through? And now, I have decided to forget this episode and get on with my life. I want to leave this burden once and for all. I will NOT mention this past again and hope that this marks the full stop for the whole episode.

It affects me that this incident keeps coming back to haunt me time and again. After so many years, I thought time would have purged it out from my system. WAKE UP, it's time you let it go. No point harbouring over it again and again. OKAY! I NEED TO FORGET ABOUT IT.


Saturday, December 20, 2008

Guru Stocks at 52-Week Low: HSBC Holdings plc, Duke Energy Corp, Transocean Inc, Hitachi Ltd, CSX Corp.http://www.gurufocus.com/news.php?id=42313

The market remained almost flat last week, gaining a couple of points. Last week’s top five out of favor companies that reached their 52-week lows were HSBC Holdings plc, Duke Energy Corp, Transocean Inc, Hitachi Ltd, and CSX Corp.

Last week’s top two out of favor industries were the Oil Equipment Services and Distribution and the Personal and Household goods industries. 11 Oil Equipment companies reached their 52-week lows, while 2 reached their 52-week highs, giving the industry a low/high ratio of 5.5. In the Personal and Household Goods industry, 26 stocks have reached their 52-week lows, while 5 have reached their 52-week highs, giving the industry a low/high ratio of 5.2.

For full details about guru stocks at 52-week lows and more information, click here

HSBC Holdings plc (HBC)

Reached the 52-Week Low of $45.55 The prices of HSBC Holdings plc (HBC) shares have declined to close to the 52-week low of $45.55, which is 48.0% lower than its 52-week high of $87.67. HSBC Holdings plc is owned by 8 Gurus we are tracking. Among them, 1 has added to their positions during the past quarter. 5 reduced their positions.

HSBC HOLDINGS is one of the largest banking and financial services organizations in the world. The company has a market cap of $124.19 billion; its shares were traded at around $45.55 with a P/E ratio of 53.5 and P/S ratio of 0.85. The dividend yield of HSBC Holdings plc stocks is 8.49%. HSBC Holdings plc had an annual average earning growth of 36.9% over the past 5 years.

Richard Pzena owns 115,665 shares as of 09/30/2008, which accounts for 0.07% of the $13.21 billion portfolio of Pzena Investment Management LLC. Ruane Cunniff owns 3,725 shares as of 09/30/2008, a decrease of 77.73% of from the previous quarter. This position accounts for less than 0.01% of the $9.47 billion portfolio of Ruane & Cunniff & Goldfarb Inc.

Duke Energy Corp. (DUK)

Reached the 52-Week Low of $14.68 The prices of Duke Energy Corp. (DUK) shares have declined to close to the 52-week low of $14.68, which is 30.2% lower than its 52-week high of $20.66. Duke Energy Corp. is owned by 5 Gurus we are tracking. Among them, 1 has added to their positions during the past quarter. 4 reduced their positions.

Duke Energy Corporation is an integrated energy and energy services provider with the ability to offer physical delivery and management of both electricity and natural gas throughout the U.S. and abroad. The company. has a market cap of $18.49 billion with a P/E ratio of 11.9 and P/S ratio of 1.45. The dividend yield of Duke Energy Corp. stocks is 6.29%.

Duke Energy Corp. recently reported its third quarter 2008 results. The company announced that its EPS was 33 cents per share, compared to 45 cents per share in the third quarter of 2007. Commenting on the company’s results, Duke’s CEO said, "We are disappointed in the third quarter results, but our strong performance earlier in the year will help mitigate the impact of these results on our year-end performance. Although we don't believe we will be able to achieve our 2008 employee incentive target of $1.27 of adjusted diluted earnings per share by year's end - particularly in this economy -- we are only about 5 cents off of where we expected to be at the end of the third quarter."

Kenneth Fisher owns 20,453 shares as of 09/30/2008, which accounts for less than 0.01% of the $31.63 billion portfolio of Fisher Asset Management, LLC. David Dreman owns 28,850 shares as of 09/30/2008, a decrease of 41.18% of from the previous quarter. This position accounts for less than 0.01% of the $10.85 billion portfolio of Dreman Value Management. Bruce Berkowitz sold out his holdings in the quarter that ended on 09/30/2008.

