Posts By: Geoff Gannon

Geoff Gannon March 24, 2007

On Billionaires, Their Buys, and Buffett

I recently read a post by Barry Ritholtz over at “The Big Picture“. It’s called “Investing Advice: If you are NOT a billionaire“. Ritholtz starts with a good premise: don’t try to “tag along” on stock market investments made by billionaires simply because they’re billionaires.

Unfortunately, his argument goes off the tracks pretty quickly. He singles out three billionaires: Kirk Kerkorian, Michael Dell, and Warren Buffett. Ritholtz has a point with Michael Dell, but the same point is applicable to an awful lot of insider buying at large, public companies.

As for Kerkorian and Buffett, I’m afraid I can’t find anything to agree with in those arguments. Regarding Kerkorian he writes:

He has a long and storied history as a corporate raider, greenmailer, etc. When one gets closer to the long dirt nap, one thinks of their legacy. For all we know, this GM bid was an attempt to improve his reputation.

I have to admit smiling when I read this, because about a year ago I wrote a post on some notable billionaires (from the Forbes list) that included a fairly long digression on comments made by bloggers about Kerkorian’s advanced age:

There’s been more than enough written about General Motors (GM) over the past year; so, I won’t add anything here. I will, however, mention that one point made by some blogs (and even some “mainstream” media sources) is nonsensical. It’s been written (presumably with a straight face) that Kerkorian can’t possibly be making a long-term investment in GM, because (at 89) he simply doesn’t have enough time left to see such an investment through.

The strongest argument against this line of reasoning is that making investment decisions based on your anticipation of imminent death is akin to making life choices based on the belief that you don’t have free will and all future events are predestined. In both cases, if your assumption is correct, you gain little or nothing. If your assumption is incorrect, you lose a lot.

Besides, all of this assumes you have no interest in leaving greater wealth behind (whether to charity or your family), which seems rather absurd. Kerkorian isn’t exactly forgoing his own enjoyment; he already has far more money than he could ever spend on himself (that would be true even if he were 29 instead of 89).

Also, it’s worth noting that Phil Carret lived to be 101. I don’t mean to suggest Kerkorian may live just as long; rather, I mean to suggest even at 89, you could be hanging up your cleats twelve years too early. To put that in perspective, if the average American male expected to die twelve years before he actually did, he would be planning to die around the time he would start collecting Social Security.

As a rule, investors who are as passionate as Kerkorian usually die long before they retire.

I don’t have anything more to say about Kerkorian. I do, however, have quite a lot to say …

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 23, 2007

Column: Tweeter Home Entertainment

Guest Columnist Max Olson’s latest article is entitled “Tweeter Home Entertainment“. In this article, Max discusses Tweeter (TWTR) and its recently announced plans to close many of its stores.

Read “Tweeter Home Entertainment”

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 23, 2007

Value Investing News: Top Stories – Week of Monday, March 19th

1. Sherwin Williams: No Lead Threat
2. Use Sites Like Yahoo! Finance With Caution
3. Tweeter Home Entertainment
4. Value Delusions and Strategic Thinking
5. On the Risk of Settling
6. On Rex Stores, Real Estate, and Ethanol
7. Chou 2006 Annual Report
8. Festival of Stocks #28
9. Profit With Split-Offs
10. Marty Whitman: Letter to Shareholders

Visit Value Investing News

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 23, 2007

Book Review: Value Investing

Gannon On Investing’s contributing writer, Steven Rosales, reviews Bruce Greenwald’s Value Investing: From Graham to Buffett and Beyond.

Read Review

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 22, 2007

20 Questions for Todd Sullivan of ValuePlays

Todd Sullivan is a value investor who writes the ValuePlays blog. ValuePlays is a value investing site focusing on individual stock analysis, investing concepts, and market commentary.

Visit ValuePlays

1. Are you a value investor?

Yes.

2. What is value investing?

Purchasing a piece of a company at a price that is below a reasonable valuation.

3. What is your approach to investing?

Look for the current “red headed step children” and pick out the gems.

4. How do you evaluate a stock?

I look for industry leading companies who:

– Have a valuation that is equal to or at a small premium to other shares with a comparable earnings growth rate.

– Have a total return yield greater than the current corp. bond rates.

– Are buying back shares.

– Are increasing the dividend.

– And are increasing cash flow from operations.

All that takes about 20 minutes, if it passes those tests, I begin to dig deeper into SEC filings, annual reports, etc. Earnings call transcripts on Seeking Alpha recently have been providing me a ton of insight, not necessarily for the details, but the general “tone” of management.

5. Why do you buy a stock?

To own a piece of a company.

