That video was posted on her site at the end of May, and it appears to be the last one she's done. I e-mailed her via her site a while back to see about doing one of these clips for Short Screen, but never heard back. If she gave this up, another young woman who's comfortable in front of a camera ought to run with the idea, preferably on some sort of CPA basis.
Showing posts with label Mark Cuban. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mark Cuban. Show all posts
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Whatever happened to 'Girl in Your Shirt'?
I read about Girl in Your Shirt a couple of months back on Mark Cuban's blog. An enterprising young woman was recording video clips of elevator pitches like this one below for various businesses:
That video was posted on her site at the end of May, and it appears to be the last one she's done. I e-mailed her via her site a while back to see about doing one of these clips for Short Screen, but never heard back. If she gave this up, another young woman who's comfortable in front of a camera ought to run with the idea, preferably on some sort of CPA basis.
That video was posted on her site at the end of May, and it appears to be the last one she's done. I e-mailed her via her site a while back to see about doing one of these clips for Short Screen, but never heard back. If she gave this up, another young woman who's comfortable in front of a camera ought to run with the idea, preferably on some sort of CPA basis.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
News from Alloy Steel
The company (OTC BB: AYSI.OB) filed this 8-K earlier today:
Mill Commissioning
The company advises that the new ARCOPLATE manufacturing plant specifically designed to produce extra thick (up to 20/11mm) and super alloy wear plate has been commissioned and has commenced production.
The new mill is the only one in the world capable of producing a bi-metallic fused super alloy wear plate in a thickness of application of up to 20 mm (just over ¾ of an inch) in a single continuous casting operation.
The conventional method used to produce a hard surface overlay is by a welding method which can only achieve a weld surface which at best is ¼ inch or 6mm thick in a single pass and is flawed with major quality technical limitations.
The new AYSI new technology has overcome all the known technical difficulties and is capable of fusing 20mm or super wear resistant alloy onto a ½ inch or 12mm steel backing plate.
This is a significant technological breakthrough which should see this plate be specified consistently in new mining projects and become the norm for replacements in upgrades for existing mining operations.
Mr. G Kostecki C. E. O. of the company is very encouraged with the strong interest being shown by all the major producers who have seen the test samples and the technical reports and predicts a large future demand for the product.
Mr. Kostecki was responsible for the technical innovation and development of the new process and alloy formulation.
These reports have been carried out by independent laboratories.
Whether any of the demand predicted above will be apparent in the 10-Q Alloy Steel is going to file next week remains to be seen, but this is good news. More generally, the surge in Chinese steel production and the recovery of iron ore prices has been good news for Alloy Steel's mining company customers (how sustainable Chinese demand will be remains to be seen).
I picked up a few more shares of Alloy Steel at .325 on Tuesday, when the stock dipped about 20% on no news. Still keeping most of my powder dry for investing in another asset class though.
Incidentally, a couple of weeks ago, I mentioned Alloy Steel in a comment thread on Fred Wilson's blog, in response to a comment by Mark Cuban about how he'd be more interested in investing in a Rearden Steel1 than the next social media start-up. That was a brain cramp on my part: Even if Cuban could buy all of Alloy Steel, it wouldn't be a big enough investment to be worth his time. Plus, Cuban (wisely) likes to invest where he has an information advantage2, so unless he has connections in the wear plate or mining industries, he probably wouldn't seriously consider investing in this sort of company.
1An allusion to Hank Readen's company in Atlas Shrugged.
2Writer, entrepreneur, and angel investor Tim Ferriss seconded Cuban's point in a post last fall. Ferriss wrote that he feels more comfortable investing in tech companies where he has some inside knowledge and connections than swimming with the sharks in the stock market.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Mark Cuban: "I'm Going Long Right Now"
In his post yesterday on Wall Street Pit, Cuban mentioned he was starting to go long on some dividend paying stocks while continuing to hedge himself by holding puts on Dow Diamonds (AMEX: DIA). Here are a few excerpts:
On the macro view
On the importance of dividends:
On the importance of dividends some more
On why you should be skeptical of anyone's advice, including his:
On the macro view
When I look at the credit markets. The Fed and Treasury and even international agencies are signalling that they will be the lender of the first and last resort. We see short term treasuries trading as if traders are starting to get comfortable with credit and liquidity. I think that although banks dont fully trust lending to each other yet, they are working to put together the scenarios under which they will trade. They are gearing up.
