Archive for May 5th, 2008

Filed under: Earnings reports, Microsoft (MSFT), Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), EMC Corp (EMC), Symantec Corp (SYMC), Technical Analysis, Stocks to Buy

Double-Take Software (NASDAQ: DBTK) products and services enable customers to protect and recover computer files. Its software helps users to reduce or eliminate data loss and recover applications, through automatic or manual means. Customers include law firms, financial institutions, hospitals, school districts and government entities. Hewlett-Packard (NYSE: HPQ) and Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) are among the firm’s strategic partners. EMC Corporation (NYSE: EMC) and Symantec (NASDAQ: SYMC) are major competitors.

The company surprised the Street last week, when it reported Q1 EPS of 13 cents and revenues of $23 million. Analysts had been looking for 11 cents and $22.2 million. Management also guided Q2 EPS to 15-16 cents (14 cent consensus), Q2 revenues to $24.4-$25 million ($24.44M consensus), FY08 EPS to 65-67 cents (65 cent consensus) and FY08 revenues to $101.7-$103.5 million ($102.29M consensus).

Continue reading Double-Take Software (DBTK): Shares in bullish ‘flag’

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Via [bloggingstocks]

I’m not sure at what exact point did “saving” become a four letter word. The predicament that we now find ourselves in has an origin in a decade long spending binge. For many decades in our nation’s history, we were a lender and large exporter to other countries so this is a relatively […]
Related Posts:
The Credit Conundrum: The New Loan Shark is the Fed.
Ponzi Financing – The House that Credit Built.
The Plague of Housing: Why we Will Feel and Be Poorer Because of the Housing Bust.
Are you a Debt Slave?
The Housing Wave of the Future: Two Main Mortgage Tsunamis.

I’m not sure at what exact point did “saving” become a four letter word. The predicament that we now find ourselves in has an origin in a decade long spending binge. For many decades in our nation’s history, we were a lender and large exporter to other countries so this is a relatively new phenomenon that we now have to borrow and go into deficits. I find it hard to believe that the market cheers when retail sales come in slightly lower and in another report, we find out that the public is utilizing credit cards at a higher rate to maintain these higher spending levels. What has occurred is the borrowing binge from real estate has now shifted to the last fortress of hope, the plastic credit card. And guess what? Your government doesn’t want you to save! In fact, it seems like policies are being put into place to force you back on the perpetual hamster wheel of spending. Just to give you some proof, let us look at the rate of U.S. Treasury I Savings Bonds:

Saving I Bonds

I bonds are a relatively safe and good addition to any portfolio. They provide a fixed rate of return plus an inflation rate. Or I should say, they used to provide a fixed rate of return. Currently I Bonds are paying 4.84% which includes the abysmal 0% fixed rate. The government here can easily increase the demand for people to save but take a look at the above track record. If anything, they are making it more and more difficult for those looking for safe investments to actually park their money. It is a sad attempt to punish savers and force people out to consume more which has become 72 percent of our GDP. The rebate checks are now hitting bank accounts and only time will tell what kind of impact they will have.

Yet in 2007, they reduced the maximum amount a person can invest in I Bonds from $30,000 a year to $5,000:

“If 98 percent of all annual purchases of savings bonds by individuals are for $5,000 or less, why does the Treasury Department feel it necessary to reduce the amount of savings bonds purchased?

The Treasury press release identifies a desire to get the program back to its roots of serving individuals with small amounts to invest.

It’s hard to argue with that. However, if 98 percent of the purchases already fit that pattern, why bother with the revised standards?”

Actually, there are ways people can get around this by buying both the paper form and the electronic form ($10,000) but the point is that they are making it more complicated for people to save. The logic they give for the reduction is something I do not buy. The roots of saving simply are not in line with what the fixed rate did this month. It is down right maddening how policies are being taken to punish savers. Another reason for this is I Bonds are also linked to the CPI for inflation and have you noticed the price of things recently? It is very likely that if rates spiral out of control and the market starts unwinding further, these guaranteed investments may be very lucrative. And at that point we may find out that they simply discontinued these things altogether.

The employment numbers on Friday weren’t so encouraging either giving us our 4th straight month of employment contraction:

bls.jpg

The market ended the day higher simply because the forecast was set for 70,000 job losses and we only got 20,000. This is the world we now live in. The market is simply cheering the fact that estimates weren’t as bad as projected but forget to examine the deeper meaning of this all. If we aren’t in a recession why is it that we are losing jobs?

