Showing posts with label investors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label investors. Show all posts

Thursday, April 10

8 bargain stocks for value investors

8 bargain stocks for value investors
Business Week | By Brett Arends, MarketWatch

Even in this rich market, these shares are still trading at a discount, says one fund manager.

Are there still any bargains left out there in the stock market? If so, where are they?

It is not news that by many long-term measures, U.S. stock indexes, and indeed many overseas indexes, are looking on the rich side.

But it's an old saw that there is always a bargain somewhere on the stock market if you know where to look -- even when most shares are expensive, like now.

So I asked one excellent value investor for his top picks. He gave me eight -- ranging from some small-cap and foreign names you've probably never heard of to some household names that even your grandma knows.

Josh Strauss is a partner at Pekin Singer Strauss, a $1 billion money manager in Chicago, and the co-manager of the firm's Appleseed (APPLX) mutual fund, a general investment fund with a socially-responsible angle.

The Appleseed fund was launched at one of the toughest moments for a money manager: Namely at the end of 2006, not long before the beginning of the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. And while a seven-year track record is still a small sample size, it's impressive.

If you had invested $10,000 in the MSCI World stock market index back then and just left it there, reinvesting the dividends, you'd have made $3,200 in profits through the end of last year.

If you'd invested the same amount of money in Appleseed, you'd have made $7,800 -- more than twice as much.

The fund fell just 18 percent in 2008, compared with 40 percent for the MSCI World index of stock markets.

Strauss is a big gold bug, and the fund has 17 percent of its money invested in gold bullion. That helped it when gold was on the way up, but has hurt it for the past couple of years. The fund is also cautiously positioned, holding 17 percent of its money in cash and bonds. That also hurt it last year, when markets boomed.

Despite that, Appleseed was up 20 percent, not too far shy of global markets' 27 percent. The fund's stock holdings were up nearly 40 percent -- an astonishing performance.

So what are his eight picks?

Teva Pharmaceuticals (TEVA): The Israel-headquartered company, whose stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange, is the world's top manufacturer of "generic" or off-brand drugs and some patented, branded drugs. Fears over the imminent patent expiration of Teva's blockbuster multiple sclerosis drug, Copaxone, have left the stock too cheap on about 11 times forecast earnings and a free cash flow yield of about 10 percent, argues Strauss.

Titan International (TWI): This company makes agricultural equipment, including wheels and tires. Profits have been hit recently, in part because tumbling corn prices have hit the income of its customers, farmers. But Wall Street is too pessimistic, says Strauss. The stock is now just six times earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization. "The market has this stock trading at a depressed valuation on cyclically depressed earnings -- as if low corn prices are the new normal," Strauss says.

FTD (FTD): Do you order flowers online? You may use ftd.com. This stock was spun off from parent United Online (UNTD) at the end of 2013 and has been overlooked by the market so far, says Strauss. No sell-side analysts cover it, but Strauss estimates the stock is only about ten times free cash flow.

John B. Sanfilippo (JBSS): It's nearly 18 months since I first wrote about Appleseed's bullish take on the owner of Fisher Nuts. Since then the stock has, er, gone nuts, rising 70 percent. Strauss is still nutty about the stock, too (sorry about that. You try writing about the booming stock in a nut company). It's still only about 11 times forecast earnings.

Toyo Tanso (JP:5310): This Japanese company makes key components for solar panels and LEDs. The stock has been hit along with the wider alternative-energy sector, but Strauss argues the fall is overdone and the stock now sells for less than "tangible book value" -- the net value of its real assets.

Western Union (WU): These guys were letting you transfer money around the world long before "bitcoins." They are still the biggest brand worldwide in money transfer and payment services. The stock is just 11 times forecast earnings with a decent 3% dividend yield. Strauss says the business has high barriers to entry, and the company has a solid balance sheet and robust cash flows.

Staples (SPLS): Stock in the giant office supplies company has fallen by nearly a third since last summer, and the company recently announced store closings and layoffs as profits came in lower than expected. Many traditional retailers are suffering as we buy more and more online. Staples has also been hit by the sluggish economy, and the move -- thanks to technology -- toward more "paperless" offices. But the franchise remains robust, and the stock is now just 12 times earnings, with a 4 percent dividend yield.

Mosaic (MOS): Stock in this producer of potash fertilizer has halved in three years as the boom in commodities, particularly agricultural products, has gone into sharp reverse. An industry price war last year hurt the economics still further. But Strauss thinks the industry fundamentals are sound and the stock (with a 2 percent dividend yield) is a contrarian buy.

How will these picks fare? As ever, you pays your money and you takes your chance.

Monday, April 7

4 advantages of small-time investors

4 advantages of small-time investors
Business Week | By Charlie Bilello, U.S. News & World Report

You can beat the pros at their own game if you extend your time horizon, exercise patience and look for ways to move against the crowd when opportunities arise.

In most fields, professionals or industry experts have a clear advantage over the average person. We know this to be true in medicine, law, engineering and other vocations in which the learning curve is high.

Contrary to popular belief, investing is not one of these fields, and in fact, the opposite is often true. A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing in the investment world.

Before you jump to conclusions, I am not suggesting that the average individual outperforms the average professional investor. This is likely not the case. What I am arguing is that the potential is there if individuals can avoid the emotional biases that hurt all investors while capitalizing on certain inherent advantages that individuals possess.

What are some of these advantages?

The most important element of successful investing is time. Even if you have an effective investment strategy, you still need to have enough time to benefit from the long-term compounding of returns. The advantage that many individuals have over professional investors is that their time horizon is often significantly longer.

History has shown us that the longer your time horizon, the higher your odds of achieving a positive return. For example, since 1900, the Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) has been higher in 64 percent of rolling 3-month periods. If you extend the holding period to 12 months, this improves to 72 percent. If an investor committed to a 5-year holding period, an investment in the S&P 500 index would have been up 89 percent of the time. A 10-year holding period improves to a 96 percent success rate and if you held for a 20-year period, your return in the S&P 500 index would have been positive 100 percent of the time.

Meanwhile, many professional investors, particularly hedge funds, are operating on a monthly performance time frame in which their performance is judged. This can often lead to suboptimal investment decisions in an attempt to manage the monthly performance number. This is perfectly rational behavior for these hedge funds, as their businesses cannot afford a string of poor numbers, even if it means that long-term returns would increase. For these funds, there is no long term without the short term.

Individual investors, of course, do not have to worry about reporting a monthly number and can invest to maximize long-term returns.

Knowing you have time on your side is one thing, but having the patience to sit there during the inevitable periods when you lose money is quite another. Many professional investors lack patience, as they are not afforded this luxury by their clients. Again, this can lead to suboptimal behavior and abandoning an otherwise successful strategy at precisely the worst time.

A clear example of this would be the fall of 2008, when many long/short hedge funds had to sell down their long investments in order to minimize risk and keep their investors at bay. At the same time, individual investors could have done the opposite, and increased their long-equity exposure knowing that it was likely to hurt in the short run, but benefit from long-term returns.

A third advantage individual investors have is that they can go against the crowd when valuations are at an extreme. Professional investors often suffer from herding, or the concept of gravitating to similar investments of other funds. They engage in this behavior because the career risk from deviating from the crowd and being wrong can mean the end of one's career, even if it is the correct decision in the long run.

An example of this today would be the emerging market equity space. In spite of these investments' significantly cheaper valuations than U.S. equities, you'll find few professional investors with a bullish outlook on these shares.

The reason for this is simple. While the S&P 500 is up over 47 percent over the past three years with overwhelmingly positive news, emerging markets are down 15 percent and have the backdrop of extremely negative news. If a professional investor were to deviate from the crowd here and buy emerging markets, they would be highly penalized if the trade did not immediately work.

Their investors would have little patience for losing money in a trade that was so obviously (in hindsight) wrong. The implication here is that because emerging markets have been underperforming by such a wide margin, that the professional investor should know better than to invest in that region. Thus, regardless of the long-term return potential, professional investors will avoid emerging markets until prices advance and the news gets better. By this point, though, much of the original opportunity will have passed.

Professional investors are often paid to be specialists or experts in a certain area of the market, whether it be an asset class, a sector or a security. This expertise can come at a cost when a better investment opportunity lies elsewhere. A good example of this would be in 2000, at the height of the dot-com bubble. A professional investor that focused on long-only investments in the technology sector would have no way of avoiding the ensuing crash.

The pros are also constrained by size. When assets under management reach a certain level, smaller or less liquid opportunities are no longer an option for these funds. At times, these smaller opportunities are extremely compelling, offering the best long-term returns. Individual investors do not suffer from size limitations and can (in theory) go to wherever the best opportunity is.

Bottom line: Although these advantages are available to all investors, they are significantly underutilized. The average individual suffers from the same negative behavioral biases as professional investors. Indeed, the average holding period for stocks has continually fallen over the past 50 years, from over eight years in 1960, to less than a year today.

With increased access to information and lower costs of trading, investors have become their own worst enemy. They are relinquishing any advantage they might have over professionals in believing they can improve their returns through increased trading.

An intelligent investor would do well to stop trading without a strategy and recapture their inherent advantage by extending their time horizon, developing a more patient outlook and looking for ways to move against the crowd when opportunities arise.

Tuesday, April 1

9 great funds for young investors

9 great funds for young investors
Business Week | By Stacy Rapacon, Kiplinger

Many millennials remain understandably wary of the stock market. But for young people with time on their side, these mutual funds present good long-term options.