Grp Exec & CFO David L Hauser sold 6,000 shares of DUK stock on 09/19/2008 at the average price of $18.8; the price of the stock has decreased by 21.91% since.

Transocean Inc. (RIG)

Reached the 52-Week Low of $46.72 The prices of Transocean Inc. (RIG) shares have declined to close to the 52-week low of $46.72, which is 71.1% lower than its 52-week high of $161.4.

Transocean Inc. is owned by 8 Gurus we are tracking. Among them, 2 have added to their positions during the past quarter. 6 reduced their positions. Transocean Inc. provides offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas exploration development and production. The company has a market cap of $18.11 billion, a P/E ratio of 3.8 and P/S ratio of 2.84. Transocean Inc. had an annual average earning growth of 6% over the past 10 years.

Transocean Inc recently reported its third quarter 2008 financial results and the results of the first three months of 2008. The company announced that its net income for the first three months of 2008 was $3.44 per share, compared to $4.63 per share for the first three quarters of 2007. However, the company’s revenue grew significantly.

Kenneth Fisher owns 3,451,773 shares as of 09/30/2008. Chris Davis owns 6,787,729 shares as of 09/30/2008. Mark Hillman owns 206,842 shares as of 09/30/2008, a decrease of 33.01% of from the previous quarter. David Dreman owns 3,970 shares as of 09/30/2008, a decrease of 41.36% of from the previous quarter.

Hitachi Ltd. (HIT)

Reached the 52-Week Low of $41.43 The prices of Hitachi Ltd. (HIT) shares have declined to close to the 52-week low of $41.43, which is 46.4% lower than its 52-week high of $77.23. Hitachi Ltd. is owned by 3 Gurus we are tracking. Among them, 0 have added to their positions during the past quarter. 3 reduced their positions.

Hitachi Ltd. headquartered in Tokyo is one of the world's leading global electronics companies. They manufacture and market a wide range of products including computers semiconductors consumer products and power and industrial equipment. It has a market cap of $14.92 billion; its shares were traded at around $41.43 with and P/S ratio of 0.13. The dividend yield of Hitachi Ltd. stocks is 1.09%. Hitachi Ltd. had an annual average earning growth of 10.9% over the past 5 years.

Dodge & Cox owns 14,220,319 shares as of 09/30/2008, which accounts for 1.09% of the $90.25 billion portfolio of Dodge & Cox. Kenneth Fisher owns 3,490 shares as of 09/30/2008, a decrease of 46.83% of from the previous quarter. This position accounts for less than 0.01% of the $31.63 billion portfolio of Fisher Asset Management, LLC. Charles Brandes owns 2,787,108 shares as of 09/30/2008, a decrease of 53.99% of from the previous quarter. This position accounts for 0.7% of the $27.58 billion portfolio of Brandes Investment.

CSX Corp. (CSX)

Reached the 52-Week Low of $31.6 The prices of CSX Corp. (CSX) shares have declined to close to the 52-week low of $31.6, which is 54.2% lower than its 52-week high of $69.06. CSX Corp. is owned by 3 Gurus we are tracking. Among them, 1 has added to their positions during the past quarter. 3 reduced their positions.

CSX Corporation's unique combination of rail container-shipping inter modal and logistics services provides global reach that's second to none. The company's goal advanced at each of its business units is to provide efficient competitive transportation and related services for customers. It has a market cap of $12.56 billion; its shares were traded at around $31.6 with a P/E ratio of 8.7 and P/S ratio of 1.25. The dividend yield of CSX Corp. stocks is 2.76%. CSX Corp. had an annual average earning growth of 12.8% over the past 10 years.

CSX recently reported its third quarter earnings from continuing operations. The company announced thats its earnings per share (EPS) was up 40%. Revenue was also up 18%, while operating income rose 31%. CSX delivered impressive financial results in a challenging economy,” said the company’s CEO, president, and chairman. “Our resilient business portfolio and disciplined operations continue to generate substantial earnings growth for shareholders.”