No More Water in the Well

The absurd amount of mortgage equity withdrawals during this decade went hand and hand with the massive housing bubble. People for the most part used this new found money and pumped it back into the economy. Normally Americans used to keep most of their equity in their home but this psychological shift occurred and we saw marketing ads with messages such as:

“Why let your equity sit in your home and do nothing?”
“Tap the potential of your housing ATM!”

“Refinance and take cash out!”

“Take that trip or buy that new car with your HELOC!”

Here’s the chart to show you the insanity visually:

mew.gif

The amount of money being withdrawn has steadily been declining and now with the credit crunch and prices falling, the well is truly dry. In fact, some lenders are simply reducing home equity lines on customers in certain areas to protect themselves. So much for thinking that money was always going to be there. Given the negative savings rate and the golden goose not pumping out anymore gold, many Americans simply jumped to the final debt product, the credit card. The number is now somewhere near the $1 trillion mark:

“(Fortune Magazine) — This past summer’s subprime meltdown involved about $900 billion in now-suspect securitized debt, reckless lending, and consumers who buckled under the weight of loans they couldn’t afford. Now another link in the consumer debt chain - credit cards - is starting to show signs of strain. And the fear that the $915 billion in U.S. credit card debt (an uncannily similar figure) may blow up has major financial institutions like Citigroup, American Express, and Bank of America strapping on their Kevlar vests.”

This past decade saw Americans spending and avoiding saving because of massive consumption. But looking at this data, it looks like Americans are going to continue on avoiding saving but for another reason; this time many will not save because they simply cannot and have no where else to go. The credit unwinding will continue.

Did You Enjoy The Post? Subscribe to Dr. Housing Bubble’s Blog to get updated housing commentary, analysis, and information

Related Posts:
The Credit Conundrum: The New Loan Shark is the Fed.
Ponzi Financing – The House that Credit Built.
The Plague of Housing: Why we Will Feel and Be Poorer Because of the Housing Bust.
Are you a Debt Slave?
The Housing Wave of the Future: Two Main Mortgage Tsunamis.

Via [DrHousingBubble]

Filed under: Bad news, Kohl’s Corp (KSS)

Kohl’s Corp. (NYSE: KSS) recently said that it would scale back its plans for opening new locations in the U.S. in 2008 and for the next few years, citing a “squeeze-play on consumers.” Instead of the announced 90 new stores this year, Kohl’s now expects to open 70 to 75 new stores this year. The retailer is still on track to open its 1,000th store later in 2008, however.

Although the “mall store outside the mall” has identified about 400 sites for potential locations in the near future, it said that kind of expansion may not happen until 2014. Last year, the retailer opened 112 stores nationwide, ending up with a total of 943 stores total in 57 states.

Kohl’s is right when it said that its customers are “under a lot of pressure” due to higher fuel, grocery and health care costs. The good news, from what I have seen in the past, is that Kohl’s has very low prices for much of its “Croft & Barrow” apparel items, its private-label brand. If it can fight the good fight with Target Corp. (NYSE: TGT) and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (NYSE: WMT) in terms of prices and clothing selection, it may yet have decent sales on those items as expensive housewares and related items sink this year.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Via [bloggingstocks]

Filed under: Before the bell, Google (GOOG), Yahoo! (YHOO), Time Warner (TWX), Sprint Nextel Corp (S)

Sprint (NYSE:S) is up almost 7% on a rumore buy-out by Deutsche Telekom.

Yahoo! (NASDAQ:YHOO) is off 23% after rejecting a buy-out from Microsoft.

Time Warner (NYSE:TWX) shares are up 2% on news Yahoo! may buy AOL.

Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) is up 3% on the chance it may provide Yahoo! some of its search services.

Douglas A. McIntyre is and editor at 247wallst.com.

Filed under: Rants and raves, Comfort Zone Investing, Sunday Funnies

In this month’ Money Magazine story, Calming words for troubled times the final words were by Deena Katz, Chairman, Evensky & Katz Wealth Management, who shared this “My mom always said, if you’re going to do it, don’t worry; if you’re going to worry, don’t do it.”

Are you a worrier? Do you fret over everything? Can you undo those things you have already done that you are worried about? Sometimes it’s tough. But maybe you should consider it. How does that apply to the stock market or investing in general. From that perspective it is very simple. Do not invest in anything that will keep you up at night.

While this may be good advice for most aspects of investing there is one time that it might cost you. When stocks are rising few people are worried. When stocks are falling everyone’s worry factor rises. As their worry factor rises they tend to become sellers. This may relieve one of their worries but it also may relieve them of their money because it contradicts two other old bits of wisdom.