I have no idea what the economy will do other than the fact that it wont be good. How bad it will get, I dont know. But I can look at a company, discount what the projections are, then discount them some more, and come up with what I think is a fair price.
On the importance of dividends:
What is a fair price to me? Well I start with the Dividend first. No dividend, no buy.
[...]
My first stomping grounds are MLPs. They have been getting killed. KILLED. They build pipelines, ships, whatever, and they do contracts to provide service via those assets. The assets are very long term, and the cash flows are very consistent. I am putting together a big porfolio that will pay me more than 10pct yield. The nice thing about 10pct yield, is that its 10pct yield. As long as I watch them and make sure nothing changes in their business to impact that yield (and hopefully it improves and they increase the payout), then I dont have to mark to market on a daily basis. I just get paid.
On the importance of dividends some more
I’m also looking at stocks in industries that I know very well that yield 6pct or more. Dividends that I think are safe in companies that I think are very strong. This wont be a big part of my portfolio. Just a tasting.
Why? Because there are some good companies, in good businesses where I think the dividend is safe, and 6pct , plust hopefully future dividend increases is a good thing. Notice I didnt say a word about the price going up. It doesnt matter if the price goes up. It matters if the dividend goes up. The best stock to buy is the one you never have to sell. It just pays you forever. The concept that you own your share of the discounted cash flow of a company is the biggest lie ever sold by brokers in the history of financial markets. You dont own shit. The CEOs, you know the ones that pay themselves, but dont manage to pay dividends, they control and effectively own those future cash flows. So dont kid yourself. Buy stocks that pay dividends and get paid. Even then there is the risk they can go to zero. So always be aware.
On why you should be skeptical of anyone's advice, including his:
All that said. The stock market can humble me or anyone in a nano second. It could go a lot lower. I DO NOT SEE IT GOING DRAMATICALLY HIGHER. NO CHANCE IT GETS BACK TO 11k anytime soon.
But, Do not take advice from me. In fact, do not take advice from anyone. If your advisor was so smart, they wouldnt be giving you advice on what to buy. They would be sitting on their yacht, being taken to port, to hop on their helicopter, to go to the airport, to jump on their GV, to go to their house on an island you have never heard of. Not sitting in an office, on the phone talking to you about to go nuclear over the market ass.
Unless you know a company and industry as well as anyone, PUT YOUR MONEY IN A CD.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
From Mark Cuban to Chris Rock
Mark Cuban's description of his first year in business from his "Success & Motivation" series of posts reminded me of a bit about jobs versus careers from Chris Rock's recent HBO special. Here's Mark Cuban writing about his first year in business:
And here's a clip of Chris Rock's bit about jobs versus careers:
That first year in business was incredible. I remember sitting in that little office till 10pm and then still being so pumped up, I would drive over to the gym I belonged to and run 5 to 10 miles on the treadmill going through that day, and the next in my head. Other days I would get so involved with learning a new piece of software that I would forget to eat and look up at the clock thinking it was 6 or 7pm and see that it was 1am or 2am. Time would fly by.
And here's a clip of Chris Rock's bit about jobs versus careers:
Mark Cuban on the Importance of Having an Information Advantage
On Christmas Eve last year, Mark Cuban republished on his blog a series of posts about how he got his start in business ("Success & Motivation"). There's a lot of great stuff in this series of posts, but one theme that comes up repeatedly is Cuban's emphasis on having an information advantage. Here are a couple of examples, excerpted from this long (but entertaining) series of posts.