Kenneth Fisher owns 507,382 shares as of 09/30/2008. Dodge & Cox owns 27,900 shares as of 09/30/2008. Chuck Akre owns 17,769 shares as of 09/30/2008. Ken Heebner sold out his holdings in the quarter that ended on 09/30/2008.

Chairman, President & CEO, Director Michael J Ward sold 781,920 shares of CSX stock on 11/05/2008 at the average price of $46.46; the price of the stock has decreased by 31.98% since.

Saturday, May 3, 2008

Buffett Says Credit Crisis Ebbs for Wall Street Firms

Buffett Says Credit Crisis Ebbs for Wall Street Firms (Update4)
By Josh P. Hamilton and Betty Liu

May 3 (Bloomberg) -- Warren Buffett, chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said the global credit crunch has eased for bankers, and the Federal Reserve probably averted more failures by helping to rescue Bear Stearns Cos.
``The worst of the crisis in Wall Street is over,'' Buffett said today on Bloomberg Television. ``In terms of people with individual mortgages, there's a lot of pain left to come.'' Buffett was interviewed before the Omaha, Nebraska-based company's annual meeting, attended by about 31,000 people.
Buffett, the world's richest man according to Forbes magazine, said the Fed acted properly when it arranged a $2.4 billion buyout in March of New York-based Bear Stearns by JPMorgan Chase & Co. The billionaire said he turned down the opportunity because he lacked enough capital and time to craft a solution. More failures and wider panic may have resulted if the regulators didn't halt the run on Bear Stearns, he said.
``The worry was that there would be contagion; it was a very real worry,'' Buffett said. ``If Bear Stearns had gone, the next day, somebody else would have gone. It could've been a very, very, very chaotic situation.''
Buffett, 77, said he was contacted in March before JPMorgan, the third-biggest U.S. bank by assets, agreed to buy Bear Stearns. The person calling him, whom he wouldn't identify, was ``someone responsible'' and wasn't from the Federal Reserve or the Treasury. The call lasted about half an hour, Buffett said.
Too Big for Buffett
``As I understand it, Bear Stearns had $65 billion due on Monday and I didn't have $65 billion,'' Buffett said. ``I couldn't get my mind around that situation in the required time.'' New York-based JPMorgan was the right buyer for Bear Stearns, he added.
Berkshire had about $35 billion in cash as of March 31, according to a regulatory filing yesterday.
JPMorgan agreed in mid-March to acquire Bear Stearns, once the fifth-biggest U.S. securities firm, after customers grew concerned about the company's health and pulled out their money, leaving Bear Stearns short on cash. JPMorgan, which got financial support from the Federal Reserve, raised the purchase price a week later to $10 a share from $2 to mollify Bear Stearns shareholders who said they weren't getting enough.
The 24-company KBW Bank Index has advanced 14 percent since the Bear Stearns bailout was announced in March, and the 11- company Amex Securities Broker/Dealer Index has climbed 30 percent.
Credit Losses
In a question-and-answer session at the shareholder meeting, Buffett said that from a risk perspective, some banks got ``too big to manage.''
The world's largest banks and investment firms have recorded more than $300 billion of losses and writedowns tied to mortgages, bonds and loans.
Berkshire's own investment in derivative contracts recovered $500 million to $600 million of lost value since the end of March, Buffett said. The company will make ``significant money'' on the derivatives over the long term, he said at the meeting. Berkshire said yesterday the value of the investments had declined by $1.7 billion in the first quarter. The entire company's quarterly profit plunged 64 percent to $940 million.