The Great Recession has scared nearly an entire generation away from stocks. According to a 2013 survey by Wells Fargo, more than half of people age 22 to 32 lack confidence in the stock market.

Anton Bayer, chief executive of Up Capital Management, a registered investment adviser in Granite Bay, Calif., says this attitude is understandable given that young people have seen nothing but a high-volatility market during their investing lifetime.

"Their approach is 'If I don't do anything, I won't lose money,' but that's not good enough," Bayer says. "They need to engage. In order to build wealth, you can't be passive."

Mutual funds can be the best way for young investors to get in on the action. A single investment can include a diversified portfolio at a relatively low cost. Plus, Bayer points out, "in times of storms, mutual funds can weather the ups and downs a little bit better than a few individual stocks."

A solid investment base starts with index mutual funds, which mimic the returns of a broad market segment. These funds are easy for young investors to comprehend because there are neither exotic investment strategies to unravel nor the stock-picking whims of fund managers to decipher.

"A very simple, no-load index fund is the cheapest and easiest way to go," says Lauren Locker, a financial planner based in Little Falls, N.J. "It'll let you hit a little bit of everything, and you don't really have to pay too much attention to it."

Locker recommends Vanguard Total Stock Market (VTSMX). The majority of its portfolio (72.2 percent) is invested in giant- or large-company stocks, but it also dips into medium-, small- and micro-cap stocks. Its benchmark, the CRSP U.S. Total Market Index, is made up of about 3,600 U.S. stocks.

Over the past five years, Vanguard Total Stock Market has gained 26.0 percent annualized, ranking it in the top 12 percent of its "large blend" category. (Large blend funds invest in both growth and value stocks and are fairly representative of the entire stock market. All returns and related numbers are as of March 5.) The fund's expense ratio is a very low 0.17 percent per year. It requires a minimum initial investment of $3,000.

One note on fund performance figures: Stocks have been on a tear since the brutal bear market ended in March 2009, resulting in outsized gains during the past five years. Don't expect these heady returns to continue indefinitely. Over the long term, the average return of the stock market is closer to 10 percent per year.

Investing rookies might also enjoy the set-it-and-forget-it benefit of target-date funds. Get started by choosing the year in which you want to achieve your investing goal, such as retirement. Then, pick a fund with that year in its name. The managers will build the fund's asset allocation to suit your time horizon and dial down the risk as the fund's deadline approaches.

Three of the biggest fund families -- Fidelity, T. Rowe Price and Vanguard -- offer quality target-date options, says Locker. Vanguard boasts the lowest fees. The Vanguard Target Retirement 2050 (VFIFX) fund, suitable for a 29-year-old aiming to retire at age 65, has an expense ratio of just 0.18 percent. Fidelity's and T. Rowe's 2050 funds charge 0.82 percent and 0.78 percent, respectively.

T. Rowe Price Retirement 2050 (TRRMX) has the best performance record of the three, earning 23.9 percent annualized over the past five years, keeping pace with the widely followed Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) and topping Vanguard 2050 by an average of 2.0 percentage points per year and Fidelity Freedom 2050 (FFFHX) by an average of 2.7 points per year.

Instead of the target-date approach, Bayer prefers using balanced funds, which generally invest in a mix of stocks and bonds. "These are very useful tools for younger investors because they're the whole package," he says. Over time, he suggests switching from more-aggressive balanced funds to more-conservative balanced funds as your investment needs change. For example, opt for the aggressive fund when you're young and have time on your side, then move into increasingly conservative balanced funds as you approach retirement.

Bayer likes Invesco Equity and Income (ACEIX), which Morningstar categorizes as "aggressive allocation," meaning the fund typically has 70 percent to 90 percent of its assets in stocks. He might trade it for a "moderate allocation" fund with 50 percent to 70 percent in stocks, such as Hartford Balanced (ITTAX), to ease up on risk. Unfortunately, both funds' Class A shares come with a 5.5 percent load -- a sales charge that can really take a bite out of your returns. But if they're available through your 401k, you may be able to skip that extra fee.

For a no-load balanced option, consider FPA Crescent (FPACX), a moderate allocation fund and member of the Kiplinger 25, a collection of our favorite no-load mutual funds. Manager Steven Romick is free to invest almost anywhere and in a range of different assets, from stocks and bonds to currencies and subprime home loans. But with his strategy of seeking out-of-favor stocks, he has found few compelling opportunities during the market's recent run. The fund currently has a portfolio that's 44.1 percent cash.

It has earned 16.7 percent over the past year, better than its peers by 4.0 percentage points, but it trailed the S&P 500 by 7.6 points. Long-term returns are more impressive: Over the past 15 years, it has gained an average of 9.9 percent a year, beating the S&P 500 by an average 5.4 percentage points a year and leading its category. The fund charges 1.14 percent in annual expenses and requires $1,500 to start.

After you settle on your core funds, you may want to devote a portion of your investing dollars to sector funds that offer the potential to outperform the broader stock market. These funds can (and probably will) have more ups and downs than core funds, but young investors with ample time to recover from investing stumbles can afford to take on the added risk.

Bayer suggests looking at the technology and biotech sectors -- both top performers over the past few years. What do these sectors have in common? Innovation. "They are introducing new products, new services, something that's allowing them to introduce new sources of revenue," says Bayer. "Buying early in innovation is a huge opportunity."

He recommends Fidelity Select Biotechnology (FBIOX). Manager Rajiv Kaul seeks companies with strong pipelines and breakthrough innovations on the horizon. Over the past three years, this Fidelity fund has ranked tops among health funds with a return of 47.4 percent annualized, beating its peers by an average of 26.9 percentage points per year and the S&P 500 by an average of 32.6 points per year. It requires a minimum initial investment of $2,500 and charges 0.79 percent in annual expenses.

Ivy Science and Technology (WSTAX) is a load fund that Bayer thinks is worth the cost. It has a sales charge of 5.75 percent on top of its 1.37 percent annual expense ratio, but the fund has returned a whopping 46.7 percent over the past year, 22.4 percentage points better than the S&P 500 and 10.7 points more than the average technology fund. Over the past ten years, it has outperformed 97 percent of its peers. Top holdings include household names Google (GOOG) and Facebook (FB) as well as lesser-known companies, such as Cree (CREE) and Aspen Technology (AZPN). The minimum initial investment is $500.

Tuesday, January 14

4 Ways women make better investors

4 Ways women make better investors
| By Tom sightings, US News & world report

Guys could stand, a couple of things about the investment of their female pendants--risk-averse as the virtues of patience and learning research.

The proof is: after a number of studies by banks and investment firms over the past decade, women make better investors than men. The youngest, determined by the tax and advisory firm Rothstein of Kass, that hedge funds, led by women, which surpassed the managed by men by 6 percentage points over a nine-month period in 2012.

Why do women, better than the average? No one knows exactly. And of course there are exceptions, such as Warren Buffett.

But if in the long term, women generally have better investment returns than men produce. Here are four possible causes:

You think this would be a good thing, right? But as in so many areas to invest, the obvious answer is not correct. For many men, the most important thing is not the absolute return on an investment, but whether their rivals to beat. This leads often male managers of to risky bets that can pay off which are less.

Is one more important investment criteria for many men bragging about their income. And as we all know, men are less likely, for advice on issues. Somehow, it is seen as a sign of weakness. All of this leads to men focus on short term and lose the primary purpose of investments out of sight: to produce consistent, positive returns over a longer period of time.

According to a study by behavioral scientists, women are typically averse than men. Women are more inclined, to wear than men, seatbelts, cigarette smoking and blood pressure avoid checks. You are 40% less likely, that to run the yellow traffic light. So it should not surprise attracted the women towards safer investments and hold portfolios of stocks, which are less volatile.

An investment study showed, that if something goes wrong, men become angry fearful while women. Anger can cause that people ruthlessly trade will double to more losses, such as to lose investments or to try, "a falling knife to collect." However, afraid of women are more likely to avoid market downturn in the first place, and then if they suffer losses are more likely pull the reins and move away from large disasters.

Women, who are less confident than men are likely to less deceived to believe they know more than is actually the case. They want to control and therefore not more research to find out exactly what they invest.

Women are also more realistic ideas, what can reasonably afford an investment. In short, they have lower expectations from their investments. Therefore, they are less likely to jump on the "next big thing" or a "don't miss" fall on stock tip.

In a report found that a quarter of the men surveyed gave, that she would gamble on a "hot" investment, without any real research to do, because many women have the same while making only half of error would. As a result, trading women of less frequently. They are less transaction costs and less tax consequences. Women undertake their investments, and because they have done their homework, are more likely to their obligations to meet. You are patient investors and typically not by a short-term setback in the performance of one frightened company.

Surveys have shown that women more likely than men to the attribute success to factors outside themselves as luck or fate. This apparent contradiction lay - with the goal of achieving the control if you know that you can only so much control - are women the perspective they need to avoid panic. And yet paradoxically, it allows also to admit when they've made a mistake.

Women looking for the next storm. When it arrives, they batten to the hatches and it ride. You know the market like the ocean. It is much larger than an investor subject to any large global forces. But in the course of time, there is a certain ebb and flow, and if you're a good Navigator you can rich coastal sailing.

How is it that the best investor of all, the legendary Warren Buffett, happens to be a man? Maybe you should ask author Louann Lofton, who wrote the book "Warren Buffett invests like a girl: and why would you want to."