On the importance of having an information advantage in the technology business
On the importance of having an information advantage in investing (from an interview with Young Money magazine)
On the importance of having an information advantage in the technology business
I would continuously search for new ideas. I read every book and magazine I could. Heck, 3 bucks for a magazine, 20 bucks for a book. One good idea that lead to a customer or solution and it paid for itself many times over. Some of the ideas i read were good, some not. In doing all the reading I learned a valuable lesson.
Everything I read was public. Anyone could buy the same books and magazines. The same information was available to anyone who wanted it. Turns out most people didn’t want it.
I remember going into customers or talking to people in the industry and tossing out tidbits about software or hardware. Features that worked, bugs in the software. All things I had read. I expected the ongoing response of “Oh yeah, I read that too in such-and-such.” That’s not what happened. They hadn’t read it then, and they haven’t started reading yet.
Most people won’t put in the time to get a knowledge advantage. Sure, there were folks that worked hard at picking up every bit of information that they could, but we were few and far between. To this day, I feel like if I put in enough time consuming all the information available, particularly with the net making it so readily available, I can get an advantage in any technology business.
On the importance of having an information advantage in investing (from an interview with Young Money magazine)
YM: Do you have any general saving and investing advice for young people?
CUBAN: Put it in the bank. The idiots that tell you to put your money in the market because eventually it will go up need to tell you that because they are trying to sell you something. The stock market is probably the worst investment vehicle out there. If you won’t put your money in the bank, NEVER put your money in something where you don’t have an information advantage. Why invest your money in something because a broker told you to? If the broker had a clue, he/she wouldn’t be a broker, they would be on a beach somewhere.
Monday, September 22, 2008
USEG Expands Share Buyback; More of Mark Cuban on Buybacks
U.S. Energy Corp (Nasdaq: USEG) expands its share buyback. It had already bought back about $3.1 million worth of its shares under its previous $5 million authorization, and now USEG's board has expanded that authorization to $8 million.
Separately, on his blog last week, Mark Cuban reiterated his opposition to buybacks ("The AIG-Lehman-Merrill Link"),
In the cases of AIG, Merrill, and Lehman, I doubt the shareholders would have been much better off if they had received dividends in lieu of buybacks over the last 18 months, and I doubt the money used in the buybacks would have been enough to materially affect the outcomes there. It certainly didn't help though.
I wonder what Cuban would think of USEG's share buybacks. USEG has plenty of cash, so it's not facing a cash crunch; it doesn't have current earnings, so it's not engaging in 'financial engineering' to boost earnings per share; and it's buying back its shares at well below book value.
Separately, on his blog last week, Mark Cuban reiterated his opposition to buybacks ("The AIG-Lehman-Merrill Link"),
3 Companies facing cash crunch oblivion. A bankruptcy, an desperation sale and pure desperation. What do all 3 companies have in common ? Share buybacks. Billions and Billions and Billions in share buybacks over the last 18 months.
[...]
Can anyone say “financial engineering” ? think all 3 companies could have used that cash they spent trying to pump up their stock prices ? All that cash going to people who sold the stocks, huge losses going to those who held the stock. Thats why dividends are far better than share buybacks. At least in this case all shareholders could have gotten something back other than “the bag” remaining shareholders continue to hold.
In the cases of AIG, Merrill, and Lehman, I doubt the shareholders would have been much better off if they had received dividends in lieu of buybacks over the last 18 months, and I doubt the money used in the buybacks would have been enough to materially affect the outcomes there. It certainly didn't help though.
I wonder what Cuban would think of USEG's share buybacks. USEG has plenty of cash, so it's not facing a cash crunch; it doesn't have current earnings, so it's not engaging in 'financial engineering' to boost earnings per share; and it's buying back its shares at well below book value.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
More of Mark Cuban on Stocks
Another excerpt from Mark Cuban's compilation of posts, "Talking Stocks",
On presenting his company Broadcast.com to institutional investors during the roadshow he and his partner Todd Wagner went on before its IPO:
On presenting his company Broadcast.com to institutional investors during the roadshow he and his partner Todd Wagner went on before its IPO:
Prior to the road show, we put together an amazing presentation. We hired consultants to help us. We practiced and practiced. We argued about what we should and shouldn't say. We had Morgan Stanley and others ask us every possible question they could think of so we wouldn't look stupid when we sat in front of these savvy investors.