Buffett is scheduled to embark on a four-city European trip this month to scout potential acquisitions, including family- owned companies. He has been investing in China, Israel and the U.K. to spur profit growth after saying that U.S. investments meeting his criteria have become scarce.
International Earnings
``Over time we'd like to develop more international earnings,'' Buffett said. ``If it's a $2 billion deal, fine; if it's a $20 billion dollar deal, fine.''
Buffett, who made his first non-U.S. acquisition in 2006, paying $4 billion for 80 percent of Israel-based Iscar Metalworking Cos., said he can't predict the location of the next company Berkshire will acquire.
``They can come from Europe, they can come from the United States, you just never know,'' he said. ``Somebody, someplace is going to have a situation where we fit. They're going to call me; I want to make sure I'm on their radar screen.''
Buffett said during the meeting he'd like to buy businesses in India and China, and that he wanted to acquire one or two non- U.S. companies in the next three years. He is looking as competition forces down insurance rates in the U.S. for Berkshire, which typically gets about half its profit from insurance units including National Indemnity, General Re Corp. and Geico Corp.
The U.S. dollar will keep weakening and Buffett feels ``no need to hedge'' against currency risk when buying large companies outside the U.S., he said.
Landing From Mars
``If I landed from Mars today with a billion of Mars dollars, or whatever they call them on Mars, and I was thinking about where to put my money,'' he said. ``I don't think I'd put the entire billion in U.S. dollars.''
Berkshire Hathaway has spent $4 billion investing in the municipal auction-rate bond market, taking advantage of payouts that topped 10 percent after regular bidders fled the market. Markets were so disrupted, Buffett said, that bonds from the same issue were selling simultaneously from the same broker with yields of 6 percent and 11 percent.
Berkshire has risen about 22 percent in New York Stock Exchange composite trading during the past 12 months and gained about 4,700 percent in 20 years through Dec. 31, about six times more than the Standard & Poor's 500 Index including dividends.
Buffett took shareholder questions for more than five hours on dozens of issues.
Other topics Buffett addressed include:
-- There's ``no guarantee'' Berkshire Hathaway won't be a buyout target after his death, though such a takeover is unlikely.
-- He said he's in good health because of his diet, ``some Wrigley, some Mars, some See's, some Coke.'' Berkshire this week committed $6.5 billion to help finance candy company Mars Inc.'s takeover of Wm. Wrigley Jr., the world's biggest maker of chewing gum. Berkshire owns See's Candies and is the top shareholder of Coca-Cola Co.
-- He doesn't support a push for companies or countries to boycott the Olympics in China based on that country's human rights record.
-- He would buy shares of PetroChina Co. again if they are at a level he considers cheap, Buffett said. Berkshire sold a stake in the company last year.
-- Factories in China have different norms for working conditions than those in the U.S., and he won't ``tell the world how to run'' their businesses.
To contact the reporters on this story: Josh P. Hamilton in Omaha at jphamilton@bloomberg.net; Betty Liu in New York at Bliu17@bloomberg.net; Last Updated: May 3, 2008 18:43 EDT