Wednesday, November 13

Investors wiser ahead of Twitter IPO

Investors wiser ahead of Twitter IPO
| By Carol Kopp, MarketWatch

Several wealth managers told Reuters that they would advise their clients to wait until after the IPO, and buy Twitter only if and when the stock tanks.

Unless you're one of those high rollers who run a mutual fund or a hedge fund, you probably didn't get invited to any of the stops on the Twitter Inc. road show, the obligatory show-and-tell by company executives in advance of an initial public offering.

That's OK. It's being called "the most eagerly awaited market debut since Facebook (FB)," and that ought to tell you all you need to know.

It doesn't look like the Twitter IPO will cause the same system-crushing frenzy, or the same horrible hangover, that Facebook's debut caused in May 2012.

In fact, it looks like the small investor is going to sit back and watch what happens to this one. After all, procrastination has worked out quite well for Facebook investors. After famously closing below its IPO price in May 2012, the stock just kept sliding, falling to a low under $19 last August. Since then, it has gained steadily, and is now above $50.

This time, several wealth managers told Reuters that they would advise their clients to wait until after the IPO, and buy Twitter only if and when the stock tanks. Others said they had not had any inquiries from clients about the IPO, and wouldn't recommend participating in it if they did.

In any case, individual investors may well own a bit of Twitter stock anyway, through their mutual funds or 401(k) investments.

Twitter executives have gotten some credit for keeping their expectations — and their offering price — modestly low.

The company has said it will sell 70 million shares at a price of $17 to $20 each when it launches the IPO, as early as Nov. 7. That would value the company at about $11 billion, less than the $15 billion some analysts were expecting. The New York Times suggests that Twitter may still raise the price, if it finds "exuberant demand" in the road trip.

There's also little chance of the technical glitches that enraged investors on Facebook's big day.

Some of the techies who work for the New York Stock Exchange devoted last Saturday to a test run of the initial public offering of Twitter shares, in advance of the actual event.

The test apparently went off without a hitch. Maybe they can rub the noses of their rivals at the Nasdaq in that small victory.

But it seems that the Facebook experience caused an epiphany of sorts for the small investor. In short, we've wised up.

For those who haven't, Forbes.com has an analysis of the actual performance of recent IPOs. It offers pretty definitive proof that the famous first-day "pop" in price for an IPO benefits the company's founders and early investors, and its underwriters, but not so much the retail investor.

That was pretty much what happened with Facebook's stock last year — except that even institutional investors lost about $500 million on the IPO, at least short-term, due in part to malfunctioning at the Nasdaq.

In Twitter's case, there's also the plain fact that the company isn't making money yet, having moved only recently into monetizing mode.

In an updated filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this month, Twitter said its revenue more than doubled in the third quarter, to $168.6 million in the third quarter, from $82.3 million the year before. Its net loss rose to $64.6 million, from $21.6 million.

The company is continuing to spend heavily on sales and marketing, and on research and development, and may not start actually turning a profit until 2015, according to one of the underwriters of the stock offering.

According to Bloomberg News, much of that research and development cost is for creation of apps that complement Twitter. The company wants to own those apps, and the advertising that is carried on them, rather than cut revenue-sharing deals with external app developers.

Twitter's strength is in its 230 million users, and its growing reputation as a place to make and break news.

Collecting Twitter followers is becoming something of a competitive sport for anyone with anything to communicate. This week, Pope Francis tweeted his gratitude to his followers, after passing the 10 million mark. As The Guardian points out, that's triple the number of his immediate predecessor, but a tad fewer than Kanye West has collected.

It's also way fewer than the number of followers for the three most popular names on Twitter. Justin Bieber, Katy Perry and Lady Gaga each have more than 40 million followers.

Sunday, November 10

Halloween means treats for investors

Halloween means treats for investors
| By Steven Goldbert, Kiplinger's

If you sold in May and went away, it's time to come back. Historically, the stock market delivers stellar returns from November through April.

Forget Washington's paralysis. Stop worrying that the market is "too high." Put aside concerns that third-quarter earnings are tepid. Instead, brighten up: Halloween is here, and that means Wall Street, if history is any guide, is about to stage a six-month-long party.

The "Halloween Indicator" is one of the few stock market patterns with a substantial body of research behind it. The most comprehensive study, published last year, found that stocks worldwide rose 6.9 percent, on average, from November through April, and only 2.4 percent from May through October.

Authored by Ben Jacobsen, a finance professor at Massey University in New Zealand, and graduate student Cherry Zhang, "The Halloween Indicator: Everywhere and All the Time" examined price changes in 108 countries stretching back as far as 319 years. (The researchers used price-only returns rather than total returns because it was impossible to obtain old dividend data in some markets.)

The Halloween Indicator is the flip side of "sell in May and go away" -- a Wall Street saw that in effect suggests staying out of the stock market from the start of May through the end of October. But although the New Zealand study finds that markets aren't as strong in the May-October period as they are in the November-April period, stocks in many countries still show gains, on average, from May through October.

Selling in May didn't prove to be a fruitful strategy this year. From May 1 through October 21, the Standard & Poor's 500 Index ($INX) returned 11.4 percent. That was a little less than the market's 13.2 percent return from November 2012 through last April, but that's cold comfort to those who headed for the sidelines last spring.

Jacobsen says he has no idea why the sell-in-May strategy failed this year. "I wish I knew why the strategy works in some years and doesn't in others," he said in an e-mail. The same, of course, holds for the Halloween Indicator. It may not work every year, but the strategy, Jacobsen says, is "as good as it gets."

In the U.S., Jacobsen and Zhang found, the November-April period beat the May-October period by 5.7 percentage points, on average, from 2001 through 2011. From 1991 through 2000, November-April outperformed the other half of the year by 4.2 points, on average. In the 1980s, it was ahead by 6.6 points; in the 1970s, by 6.7 points; in the 1960s, by 5.5 points; and in the 1950s, by 5.0 points.

Overall, the authors found, the strategy worked in 81 of the 108 countries they tracked. It worked best in Western Europe, but the pattern was strong in the U.S., too.

What's more, in the United Kingdom, which the authors studied most closely, the strategy worked better the more years you employed it. Compared with buying and holding, selling in May and buying back November 1 worked only 63 percent of the time over one year. But over five years, it worked 82 percent of the time, and over ten years, it worked 92 percent of the time.

No one knows why the strategy has worked. The authors call it a "puzzling anomaly."

Jacobsen says he has been employing the strategy with his own money "for over 20 years with a lot of success." He holds cash from May through October.

I worry about any market-timing strategy, particularly one that has no clear rationale for why it works. But the amount of data on this anomaly is too massive to ignore. My biggest problem with it is that the market tends to rise from May through October, too, so why sell?

If I were going to employ the strategy, I'd do so only in a tax-deferred account -- and I'd use it only to raise and lower my stock allocation by, say, five to ten percentage points. If you do it with a bigger part of your portfolio, I think you're setting yourself up for failure because you're likely to give it up after a bad stretch or two.

Finally, the stock market has already enjoyed a terrific year (year to date through Oct. 21, the S&P 500 has returned 24.4 percent), and a pullback is inevitable at some point. But we don't know when the retreat will occur, or how deep it will be.

However, there are reasons to be bullish -- aside from Halloween. The economy is growing, albeit at a slow pace. The Federal Reserve may taper its bond buying, but it's committed to keeping short-term interest rates near zero until the economy strengthens. Most Republicans sound unwilling to go through another "Perils of Pauline" experience anytime soon, so we may avoid debt and budget crises early next year. Finally, although the market isn't cheap, I don't think it's overpriced, either.

Sunday, January 6

Chinese investors still does not turn sour on us

Michelle Caruso-Cabrera, CNBC.com
Investors around the world can be cooled in the United States, but not China.

Chinese investment in the United States will probably break another record in 2013, according to market research firm rhodium group. This is after a record year in 2012 with deals worth more than 6.5 billion $, 12 percent from the previous record of $5.8 billion in the year 2010.

"Since we have already lined up $5 billion value of the deals it is very likely that 2013 will be another record year." Policies in China, which demonstrates commitment to structural reforms expand the dynamics could find access to technology and know-how to prepare for a new era of Chinese growth, as Chinese companies,"said Thilo Hanemann, author of a new report rhodium Chinese direct investment in the United States.

The Chinese seem, in fact, be some of the few who are willing to invest in the United States since the financial crisis. Analysis is Middle Eastern investment in the United States by 86 percent, Canada by 75 percent and Europe to 49 per cent from the first three quarters 2007 at the first three quarters of the year 2012, according to the Bureau of economic.

Hanemann thinks that the household data number, because it flows through offshore financial centres not included undercounts. Rhodium estimates the increase in Chinese investment in the United States is actually a whopping 1300 percent.

Of course, China is still small compared to other parts of the world; less than 1 percent of the total foreign investment in the United States. However, that only the number is expected to be as a country grow and his growing companies continue to invest outside their home country, they search for raw materials and value added expertise. (Read more: No. 2 of the world economy is solid 2013 set up.)

Biggest deals in the year 2012 the Sinopec were $2.5 billion to Devon Energy and Dalian Wanda's cinema chain AMC $2.6 billion purchase. In addition, Wanxiang took $420 million at great point energy.