6. Why do you sell a stock?

The business deteriorates or its valuation becomes irrationally high.

7. What investment decision are you most proud of?

MO at the height of the litigation woes in 2003 and MCD during the “mad cow” scare of Jan 2003.

8. What investment decision do you most regret?

Selling USG in June of that year.

9. Why do you blog?

I love the market and love to write. It also makes me a better investor by forcing more detailed analysis and making me stick to my guns.

10. What’s your best post?

Did SBUX’s Donald Really say that?

Picked up in the WSJ Online

11. What’s your worst post?

SHLD: What Will Eddy Do? Just guess work. Of course if I turn out right, pure genius. 🙂

12. What financial publications do you read?

WSJ, Barons.

13. What investing blogs do you read?

Value Investing NewsThe StockmastersSeeking AlphaFat Pitch, Gannon, PeridotInteractive Investor.

14. What’s the best investment book you’ve read?

“Buffett: The Making Of An American Capitalist”

15. What’s the last investment book you’ve read?

“The Intelligent Investor” – I try to read it at least once a year.

16. When did you start investing?

At 19. I’ve always loved the idea of being able to buy a piece of a company and “go along for the ride”.

17. How have you improved as an investor?

One word: Patience.

18. How do you need to improve as an investor?

Believe in my choices more, my biggest mistakes have not been picking the wrong companies but getting out too soon or not buying at all because I doubted my reasoning…. (see USG, CHD).

19. Where are the bargains in today’s

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 22, 2007

Book Review: The Rediscovered Benjamin Graham

Gannon On Investing’s contributing writer, Steven Rosales, reviews Janet Lowe’s The Rediscovered Benjamin Graham.

Read Book Review

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 22, 2007

On the Risk of Settling

Rick of Value Discipline wrote an excellent post yesterday entitled “Value Delusions and Strategic Thinking.” In my view, this post is an especially important read in today’s market environment. Whether current market wide valuations are reasonable or not, it seems clear that the supply of obvious bargains is relatively low.

It’s no secret that “value stocks” have outperformed in recent years. These are the conspicuously cheap stocks – the ones that knock you on the head and say “Look at my price-to-book ratio, look at my price-to-earnings ratio! Does it really matter what kind of business I am? I’m so cheap the only thing you need to know is that I can pay my bills on time.”

And sometimes that’s true. Sometimes, there’s a veritable feast of such conspicuously cheap stocks scattered across a variety of industries. By selecting a diverse group of stocks that share only their conspicuous cheapness and nothing else, an unimaginative investor can rack up solid returns during such times.

Today isn’t one of those times.

There are two kinds of unloved stocks: those that suffer from contempt and those that suffer from neglect. The greatest long-term advantage in hunting for bargains among small cap stocks doesn’t come from the companies themselves – rather, it comes from investors’ attitudes towards these smaller stocks. Since there are so many small stocks, most investors can’t help but neglect a great many of them. And so, there tend to be more bargains born of neglect among small cap stocks than among their larger brethren.

Try this little exercise when you get a chance. Start with a blank piece of paper. Then, write down the ticker symbols of the stocks you currently consider to be cheap. If you’re an unmovable bear, write down the ticker symbols of the stocks you consider to be cheap relative to the market. Treat this as a free write. Don’t linger on a particular stock or second guess yourself – the moment your hand stops moving, you’re done.

Now, go over the list and ask three questions of each stock. One, is this a bargain born of contempt or neglect? Two, is this stock cheap because of company specific concerns or because of industry wide concerns? Three, if this were a private business, would it be considered a great business, a good business, an average business, or a poor business? In other words, is this a strong player in a healthy, growing industry or an also ran in the buggy whip business?

Hopefully, your list will feature a good mix of businesses from a variety of different industries. Ideally, it will have some neglected names on it – truly special businesses that are being valued like they’re nothing special.

I recently performed this exercise myself. After the list was complete and I had gone back over it with the precise ratios in hand, I found the truly cheap businesses were not high quality names and were concentrated in a very few industries. …

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 22, 2007

Book Review: You Can Be a Stock Market Genius

Gannon On Investing’s contributing writer, Steven Rosales, reviews Joel Greenblatt‘s You Can Be a Stock Market Genius.

Read Book Review

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 21, 2007

On Corus, Fremont, and the Impairment Charge

I haven’t written about the sub-prime lending story on this blog, because it didn’t involve the kinds of stocks I would normally write about. Despite the recent market tumult, very few financial services companies have seen their stock prices decline to levels where they would be worth writing about. However, there are a few exceptions. Last Thursday, one of these exceptions, Corus Bankshares (CORS), made an announcement that connected it to the wider sub-prime lending story.