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Don't trust the Wall St rally

Don't trust the Wall St rally

Divining future profitability of the nation's financial firms tells us stock market valuations are still too high.
By Bethany McLean, Editor at Large

Up until now, all eyes have been on the losses that are hitting the financial sector from the acronym soup of new instruments such as CDOs and SIVs. Everyone is scared, and rightly so, of the MUB (Monster Under the Bed) that might be lurking in supposedly safe havens. Still, financial stocks staged a big rally on the last trading day before the weekend, and again Monday, due to the belief that the worst is past, and that the government will step in to save the Street should that MUB pop out from under the bed.
But even once the current crisis is past, there's another issue facing the financial sector: Will it look like it used to? "I think it is important to step back and ask some broader questions about our financial system," wrote Ben Inker, the chief investment officer for quantitative equities in global developed markets at money management firm GMO, in a recent paper. "What it does, how big it should be; and what its sustainable level of profitability might be."
These questions are obviously important for financial services firms. At its recent peak stock price in December 2006, Citigroup (C, Fortune 500), for instance, sold for $53.34, or over 2 times its reported book value (and over 4 times if you exclude goodwill and intangibles) and almost 13 times its reported 2006 earnings. Do those numbers represent a baseline to which we'll return when this crisis has passed, or are they anomalies?
And the size of the financial sector may also matter for the rest of the market. In a piece last summer, credit rating agency Moody's opined that the market was safe from systemic risk in part because the $45 billion in profits reported by a group of financial firms including Citi and Merrill Lynch (MER, Fortune 500) were "considerable and significantly larger than in 1998," when those same firms reported profits of $12 billion. As the events surrounding Bear Stearns show all too clearly, the market isn't safe from systemic risk. Was Moody's wrong partly because that $45 billion isn't sustainable - or wasn't real in the first place?
One way to think about this is to look at the profits of the U.S. financial sector versus GDP. Inker did this, and the result was what he describes as a "truly striking chart." From 1947 to 1997, financial profits were stable at around 0.75% of GDP. But over the last ten years, the share of GDP represented by financial profits began to shoot higher. In the last few years - before the Street began to report massive writeoffs - financial profits represented roughly 2.25% of GDP. Inker says that it is too simplistic to say that the right number should be 0.75%. But when you think about what financial profits consisted of at the height of the boom, 2.25% seems unsustainable too.
The last decade saw the explosion of securitization - the carving up and redistributing of risk - the boom in hedge funds, and the private equity mania. It's apparent now that Wall Street can't transform a sub prime mortgage into a triple A credit, and that the redistribution of risk doesn't get rid of it. Unless (or until) we forget that simple lesson, it's hard to see the securitization game being played again. As for hedge funds, some commentators, such as Pimco's Bill Gross, predict the demise of broad swaths of them. With that goes the rich profits Wall Street has earned on prime brokerage. And fees from private equity, which at the height made up huge chunks of the Street's investment banking revenues? That won't come back roaring without cheap credit.
We are going to have to create whole new ways of securitizing and funding debt of all types, but especially mortgages and consumer credit. While I have confidence that those intrepid bankers on Wall Street will figure out something, as their future bonuses depend on it, it is going to take time to replace a system that took decades to build.
You also have to consider the massive writeoffs that the Street has taken. Thus far, Citigroup has taken $32 billion in writedowns related to the subprime crisis. Merrill Lynch's writedowns have totaled $22 billion. So were Citi's 2006 profits really the reported $21.2 billion, and were Merrill's the reported $7.5 billion? Or was some percentage of that an illusion? If Bear can be sold for $2 or $10 a share, then how solid was Bear Stearns' $84 per share in reported book value?
Thought about more broadly, if commentators are right that mortgage losses alone will total $300 billion to $500 billion, then, as Inker writes, "profits that look like they have been 2.25% of GDP in the past several years have actually been more like 1.75%, if we smooth the losses over the last 3 years and into next year as rough justice." And of course, mortgage losses are only a subset of the total losses.
Think back to what Ken Lewis, the CEO of Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), said last fall when his company announced its first round of writedowns: "Making money for several years, only to give most of it back in one year, is not a brilliant business model."
Inker says that the data doesn't point to any firm conclusions about what the level of financial profits should be. His best guess, though, is that a "normal" level of profits would be about half the amount that the financial sector reported in 2006.
Then, you also have to think about the multiple of those earnings that investors should be willing to pay. In a paper published in the fall of 2005, risk management gurus Leslie Rahl and Barbara Lucas of Capital Markets Risk Advisors, noted that in the past decade, a lot of things have happened that aren't supposed to happen, from the interest rate hikes of 1994 to the 1998 collapse of LTCM to the 2001 terrorist attacks. Or as the authors put it, "once-in-a-lifetime events seem to occur every few years."
If that's the case and if such events now mean that Bear Stearns (BSC, Fortune 500) can go from seemingly viable to threatening to bring down the entire financial system in the space of a week - then what sort of multiple should investors pay for Bear, or for any financial firm? Maybe investors shouldn't pay 12 times earnings, and maybe they should pay a discount to, rather than a multiple of, reported book value.
Of course, trying to guess how this will play out is just that - guessing. But if you say, for instance, that Merrill's normalized profits would be half the 2006 level, you get to about $4 billion. If you think that we should be willing to pay a smaller multiple for those earnings than we did in the past - let's be generous and say 10 times - then you get to a total market value for Merrill Lynch of $40 billion. That's still a 10% discount from today's valuation.