Still waiting for regulatory approval: a Chinese Consortium has decided a 80 percent stake in AIG aviation leasing unit lease Finance Corp to buy for $4.2 billion. Auto-parts maker Wanxiang has the business not defense of the battery manufacturer of A123 systems in a bankruptcy auction won. BGI Shenzhen waiting for regulatory approvals California biotech buy company of complete Genomics for $118 million.

"In short, we are in the middle of a structural growth story, the China United States investment relationship form converts a one-way street into a two-way street", Thilo Hanemann, author of the report wrote.

Also Chinese investment in U.S. companies was disputed in the year 2012. A report by two members of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee attacked Chinese telecom companies that wanted to invest in the United States, Huawei and ZTE, which suggests that their technology could be used for spying.

Moreover, members of the community are motifs intelligence suspicious compared to Chinese companies, especially because many of the corporate State-owned enterprises; in other words, in possession of, and ultimately by the Chinese Government controls.

Wednesday, November 7

Experts: Greece riskier for investors as Syria

The associated press, staff
London-world markets may believe that the taxes that the purse of the companies of the world breathe any easier are the worst of the financial crisis in Europe after three turbulent years, but those.

An annual overview of finance directors from global business consultancy BDO finds that the crisis over too much government debt in Europe as one of its main concerns remain - so much is considered Greece to invest a riskier place and founded in Syria as a war-torn.

Only Iran and Iraq are riskier than Greece bankruptcy and a possible euro exit than avoid the struggles to convince that it deserves a bailout loans also its international creditors.

"CFOs always carefully from southern Europe, parts of which they see now as risky as the politically unstable countries of the Middle East, always", said Managing Director Martin Van Roekel BDO.

Greece is not the only country in the 17-country group, the top 10 riskiest countries euro in the survey used in investing. Spain, which economy with one, longstanding relationship with Latin America already in the euro zone no. 4 No. 7.

This retention of finance directors, in particular from fast-growing economies such as Brazil and China, invest in the indebted countries of Europe goes to the heart of the financial crisis. A majority of these countries depends on recovery of the private sector strengthened to fill links by government spending cuts in the investment gap.

While countries like fight, Greece and Spain, to convince that they good places to invest, are other international business of prosperierende. Despite the recent signs of a slowdown others considered China the most attractive country for expansion, closely followed by the United States such as Brazil, India, Germany, and 10 of the countries are also in the top UK ripe for expansion.

Overall, the survey by BDO found that CFOs around the world find it difficult for transactions abroad. As well as an uncertain global economy citing increased regulation and increased competition.

Van Roekel also said he is "surprised" that have more financial directors do not have the high debt from countries outside Europe's concerns, especially in Japan and the United States

Although Japan's debt amounting to approximately twice as large as its economy is, the country has managed to avoid, too many investors concerns stirs up, because most of his self-financed own pension funds.

The United States that has the advantage that the dollar, the global reserve currency, problems of its own and the winner of the presidential election who it is, will soon with the "fiscal cliff" beat around - a package of huge tax increases and spending cuts will be automatically introduced if the various parts of the Government a budget agreement is not.

BDO of surveyed 1,000 CFOs of medium-sized companies currently planning foreign investment.

Sunday, September 30

Investors wondering whether another camp tech bubble bursts

Is Facebook still fall? Weigh Pacific Crest securities analyst Evan Wilson and Michael Pachter, Wedbush securities analyst, with trade across the social network company.

The share price value of some of the most well known social media stocks in the doldrums, investors in these companies have itself a question recently: we have again fool get?

During the so-called Internet bubble plowed before a decade investors like money in scores of new Internet companies, which had virtually no sales growth, bets, that technology would change the world and the new dot-coms eventually would turn a profit.

After the collapse of some dotcom names such as Amazon.com, but eventually again and move higher, but in many cases, investors have been proved wrong and the companies, which in investing, had collapsed.

Some are now proposes an another dotcom bubble in the social media space is brewing. The best known example, the, is to show the, Facebook. After years of speculation, that the social media giant public would go did fallen 53 percent in May and since then the stock price and count, flush away from more than 50 billion $ market value.

Facebook's share price hit a new all-time low Tuesday, fall under $18 for the first time, even though it is up here in after-hours trading on news of the company had started, investors and its own employees as its stock price spirals after to calm down.

In a regulatory filing that said social network its CEO Mark Zuckerberg sell not shares of the company for a year, and promised not to sell, one almost to cover tax liability is $2 billion. Social networking moves back effectively buy million shares which will probably bolster its schwachelnde share price this fall and allow the employees in their camp weeks earlier than planned to cash.

Facebook's losses since the initial public offering are not quite as dramatic as that of the other social-media company, which went public last year, including online-gaming site Zynga, the stock price has last 71 percent since the IPO in December year decline, and GroupOn, which has seen the value of the shares diving 84 percent since the IPO in November last year.

The sharp decreases have less with shaky business models and more to do with sky-high expectations for the companies in the emerging social media space, to do, said Jay Ritter, Professor of finance at the University of Florida and expert on initial public offerings.

"Facebook is money making;" It has a successful business model. "As a company, it has continued to perform, although (the Manager) difficulty, money earn with mobile users have had", Ritter said. "The problem has been for investors at a price purchased, divided into very optimistic expectations (for the company)."

S & P Capital IQ equity analyst Scott Kessler is also optimistic. Recently updated he his views on Facebook a "buy," saying that he thinks that much about the potential threat of Facebook's share price as a result of time "depends on a so-called" for the most important investors in the company, is made. The period prevented some early investors-usually venture capital investors and insiders from the sale of million shares that they own in Facebook.

The company focuses more on the monetization of their mobile users now, and in this context, it "better than expected" running, he told CNBC Tuesday, adding that the share price to a level has declined, which makes it even more attractive.

"We see a pretty attractive rate now," he said.

A more moderate view of Internet companies a good sign for the industry is, analysts say. It suggests that technology has evolved since the speculative days of the dotcom boom.

A bright spot in the social media space is LinkedIn, a social network to manage your professional identity and looking for a job. The stock is currently more than 14 percent from the IPO successfully took advantage of a niche in the social media in May of 2011. LinkedIn, Ritter said.

In contrast to this fighting online game site Zynga, to convince investors that it can sustain growth, he added. And perhaps the biggest victim of overly high expectations website is daily deals GroupOn, which went public in November 2011 to great fanfare and with a value of $13 billion. It has since about three quarters every day much shed its market value on concerns about the growth of the business of.

"Groupon high cost, and this is one of the issues which continue as well can be their business model a question mark over," Knight said.

Picking winning stocks is a difficult task, even for professionals, of course.

Knight notes that their share prices by at least 50 percent of their asking prices on their sixth month birthday saw fall 49 companies that moved exchange between 2001 and 2010.

They lost 49 companies 63.1 percent on average in the first six months of public companies, but in the next 18 months on average had a rest, positive with an average return of 22.5 percent during these 18 months.

Knight adds that, if an investor bought shares of technology heavyweights like Microsoft and had held the returns of stock Oracle if it was the 1980s, and "on the ride" losses would have compensated.

Venture capitalists expect that most businesses to lose money that they invest, but they they "10 baggers"-companies such as Google, who call their initial investment as much as 10 times, Ritter said back account.

"If there were a simple rule for fund managers, consistently beat the market it would be easy" he said. "And the proof is that it it just don't."

Wednesday, August 29

Facebook has can tanks share on the first day of early investors dump

Facebook's share price fell to an all-time low Thursday, as the first part of a so-called "hang" time for the most important investors in the company to an end.

The period lasted for 90 days after the social network of IPO on May 18, prevents that some early investors and insiders sell million shares that they own in Facebook.

These early investors include Accel Partners, a venture capital firm and Wall Street bank Goldman Sachs. Facebook insiders include members such as PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman, founder of LinkedIn is.

Facebook's share price took a Thursday morning Rammender, although it is unclear whether the decline is to insider selling their shares or other shareholders sell on concerns that insiders could be unloaded their shares in the company. Everyone has to have seller take three working days to your sales report.

Lockup periods prevent insider sell their shares too close to a public offering, caused volatility in a stock.

More than 5 percent at $20, gefallener by 7.1 percent to an all-time low of $19.69 in trade in the morning until the afternoon trade Thursday was Facebook's share price. Facebook share price has lost 48% of its value since its debut in may in a $38 price.

Some early investors include 270 million shares for sale Thursday was available-more than half of the 421 million shares, the Facebook its initial public offering in may sold.

But on Thursday, end is only the beginning of a troubling time for Facebook shareholders.

This fall of 1.20 billion shares for sale, shares are flooding the market with Facebook as a second waiting for the stock end and may decrease the value of the shares of the company. The final lockup period ends IPO next may, a year after Facebook's.

Facebook has faced a difficult three months since the public offering which was one of the most expected IPOs in history.

The company suffered by botched public offer, marred by trading of glitches on the NASDAQ Stock Exchange. The share price has the price for the offer critics who say underwriting banks traded does not have $38 since his debut, leading too high and too many shares sold to the public.

Investors are also concerned about Facebook's ability to make money from its users, of which many now access the site from mobile devices where the company derives little advertising revenue.

Mark Hawtin, investment Director of GAM, a, made the bullish case for Facebook on CNBC Thursday, say Facebook find finally a way asset management firm, earning nearly 1 billion users.

"I have confidence in the company," he said:

Still, market generated much negative comment to StockTwits Thursday action for Facebook's stock, micro-blogging site has investors.