Savvy investors? I was shocked. Of the 63 companies and 400-plus participants we visited, I would be exaggerating if I said we got 10 good questions about our business and how it worked. The vast majority of people in the meetings had no clue who we were or what we did. They just knew that there were a lot of people talking about the company and they should be there.
The lack of knowledge at the meetings got to be such a joke between Todd and I that we used to purposely mess up to see if anyone noticed. Or we would have pet lines that we would make up to crack each other up. Did we ruin our chance for the IPO? Was our product so complicated that no one got it and as a result no one bought the stock? Hell no. They might not have had a clue, but that didn't stop them from buying the stock. We batted 1.000. Every single investor we talked to placed the maximum order allowable for the stock.
On July 18, 1998, Broadcast.com went public as BCST, priced at 18 dollars a share. It closed at $62.75, a gain of almost 250 percent, which at the time was the largest one day rise of a new offering in the history of the stock market. The same mutual fund managers who were completely clueless about our company placed multimillion orders for our stock.
Mark Cuban on Stocks
On Megan McCardle's Atlantic blog, a commenter named Devin Finbarr posted a link to a compilation of posts on stocks by the billionaire entrepreneur/investor Mark Cuban, entitled "Talking Stocks". Cuban, famously, was one of the few investors savvy enough to lock in his profits near the peak of the dot-com bubble. After selling his company Broadcast.com to Yahoo! in a stock deal, he used options to lock in his profits on Yahoo! stock. Below is an excerpt from this compilation of posts.
On Buybacks versus Dividends (prompted by the occasion of Microsoft's huge special dividend):
On Buybacks versus Dividends (prompted by the occasion of Microsoft's huge special dividend):
To stock traders, the buyback makes perfect sense. If you buy stock in the open market, you help maintain the stock price. If you buy back shares of stock, you reduce the number of shares outstanding, which in turn increases the earnings per share.
This of course is completely contrary to every message that every company CEO, particularly Microsoft tries to send, that they are not trying to manage earnings or the stock price.
More importantly, it rewards the exact thing that should not be rewarded. It rewards people getting out of their investment, while not rewarding keeping the investment.
Sell the stock, you get paid. Keep the stock, you get nothing. Yes, I know that the stock price is supposed to go up for those who keep it, but there are no assurances that it will. The only certainty is that the seller has cash in the bank. The holder has the same amount of risk.
Shouldn't continuing shareholders be rewarded rather than the sellers?
That's why I am such a big fan of dividends. Dividends are the investors' best friend for several reasons:
1. The obvious, it's cash in the bank
2. It reduces your cost basis and rewards you for being a continuing shareholder
3. It can put a cap on how much the company can dilute your holdings. When a company pays a dividend, it's much more expensive just to issue stock and options to insiders. They have to consider the cash implications of each additional share or option issued. That's a good thing. It keeps companies with legitimate dividends from going nuts.
4. It creates a precedent of rewarding shareholders, hopefully with increasing dividends.
On the flipside, share buybacks are horrid for several reasons
1. It allows companies to manipulate earnings per share. Buy back enough stock, and you will hit your Wall Street expectations.
2. Companies will undertake risky cash management strategies to pay for the share buybacks. Since its one time, they can take greater risks
3. Companies will undertake buybacks with CEO and management incentives and bonuses in mind. Hit those numbers, earn lots of stock and options.
4. Companies will buyback stock so that they can re-issue it to themselves and employees. In essence they use the market as their personal and corporate piggybanks. They Buyback stock to push up earnings in hopes the stock goes up. Then they issue the stock to themselves. Then if the stock goes up, they sell the stock they awarded themselves to unsuspecting shareholders who have no idea the money they are paying for shares is going to insiders.
Stock buybacks are a very bad idea for investors and a very profitable idea for insiders and traders.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)