Impairment Charge

Corus announced that it had determined the decline in the market value of its stake in Fremont General (FMT) constituted an “other than temporary” impairment (as defined by GAAP). As a result, Corus plans to record a charge in the first quarter of 2007.

At the time of the press release (March 15, 2007) Corus held 2.5 million shares of Fremont General purchased at an average cost of $12.73 a share. The most recent trade I saw on Fremont was at $8.81 a share. So, at present, Corus’ common stock position in Fremont would be $31.83 million at cost and only $22.03 million at market. If the quarter ended today, Corus would record a $9.8 million pre-tax charge. The impairment charge would increase to the extent that Fremont General’s share price falls between now and March 31st; conversely, the impairment charge would decrease to the extent that Fremont General’s share price rises between now and March 31st.

Adding to the Position

At year end 2006, Corus held only 1.6 million shares of Fremont General. The recent increase is explained in the March 15th press release:

“During 2007, and since the recent disclosures and decline in Fremont’s stock price, Corus has opportunistically purchased an additional 967,000 shares, bringing its total position to 2.5 million shares with an average cost basis of $12.73 a share.”

Common Stock Portfolio

The 2.5 million shares of Fremont General are held at the holding company level. The holding company has a portfolio consisting entirely of the common stock of companies within the financial services industry.

To give you an idea of what the portfolio looks like, here is a summary of Corus’ common stock investments as of December 31st, 2006. Remember, this information is out of date – especially in regard to the Fremont General position:

Bank of America (BAC)16.5%

Fremont General (FMT)11.8%

JP Morgan (JPM)11.1%

Wachovia (WB)10.4%

Regions Financial (RF)8.9%

Comerica (CMA)7.1%

Citigroup (C)5.8%

Merrill Lynch (MER)5.7%

US Bancorp (USB)4.5%

MAF Bancorp (MAFB)4.2%

Morgan Stanley (MS)3.1%

Compass Bancshares (CBSS)3.0%

Associated Bancorp (ASBC)1.9%

SunTrust Banks (STI)1.8%

Bank of New York (BK)1.8%

National City (NCC)1.3%

Amcore Financial (AMFI)1.0%

Both on December 31st, 2006 and March 15th, 2007 the holding company’s common stock portfolio had a total market value in excess of $200 million. Therefore, it is unlikely the Fremont stake accounts for much …

Read more
Geoff Gannon March 21, 2007

20 Questions for Richard Beddard of The Interactive Investor Blog

Richard Beddard is the editor of Interactive Investor, one of the UK’s leading financial websites, and the main contributor to its blog. He’s a keen private investor in smaller UK stocks and larger American ones.

Visit The Interactive Investor Blog

1. Are you a value investor?

My starting point isn’t value. I look for stocks I can pigeon hole: growth, income or recovery usually value always has the last word though. Knowing why I’m buying the company helps me decide how to evaluate it. For example, if I’m looking at an income share I focus on the dividend yield and cashflows . If I’m looking at a growth share I look at earnings growth, return on capital, and margins initially. If I’m looking at a recovery share the price needs to have tanked and management must have a credible plan. But it all comes down to price in the end, and how it relates to the other factors.

2. What is value investing?

It’s buying good companies on the cheap. The price is one side of the equation, what you get for it is the other side. I like my companies to have little debt or, better still net cash in the bank. Partly that’s about safety – a cash rich company is unlikely to go bankrupt tomorrow, and partly it’s about potential, because cash can be reinvested or returned to shareholders. A growing company needs cash to fund expansion. A recovering company needs cash to see it through difficult times. I don’t mind if a company I own takes on debt, but I like to get in there before it does. Other signs I look for are less tangible: straightforward accounts, companies that put substance ahead of style, insiders buying, reputation…

3. What is your approach to investing?

I’m a long-term bottom up investor. I don’t pretend to read the markets, but I buy the stocks I do for specific reasons which means they are often un-correlated. That protected me from the savage downturn between 2000 and 2003. I suppose you could say I’m a contrarian, though I don’t set out to do the opposite of everyone else. I just set out to do my own thing.

4. How do you evaluate a stock?

It doesn’t take me long at all. Maybe an hour or two. But finding the stocks to evaluate takes a lot longer than that. I follow all the US shares covered by the Value Line Investment Survey, and all the shares listed on the London Stock Exchange. I reckon that’s 4,000 odd companies, so you can imagine – I don’t have much time to spend on each. I don’t use screens to whittle down the number as I think they are too literal. If a company has one year of low growth in five, it’s not a growth share. That’s mad. I think the ‘fuzzy logic’ of the human brain is a better filter. But Value Line and similar UK services (I use …

Read more