Tuesday, August 7

As Fed hints, investors wonder what tricks it has left

By Pedro da Costa and Jonathan Spicer, Reuters
WASHINGTON/NEW YORK -- When economists at Bank of America piped headlines from minutes of the Federal Reserve's June meeting down to the firm's trading floor, one sentence elicited an audible gasp of excitement: the Fed was exploring "new tools" to support growth.

Investors are now trying to cull hints about just what Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, who showed a willingness to stretch the boundaries of conventional monetary policy during the financial crisis, might have up his sleeve.

Two principal options have emerged as eligible candidates: following the Bank of England's lead in some sort of "funding for lending" plan that favors banks that are actively making loans; lowering the rate the central bank pays financial institutions for parking their reserves at the Fed, currently at 0.25 percent.

The search for new tools is in part a response to the severe negative reaction the U.S. central bank received both at home and abroad from its second round of bond purchases.

The Fed says it is still considering a third bout of quantitative easing, or QE3, and some analysts expect recent weakness in the U.S. economy could prompt policymakers to launch such a program as early as September.

But officials, seeing an economy that continues to show resistance to monetary stimulus, are already starting to think about what other steps they might take down the line to keep the recovery on track.

U.S. gross domestic product expanded just 1.9 percent in the first quarter, and economists believe second-quarter growth was even softer. At the same time, recent progress on bringing down the jobless rate, now at 8.2 percent, has stalled.

Against that difficult backdrop, made even more tenuous by Europe's ongoing sovereign debt debacle and a slowdown in large emerging economies, it's no wonder Fed policymakers are scrambling to restock their depleted toolkit.

"Funding for lending might be a more prudent approach than just buying up securities without any strings attached," said Brian Jacobsen, chief portfolio strategist at Wells Fargo Funds Management Group.

In response to the financial crisis and deep recession of 2007-2009, the Fed cut official borrowing costs to effectively zero and bought some $2.3 trillion in mortgage and Treasury securities in an effort to keep long-term rates down and boost economic activity.

A recent Reuters poll of U.S. primary dealers, banks that do business directly with the Fed, found that 70 percent expect another round of stimulus via bond buys. But yields on Treasuries are at or near record lows, casting doubt on what good yet more purchases can bring.

Little action, if any, is expected at the next policy meeting, July 31-August 1, when some economists think the Fed could push further into the future its conditional pledge to keep rates near zero through late 2014.

Market analysts first seized on the idea of a lending incentives program after Bernanke's surprisingly forthcoming response to a question about the Bank of England's new plan during his post-meeting press conference in June.

"Throughout the crisis, we've looked for new programs, new ways to help the economy," Bernanke told reporters. "This will be a type of thing that will be on the list of programs that we look at."

Though details are still sketchy as to how such a program might work, the Fed could tailor the collateral it accepts from primary dealers in a way that encourages them to lend to areas of the economy that need help.

In one possible approach, the Fed could accept longer-maturity collateral for loans only if the banks prove they will lend to, for example, small businesses, which have generally struggled more than big firms to borrow.

In another approach, the central bank could accept certain mortgages as collateral to stimulate demand for mortgage-backed securities and encourage lending to homebuyers having trouble getting loans.

Still, some economists wonder whether such measures could be effective if the true problem is a lack of demand for new loans, rather than an inadequate supply of credit.

"They have a hammer and they're looking for a nail," said Alan De Rose, managing director of government trading and finance at Oppenheimer. "What do you get from all this?"

There is also a chance that a funding-for-lending scheme would be less appropriate for the U.S. banking system, which is seen as healthier than the UK's.

"Banks in Great Britain are facing some difficulties with the cost and availability of funding," said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at JP Morgan and a former Fed staffer. "This appears to be much less of a problem in the U.S. where both deposit and wholesale funding is inexpensive and plentiful."

Indeed, Fed data on commercial and industrial loans suggest activity has been picking up steadily.

Another alternative that seems to have been resurrected is the possibility of cutting the rate of interest on excess bank reserves (IOER), now at a quarter percentage point, all the way to zero -- or even making it negative.

That option would lead the Fed down a path already taken by the Danish monetary authorities and now also being pondered by the European Central Bank, which recently cut its rate on bank deposits to zero.

One key source of opposition to a cut in the IOER has come from money markets, whose guaranteed-return model is already challenged by extremely low interest rates. Fed officials fear a crash in money markets could spread to other parts of the financial system, and they see the funds as a key potential source of contagion from Europe's financial crisis.

There is also a sense that such a marginal move would not have much of an impact.

Then there are the unthinkables -- steps that have loosely entered the market's imagination but have little chance of being implemented in the foreseeable future.

Most prominent among these is nominal GDP targeting or price-level targeting, in which the Fed would give itself greater wiggle room on inflation. Bernanke has been adamant in opposing any effort to actually aim for higher consumer prices, citing the Fed's inflation-fighting credibility that was hard-won by former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and sustained by his successor Alan Greenspan.

Another idea is to buy government bonds of Spain, the euro zone's fourth largest economy and at the crux of the euro zone debt crisis, which is posing a global threat of contagion. Bernanke shot down that idea at the June press conference, but some economists, like Dean Baker of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research, think that approach would provide much more bang for the Fed's buck than Treasury purchases because it would actually tackle the source of the problem threatening the global economy.

There is also something the Bank of Japan has tried doing after years of battling deflation: purchasing stocks from private firms in order to support corporate investments. Such a move would be highly controversial and would require Congressional approval, which is why some see it as having little chance of becoming reality.

Or as the headline of Feroli's recent research note to clients put it: "Sorry, the Fed won't be buying your equities from you."

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters.

Monday, June 4

Facebook investors could recoup losses in court

CNBC's Jane Wells talks to people in Silicon Valley to get their take on Facebook's IPO and its impact on future IPOs.

Retail investors with dreams of instant wealth who bought Facebook shares on opening day may have been disappointed, but they could still wind up with a windfall if lawyers seeking class-action status for lawsuits against the company and its IPO underwriters get their way.

A pair of lawsuits filed in New York and California allege that retail investors were harmed when material information about the company's finances weren't disclosed to them.

Experts in securities law have said whether or not plaintiffs will be able to recoup their trading floor losses in a courtroom will depend on the fine print of securities regulations. What Facebook and its underwriters, including primary underwriter Morgan Stanley, which declined to comment on the suits, knew, and when and to whom they provided information, are the issues on which both lawyers and regulators are focusing.

"It sounds like this is where that case is going to be one of the battlefields," said David Buckner, a partner at law firm Grossman Roth P.A., whose expertise is in class action suits and securities litigation. "Who has an obligation to speak to who — that's something that will end up being important."

Following a Congressional hearing on Tuesday, Securities and Exchange Commission chair Mary Schapiro said, "I think there is a lot of reason to have confidence in our markets and in the integrity of how they operate, but there are issues that we need to look at specifically with respect to Facebook."

Facebook did warn would-be investors of potential challenges to its revenue stream triggered by an increase in mobile users and Facebook's still-poor ability to monetize its mobile base. In an uncharacteristic amendment to its S.E.C. filing just over a week before its IPO, the company warned that these factors had the ability to hurt profits.

Investors who feel burned and are pursuing legal action contend that the company's cautionary statements weren't specific enough, that Facebook knew that this issue was having more of a negative impact than it let on in the filing, and it tipped its hand only to its underwriters and a handful of analysts.

"The real issue is how adequate a warning was the May 9 registration statement language," said Merritt B. Fox, law professor at Columbia University. "Without knowing the facts, it's hard to know if what the analysts were doing was simply interpreting information that was in the May 9 statement or whether they had additional information to suggest that things were worse."

The Wall Street Journal cited unnamed sources saying Facebook executives contacted nearly two dozen analysts following that amendment and let them ask questions about it. The lawsuits assert that this communication amounted to material information which Facebook, which has said it will defend itself "vigorously," was legally obligated to share with all investors.

"It wasn't the prospect" of future losses, said David Rosenfeld, an attorney at Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, a law firm representing plaintiffs in a suit filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on Wednesday. "They already knew… and they told their underwriters," he said.

Sunday, May 13

Amazon is spending, and investors are buying


Mark Lennihan / AP

The Kindle Fire is displayed at a news conference in September, 2011.

Ordinarily, if a company announces its profit dropped by more than a third and predicts a small profit or a possible loss for the following quarter, investors don't reward it with a stock bump of more than 15 percent. Amazon is an exception.

The Internet retailing giant reported a first-quarter drop in net income of 35 percent on Thursday, the result of big-ticket investments in its Kindle line, and in shipping and fulfillment equipment. It fell to $130 million or 28 cents a share, from $201 million or 44 cents per share a year ago.

"2Q12 operating income guidance still implies a 22 percent decline on the high end as Amazon continues to invest aggressively," Raymond James analyst Aaron Kessler pointed out in a research note, although he characterized the long-term outlook at "positive."

On the positive side, Amazon reported a 34 percent jump in revenue over last year, on the high end of what it told analysts to expect last quarter, and offered a prediction of second quarter revenues ranging from $11.9 billion to $13.3 billion. Investors liked what they heard; as of Friday afternoon, Amazon's share price was up more than 16 percent, to nearly $228.

The company has been adding features and offerings to Amazon Web Services, its cloud-based services platform. This month, it also began offering its Instant Video service via Sony's PlayStation 3 gaming console. It is rolling out the Kindle Touch to more countries and investing in the Kindle Fire as sales of ebooks outstrip physical book sales.

"Given the company accounted for roughly a fifth of the print book market in years prior, the number of eBook units that the company has been selling has clearly become significant," Heather Bellini, an analyst at Goldman Sachs, wrote in a recent research note.

Earlier this week, Amazon unveiled an initiative to sell business and industrial equipment and supplies. Last month, the company announced plans to purchase Kiva Systems, a company that makes robots used in shipping and fulfillment functions.

None of this comes cheap. Kiva, for instance, will cost Amazon $775 million. But the company has a long track record of right-venture, right-time spending, said Gene Alvarez, vice president of research at Gartner Inc.

"During the dot-com collapse, when a lot of companies scaled down on e-commerce, they continued to invest," he said. When the economy recovered and more people began buying things online, Amazon was far ahead of its competitors. "Part of me is saying that mindset is still there and that's what they're doing," he said.

Even as Americans' media consumption shifts more from the physical to the digital, analysts think Amazon is well-positioned to handle the transition.

"It is important to point out that Amazon continues to gain share in the physical world, while their Kindle footprint puts them in pole position to capitalize on the transition to digital," Bellini wrote.

Alvarez said he expects competition from other tablets and e-readers, especially Apple's iPad, to intensify, which makes Amazon's investments in growing its Kindle offerings look smart. "This rivalry is going to continue to heat up. it's going to come down to the consumers choice and the customer experience," he said.

Sunday, April 29

Investors focused on corporate earnings

A host of corporate earnings reports are in focus Tuesday.


Goldman Sachs said its first-quarter earnings fell from a year earlier, but were better than many analysts had anticipated thanks to aggressive cost-cutting and better-than-expected investment banking and trading revenues.


Goldman earned $2.1 billion, or $3.92 per share, during the quarter. In the year-ago period, which was generally stronger for investment banks' trading and banking activity, Goldman earned $4.38 per share, excluding a one-time cost for buying back preferred stock.


The Wall Street investment bank also said it would raise its quarterly dividend to 46 cents per share from 35 cents.


Coca-Cola, the world's largest soft drink maker, also reported quarterly earnings, saying its first-quarter earnings were $2.05 billion, or 89 cents per share, up from $1.90 billion, or 82 cents per share, a year earlier. The world's largest soft drink maker said revenue rose 6 percent to $11.14 billion.


Yahoo is also due to unveil earnings, but the report may be overshadowed by comments from its new CEO Scott Thompson, who is expected to lay out his vision for the struggling web pioneer.


Intel is expected to post a seasonal dip in second-quarter earnings, seen at $0.50 per share compared to $0.56 per share one year earlier.


Johnson & Johnson reported better-than-expected quarterly earnings but global company revenue fell slightly on anemic sales of medical devices and consumer medicines -- businesses that have been hit by costly recalls in the past two years.


Groundbreaking on homes fell unexpectedly in March, but permits for future construction rose to their highest level in 3 1/2 years, Commerce Department data showed.


Housing starts slipped 5.8 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 654,000 units, the government said. February's starts were revised down to a 694,000-unit pace from a previously reported 698,000 unit rate.


Economists polled by Reuters had forecast housing starts little changed at a 705,000-unit rate.


IBM Corp reports earnings after the bell on Tuesday and investors are hoping strong software demand will make for a repeat of last year's first-quarter performance, when the company raised its full year forecast.


European stock markets edged higher, as prices cheapened by a steep month-long sell-off attracted investors, although concerns about Spain's finances kept the overall mood cautious and volumes low.


Regulators on Monday approved the country's first liquefied natural gas export plant in nearly 50 years. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approval paves the way for construction to begin at Cheniere Energy's LNG plant at Sabine Pass, Louisiana.


Chesapeake Energy Corp's oilfield services unit filed to raise up to $862.5 million in an initial public offering of its Class A common stock as the natural gas company looks to fund its heavy spending.

Saturday, March 24

Pre-IPO stock trading a minefield for investors

The voicemail from Felix Investments broker Jared Carmel sounded like a typical cold-call from an aggressive stock salesman.


"What's interesting is some of the access to opportunity that we have, i.e. companies like Groupon, Facebook, we had LinkedIn before the IPO, things of that nature," Carmel told a prospect he had never met, according to court documents.


"So if you have a moment or two, if you could give me a buzz, I'd love to touch base."


But Carmel, who does not dispute making the call, was touting companies that were not publicly traded. His employer, Felix Investments, was not a typical investment firm, but one capitalizing on a new and rapidly growing realm for U.S. markets: trading in the shares of privately held companies.


It hasn't taken long for that business, super-charged by the hunger for Facebook shares, to become problematic.


At issue is the lack of protection for investors who are largely investing blind. They are often not getting basic financial information about the companies they are investing in and have precious little knowledge about some of the vehicles they are investing through.


Felix and co-owner Frank Mazzola were sued Wednesday by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which accused Mazzola of taking hidden commissions and misleading investors about how many Facebook shares Felix funds had been able to buy.


Carmel's phone message had surfaced in a now-settled lawsuit by his former employer, Advanced Equities, which objected to him calling its customers after joining Felix. Carmel, who is not accused of any wrongdoing, said in an interview that he was not selling anything at the time. "I didn't know them," he acknowledged, but added: "It was just to introduce myself."


Also on Wednesday, one of the largest exchanges where pre-initial public offering stock can be traded, SharesPost, was censured by the SEC and fined $80,000. Executives at Advanced, which is also a big reseller of stakes in private companies, are also likely to face enforcement action, according to records on file with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.


Market ripe for abuse
Regulators and some securities attorneys warn that those actions won't do much to tamp down an exploding market that is ripe for abuse.


They also say a package of proposed laws that has passed the House and drawn support from some Senate Democrats and the Obama administration would make fraud easier by allowing advertisements for private stock sales and raising the maximum number of investors to 999 from 499 before public financial filings are required.


"At a time when you have a record number of scams going on in private placements and hurting people, you are rolling back the protections. You are simplifying fraud," said Lynn Turner, a former chief accountant at the SEC who is now managing director at consulting firm LitiNomics.


Many Silicon Valley investors support loosening regulations to make it easier for private companies to raise money.


But others warn that Congress is headed toward helping to inflate a bubble in private stock. "If these markets don't get more regulated - which I think is a reasonable thing to do - they are almost certainly going to get shut down" in the wake of scandal, said Scott Sandell, a general partner at big venture firm New Enterprise Associates.


Last year, some $9.3 billion in stock in private companies changed hands, up four-fold in two years. Ownership in such companies was historically limited to venture capital funds, wealthy angel investors and early employees, but the emergence of private exchanges for non-public shares has changed the game dramatically.


The private sales, which allow employees and early investors to cash out before a public offering, don't come with anything resembling the disclosures required with an IPO. In most cases investors see hardly any financial information.


The trading can also serve as a form of guerilla marketing, as reports of escalating valuations in private deals drive anticipation of a future debut on the public markets.


Most CEOs - who are barred from hyping the prospects of their companies after they begin the IPO process - are glad that resellers are pushing their valuations up, said Geoff Yang of venture capital firm Redpoint Ventures, who sits on a dozen boards.


In the most prominent example, Facebook shares have continued to move higher in auctions on SharesPost, even though Facebook is in a mandated pre-IPO quiet period and the company can't boast of its prospects without elaborate disclaimers. SharesPost, which has more than 60,000 registered users, agreed to pay the $80,000 SEC fine over its failure to register as a broker-dealer before late last year.


Regulators say that there has been no rash of investor complaints only because most pre-IPO stocks have gained value since their purchase amid a broader rally in U.S. equities. When that changes, lawyers could challenge the legality of the transactions.


In the meantime, securities law experts and veteran Silicon Valley investors say operators like Felix are gaming the system with tactics such as creating limited liability companies to hold the private shares and then selling interests in the LLCs. That sidesteps regulations barring resale of the stock itself for six months or more.


"You have got to worry about the fly-by-night operations," said Ian Sobieski, managing director of the Band of Angels venture fund and an investor in SharesPost. "They are doing a work-around of the SEC rules."


Special rules for the rich
The nation's major securities laws were enacted after the 1929 stock market crash and a wave of interstate investment scams that bankrupted thousands of smaller investors. The laws generally forbid companies from selling stock to the public without SEC-reviewed and audited disclosure of their finances and business risks.


There are some important exceptions, most notably the use of unadvertised private placements in which so-called accredited investors can buy shares. Individuals must have a net worth of $1 million or earn more than $200,000 ($300,000 for couples) to meet the standard for being accredited, though in most cases no proof is required. The assumption is that wealthy investors can fend for themselves.


The best-known means of selling private stock are SharesPost and New York-based SecondMarket. SharesPost, based south of San Francisco in San Bruno, was founded in 2009 and said it did $184 million in transactions last quarter with a matchmaker approach for buyers and sellers.


SecondMarket, which said it is not a subject of the SEC probe, began offering a trading platform for private stock in 2008, and processed more than $500 million in such deals last year.


Both work closely with the companies whose stock they deal, and SecondMarket won't allow any transactions in shares of companies that object.


SecondMarket said a third of its sales volume last year came from "asset managers," including funds dedicated to buying up a single company's stock. Another 9 percent came from funds devoted to owning stock in a series of private companies.


Gary Ream, a sporting goods executive who invested $100,000 through Felix for Facebook shares in early 2010, said he never saw any financial statements from the company. Instead he listened to a telephone presentation by Felix and followed his gut instinct. "We sat through a conference call and they laid out where they were," he said. "It was not typical financials that you would see."


Mazzola says that Felix does not claim to have any special access to inside information for its clients. "The traditional due diligence doesn't exist," Mazzola said.


In some cases, the secondary funds can't even assure investors that they will be able to buy the stock that they are seeking. In Felix's case, according to the SEC suit, the company's "false and misleading solicitations" included claims that it was buying Facebook shares at $66 when that deal never closed. Mazzola didn't respond to questions about the suit.


Among Felix's potential customers is Pre-Game Partners LLC, created in December by investment bank Laidlaw & Co (U.K.).


According to its confidential offering memorandum seen by Reuters, the fund said it plans to spend as much as $2.5 million on a stake in a Felix fund holding Twitter shares. It also said it intends to buy stakes in private companies "such as Foursquare Labs Inc, Palantir Technologies Inc, ZocDoc Inc, Liquidnet Holdings Inc, Kabam Inc, Chegg Inc" and others, though no deals are signed.


'Horrendous investments'
Pools created without guaranteed holdings "have always turned out to be horrendous investments," said former SEC accountant Turner. "I can't comprehend why any investor would go into that."


For now, SEC rules clearly prohibit general solicitation for private stock sales, though not all-purpose introductions. Felix executive Carmel's phone message surfaced in a now-settled lawsuit by his former employer, Advanced Equities, which objected to him calling its customers.


Felix and two of its three largest owners, Mazzola and William Barkow, along with Vice President of sales Emilio DiSanluciano, settled FINRA's accusations. The men agreed to fines totaling $80,000 and suspensions from the industry for two to three weeks.


FINRA said they had cold-called investors and sent mass emails without learning whether their funds would be suitable investments for the recipients. It also said a "Facebook Due Diligence Report Presented by Felix Investments," which it sent to 125 people, "was only based upon favorable, publicly available information" and that it failed to disclose that Felix had no access to Facebook financial data or management.


Barkow has left Felix and did not return calls seeking comment. DiSanluciano likewise didn't respond to messages.


In an interview before the SEC action, Mazzola maintained he had acted appropriately. "If there was something of real concern, they would have shut us down a long time ago," he said. "We haven't defrauded anyone."


Though Felix is accused of flouting several securities laws, many more brokers that are being more careful could still leave investors badly burned, venture capitalists and lawyers warned.


"There is a nearly infinite variety of things that could be wrong with a private company that you don't know anything about," said Robert Robbins of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, who teaches an annual joint course on private stock sales for the American Law Institute and American Bar Association.


"Environmental claims, labor claims, trademark claims. You've never seen their accounting, so you can't even know if you feel good about their financial statements."


Those pushing the envelope in selling secondary market interests have overlapping histories.


For example, Felix vice president DiSanluciano worked at J.P. Turner of Atlanta - which operates 200 retail brokerages nationwide - for eight years, through the end of 2009.


Turner made a $25 million Facebook fund offering, according to media reports, saying it would collect 12 percent in fees and could not guarantee that it would obtain the shares. It is unclear whether the offering was ever completed. Turner representatives declined to comment.


Turner has had repeated run-ins with regulators and unhappy clients. In 1998, Arkansas regulators issued a cease-and-desist order to the firm after an agent told a customer that shares in a pre-IPO company called Cartoon Saloon would quintuple when the company went public.


In 2006, Turner paid $195,000 and agreed to a consent order with New Jersey regulators who found that its agents had engaged in unsuitable trading for clients and misled them about risks. The same year, the National Association of Securities Dealers fined Turner $211,000 after two brokers sold private placements in a hedge fund without disclosing the commissions they would get from trading in its accounts.


Current Felix executives Mazzola and Carmel used to work at Laidlaw, home of the Pre-Game Partners fund. They and former executive Barkow also previously worked at Chicago-based venture banker Advanced Equities, which is known for paying a premium for stakes in companies that have run into difficulty and may never go public. Unlike most venture firms, which raise money and then decide where to invest it, Advanced Equities buys stakes, adds commissions and resells to its clients.


In one spectacular case, the company raised more than $20 million and took a 12 percent commission as the main backer of a company called Pixelon, which a 1999 offering memorandum said was patenting a revolutionary means for sending video over the Internet.


Pixelon blew more than $16 million on an all-star concert with The Who rock band that was meant to showcase the transmission capability. The broadcast failed, the technology turned out to be cribbed from others, and the company's CEO was soon found to be a convicted fraudster who was on the lam. The CEO was arrested and returned to jail.


Advanced Equities and three of its leaders later joined three Pixelon representatives in settling an investor class-action suit for $2.6 million, though executives said Pixelon's insurance company picked up the tab.


Those settling included Advanced Equities co-founders Keith Daubenspeck and Dwight Badger, who received so-called Wells Notices from the SEC this year warning of likely enforcement action over a private 2009 offering.


Daubenspeck didn't respond to an interview request. "We don't have any comment at this time," Badger said Wednesday.


Copyright 2012 Thomson Reuters.

Saturday, March 3

Investors get bullish as Dow nears 13,000

Investors get bullish as Dow nears 13,000

Traders Patrick Casey, left, and Fred DeMarco work on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.


With the Dow Jones industrial average flirting with 13,000 -- a level not seen since May 2008 -- even "Dr. Doom" is stepping back from the ledge.


“We’re a believer; we’re celebrating," said Gina Sanchez, director of equity and allocation strategy for Nouriel Roubini, the New York University economist, dubbed “Dr. Doom” for his many pessimistic forecasts about the global economy.


"We think the rally has legs,” Sanchez told CNBC.


Many investors appear to feel the same way.


The widely followed index of 30 blue-chip stocks has defied forecasters to surge more than 5 percent since year-end, including the best January since 1997. The Dow has retraced over 80 percent of its bear market slide from 2007 to early 2009, Reuters reports, and is just about 10 percent away from its all-time high hit in October 2007.


“13,000 is not just a number; it’s a psychological trigger that could cause the market to drop or bring more buyers in to drive it higher,” said David Bach, a personal finance expert and author. 


Bach points to data that show the broad Standard & Poor’s 500 index, is up 23 percent from its October low.


“That’s a startling run,” Bach said. “There’s a good chance that the average person’s retirement portfolio is up at least 10 percent. But many retail investors have probably missed out on this rally because they have been putting money in safe investments like Treasury bonds, municipal bonds and corporate bonds over the past several months.”


Bach expects the rally in equities to continue, noting that corporate earnings are improving, payrolls are growing and American consumers, who have spent the past three years paying down debt, are feeling confident about borrowing and spending again. He also points to "frugal fatigue," saying consumers are ready to start spending a bit more freely again after being changing their habits in the aftermath of the Great Recession.


“People have had their heads down in this bad economy over the past few years, and now they’re coming back up for air,” he said. “That means they’re spending money again, and we see that in such metrics as growing car purchases and retail spending numbers.”


Hugh Johnson, chief investment officer of Hugh Johnson Advisors in Albany, N.Y., notes that a number of indicators are coming together and driving stocks higher.


There are signs that the sovereign default problems in Europe may be abating, and investors, buoyed by improving data on the U.S. economy, are buying up economically sensitive stocks in sectors such as technology and finance, and also small- and mid-cap stocks, he said.


“All the signs are pointing to investors taking on more risk. Why? Because the economic numbers are improving, and that’s the story here. The markets and the economic numbers are moving in sync, and that’s encouraging,” Johnson said.


Jim Paulsen, chief investment strategist at Wells Capital Management, is also bullish about the outlook for the market. Appearing on CNBC Wednesday, he pointed to a steady growth in bank loans, a sustained rise in employment and early indications of a recovery in the housing market.


“I think we might he on the front end of sustained upward move in confidence in this country, and confidence sustains valuations.” Paulsen said.


However, other market analysts expressed caution. Brian Kelly, Shelter Harbor Capital co- founder, said that, since the stock market is up over 20 percent from its low, this is not a time to buying stocks “hand over fist.”


“Buy stocks on a pullback, but be cautious here,” he said on CNBC. “There are things that can always surprise us on the negative side.”


Indeed, even Roubini’s bullishness on the market is short-lived.


His company thinks markets will be buoyed by central bank policies to keep rates low over the next few months, which will lead investors to buy stocks. But in the second half of the year the rally could fade. “We expect to end the year lower from where the market is now,” Sanchez told CNBC.

Wednesday, February 8

RIM's new leader raises doubts among investors

TORONTO/LONDON — The new leader at Research In Motion on Monday dismissed talk of drastic change at the BlackBerry maker, a declaration seized on by impatient investors who say Thorsten Heins has only 12 to 18 months to turn RIM around.


Takeover talk, swirling around RIM for months, picked up steam as Heins took the helm at a once-dominant smartphone company that now struggles to compete. But RIM's shares tumbled more than 8 percent as investors wondered whether Heins could reverse RIM's decline.


"I don't think that there is some drastic change needed. We are evolving ... but this is not a seismic change," said Heins, who joined RIM in 2007 and previously served as a chief operating officer.


RIM's co-CEOs Mike Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie, the men who engineered RIM's rise, resigned on Saturday after intense investor pressure. Their presence had been seen as a big obstacle to a possible sale of the company, although Heins insisted that was not an option he was considering.


Shareholders and analysts have grown impatient in recent months and calls for Lazaridis and Balsillie to step aside had reached a crescendo. RIM has lost market share and market value after being comprehensively outplayed by Silicon Valley tech giants Apple and Google.


"If Thorsten really believes that there are no changes to be made, he will be gone within 15 to 18 months. He will be a transitional CEO and this will be a transitional board," said Jaguar CEO Vic Alboini, who leads an informal group of 16 RIM shareholders calling for a radical restructuring. The group holds a little less than 10 percent of RIM's stock.


Lazaridis and Balsillie - two of RIM's three largest shareholders with more than 5 percent each - will remain board members, while Lazaridis will also head a newly created innovation committee. Their new roles suggest continuity was a goal in the transition.


Critics have called for a new leader who can rejuvenate both the design and operational sides of the business, or prepare it for sale to one of a raft of rumored buyers.


Heins, a former Siemens AG executive, said during a conference call on Monday that he would hone rather than abandon current strategy at RIM, which after years of massive growth needed to start operating like a mature business, not a startup.


The new CEO, who scored his last major promotion as RIM was shedding some 2,000 jobs last June, said no further job cuts were currently planned and that with RIM's $1.5 billion in cash he had no qualms in spending on the right projects.


"If I have a great strategic project or a good business case I can go to the board anytime and ask for approval for additional investment and the money's in the bank to do this," he said.


INVESTORS DISAPPOINTED


Analysts were cautious.


"People may have been a little disheartened that he was defending the current RIM strategy," said Morgan Stanley analyst Ehud Gelblum. "I think (investors) might have wanted to hear a mea culpa."


"People would have been happier hearing 'we are on the wrong path'. We didn't hear a lot of talk about change."


Jaguar's Alboini criticized the retention of Balsillie and Lazaridis on RIM's board and called for several other board members to step down before RIM's mid-year annual meeting.


"If we're wrong, prove us wrong," Alboini said in an interview, referring to the group of shareholders who support his view. "This group is not going anywhere. This is just putting RIM in a position where it might be able to get back into the game. It's early days."


Barbara Stymiest, a former banking and exchange executive, will replace Lazaridis and Balsillie as the chair of the board. Stymiest, a RIM board member for five years, is also viewed as an insider tied to the old regime.


LOOKING AHEAD


Heins' immediate concerns are to generate sales of RIM's current lineup of BlackBerry 7 touchscreen devices, deliver on a promised software upgrade for its PlayBook tablet computer by February, and rally RIM's troops to launch the next-generation BlackBerry 10 phones later this year.


But even if he had a credible overall plan to foster change, some analysts question whether RIM had fallen too far behind its competitors to catch up.


Its existing product lineup has struggled to compete with Apple's iPhone and iPad and the slew of devices from Samsung and others using Google's Android operating system. In North America particularly, RIM has hemorrhaged market share during a year marked by product delays and a botched launch of the PlayBook.


"If RIM's going to grow in the U.S. ... they have to have products better than the iPhone or Android," said Pacific Crest analyst James Faucette. As of now, "they don't have products that are competitive with those, let alone better."


But RIM has also shown a renewed seriousness about getting its message delivered, hiring crisis management firm Sitrick and Company as strategic counsel.


Sitrick helps companies in crisis and celebrities navigating scandal. Clients have included Paris Hilton as she faced jail time and Michael Vick, an NFL quarterback involved in a dog-fighting ring. The firm also helped Roy Disney remove Michael Eisner as chairman of Walt Disney.


SEEKING A PLAN


Analysts circled their calendars for an analyst day in early May as the first opportunity for the new leader to lay out a detailed plan for reversing the decline.


The event "will now become the focal point to the unveiling of Thorsten's vision," CCS Insight analyst Ben Wood told Reuters. "The speed with which you make strategic changes and implement them is absolutely critical because the mobile phone business will not stand still."


"If there are no meaningful signs of an imminent turnaround, then I think the spotlight will turn back on to the assets that RIM holds and who they might be attractive to."


Investors have seized on any rumor of a deal involving RIM as a reason to celebrate, whether talk is of a pact with Amazon as reported by Reuters in December, or with Samsung last week.


Analysts have said logical buyers for RIM also include fellow-struggler Nokia, perhaps with support from Microsoft, and Facebook which is increasingly pushing its content to users via their mobile phones.


If there is no obvious buyer, Heins has more immediate options to add value to the business.


RIM could license its software or integrate its email package, a strategy that many analysts and investors have thought the company might pursue. Heins said it would be wrong to focus on that option but he is still open to discussions.


"RIM have had big challenges in the past and they succeeded in moving from a corporate product to be also a consumer product, to get a foot in the consumer market and very few people expected them to do that," consultant John Strand said.


"Now they have to reinvent themselves again."


RIM's U.S.-listed shares closed 8.5 percent lower at $15.56, for a market capitalization of little more than $8 billion. In the company's heyday, just three and a half years ago, it had a market capitalization around $80 billion.


Copyright 2012 Thomson Reuters.

Saturday, January 21

Unusually quiet January has investors puzzled

NEW YORK — After wild price swings that left investors bewildered and not a cent richer last year, stocks are rising again, and calm has settled over the market like blue skies after a storm.


Or maybe eye of the storm is the better metaphor.


"It's a little too calm," says the usually unflappable Jim Paulsen of Wells Fargo Management, a bullish stock strategist not easily spooked. "Maybe we're setting up for a break."


Whether that break will bring a rise or fall in stocks, Paulsen is not sure. But he suspects it'll be big whichever direction.


For eight straight days, the Standard & Poor's 500 index has moved up or down less than 1 percent, a run that is both remarkable and a tad eerie. The last time stocks moved so little for so long was a 13-day streak starting last April 21 — just before a bumpy five-month drop to near bear-market lows.


Other curiosities, ominous or otherwise, from the first two weeks of the year:

The hapless and helpless are hot. Netflix Inc., the DVD-by-mail and streaming entertainment company that enraged customers by raising rates, is up 36 percent. Bank of America is up 19 percent. Both lost more than half their value in 2011.The first is last. The best-performing of the S&P's 10 categories last year, utilities, is now the worst. Those stocks rose 15 percent last year but have fallen 3 percent this year. Investors apparently have decided they're too expensive. The second-best sector last year, consumer staples, is down 1.3 percent.Stocks are up, even if profits aren't. The S&P has risen 17 percent from its 2011 low on Oct. 3 despite increasing pessimism among analysts about profits. In three months since that low, analysts have cut fourth-quarter profit estimates at companies they follow by 19 percent, the most since the depths of the Great Recession three years ago. For all of 2012, the analysts now say earnings will rise 10 percent, down from a projected 17 percent five months ago, according to FactSet, a provider of financial data.Where have all the traders gone? The markets have been calm even though few shares are trading hands. Low volume typically exaggerates price moves. Experts say last year's abnormally low average daily volume on the New York Stock Exchange, 4.3 billion shares traded, was one reason stocks gyrated so much. This year, volume has averaged 3.9 billion.

The good news for investors is that the S&P has risen 2.5 percent in 2012. But Barry Knapp, head of U.S. equity strategy at Barclays Capital, smells trouble.


The usual explanation for stocks rising this time of year is what's known as the January effect: Investors sell stock at the end of previous year to lock in losses for tax purposes, then buy again in the new year.


This year, it's more like the January defect.


Knapp says investors sold as expected, but then got nervous and didn't follow through with the crucial second part — buying. That's his explanation, anyway for the low volume. He's worried the small gains this year could prove fleeting.


"Investors don't have a lot of conviction about the rally," he says. "Most don't believe the Europeans have solved their problems or that the slowdown in China won't get worse."


Or apparently that the U.S. economy will grow much faster.


The big news so far this year is that unemployment in the U.S. fell to 8.5 percent in December, the lowest in almost three years. That raised hopes that the labor market is finally on the mend.


But then the government reported Thursday that unemployment claims rose to 399,000 in the first week of the year, the highest in six weeks, and now investors are not so sure.


Further dampening spirits was a report that sales at retailers increased just 0.1 percent in December. Earlier, several retail chains, including Target, J.C. Penney Corp. and Kohl's Department Stores Inc., cut their earnings forecasts. After Tiffany & Co. warned of disappointing holiday sales, investors pushed its stock down 11 percent.


Among S&P 500 companies making so-called pre-announcements about their fourth quarter earnings, FactSet says those cutting forecasts have outnumbered those raising them by three to one.


Which would be bad for stocks — except in the upside-down world of investing. Linda Duessel, an equity market strategist at Federated Investors, says investors tend to drive down stocks too far on warnings that profits could fall short of expectations, creating bargains.


"We're betting investors will be surprised," Duessel says. "We're bullish."


So is Paulsen of Wells Fargo, notwithstanding his talk of an eerie calm. He says investors are paying 12.5 times expected per-share earnings for the S&P 500 versus a more typical 14.5 times, meaning they're relatively cheap.


He thinks the gap will close, and stocks could jump 15 percent, assuming the unemployment rate continues to drop this year and investors become more confident. For an extra kick in your portfolio, he suggests buying stocks in industries closely tied to the economy, like industrials, materials and financials. All three fell last year.


"There's a huge discount (on stocks) due to all the fear and phobia," Paulsen says. "Rising confidence could be a big boost."


Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


View the original article here

Site Search