“Buy low and sell high” is a common refrain said tongue in cheek because a bell does not ring announcing the highs and lows. However, even ‘my pal Warren’ would advise that “investors should buy on fear and sell on greed”. So then the modified version of mom’s advice melding it with market realities is that you should be worried when others are not and remain calm when everyone else is panicking.

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture & planning firm. He writes the columns Chasing Value and Serious Money.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Via [bloggingstocks]

Reader Paul (big hat tip to him) pulled a key comment out of the B of A press release issued earlier this week that addressed Bank of America’s efforts to help homeowners keep their home. The comment, burried at the bottom of the release was:

“We will continue to work with distressed borrowers to match the customer’s repayment ability with the appropriate loss mitigation option, including loan modifications, forbearances, repayment plans, lower rates and principal reductions,” McGee said. “

Paul thought it was absurd that no one pressed McGee on the last point which was “principal reductions.” This, he argued correctly, is a massive change in policy for the industry, as banks have been fighting tooth and nail to make sure that court-ordered principal reductions (cram downs) aren’t enforced from the bench.
The Implications of a BofA-led Principal Reduction Effort Would be Staggering

If Bank of America is truly making principal reductions a part of it’s “home-saving” playbook it would have incredibly wide-spread implications across not only the banking industry but the housing market and general economy.

As Paul mentioned, the press didn’t have a chance to grill him on this point and I agree with him that McGee needs to be held accountable for what he said and to outline in greater detail just what role these principal reductions are playing (or will play) in BofA’s loan modification process.

Bank of America, if they are making principal reductions even a trivial part of their options in keeping homeowners put they will set a precedent which will inexorably alter the housing market. Think of the ramifications of this action.

First of all, Bank of America’s adoption of this policy would make it essentially an industry-accepted practice overnight. Lenders of all types would gladly follow their lead in an effort to keep their REO rolls from growing exponentially. Why wouldn’t a lender take a $25,000 principal reduction if it keeps the mortgage current than risk the pain and headache of foreclosing for a property that might only sell for 50% of the current note?

The Ultimate Moral Hazard

Homeowners who are struggling with their payments due to myriad reasons (from fraudulently overstating their income to a resetting option-arm to death of the primary wage earner) will see principal reductions to keep them in their home. The homeowner next door in a comparable home will not see that relief as long as they continue to make their payments on time.

Homeowners are rewarded for feigning problems with their mortgage payments to get the reduction. It’s a less-painful version of mailing in your keys. Go down 60-days on your mortgage and get a nice chunk of your loan balance forgiven.

A Good Homeowner Gamble?

The argument that the mere idea of a damaged credit score is enough to keep full-balance folks paying right along while their neighbors get gifted $50k loses credibility in the current environment. If I’m a homeowner (which I am) and I’m current on my mortgage (yes, again) and I’m seeing all of the bail out plans and changes being made and I see Bank of America add principal reductions to their loan modification tool kit for delinquent borrowers I might start to think that there is going to be some government intervention on future credit as a result of this mess too.

Think about it - with all of the changes to save homeowners who are losing their homes and going down late on their mortgages the government will surely want to address future credit opportunities for those bailed-out. They may even be thinking of a way to help folks who suffered a foreclosure or late payments by a “resetting ARM” be distinguished in credit scoring from those who faced bankruptcy or late payments on consumer debt.

If I’m a homeowner who is seeing principal reduction around them I might trade $50,000 in debt forgiveness for a couple of years of higher interest-rate costs. Heck a back-of-the-envelope calculation might show that it’s worth it even without changes to current credit scoring methods and the laws governing same.

Is Once Enough?

Do you only get one shot at the reduction? Blown Mortgage regular Ann had this to say about the principal reduction path:

The question I have is what types of loans are going to be modified? Teaser ARMS? MTA’s? Also how do you modify? Based on True income when it was a liar loan? Principal Reductions in a declining market..does that mean that a year from now when the price goes down another 10% are those borrowers going to expect more? What about the average Joe next door, who isn’t a “troubled” borrower and now has a principal balance of $300K..while his neighbor had 50K forgiven and now has principal balance of $250K?

Seems to me there is no end in sight…

And that’s another major challenge. What happens to the neighbor who takes the write-down now, and then sees his neighbor take a write-down in six-months that is double the amount forgiven to him? Does that neighbor sue Bank of America for an additional reduction?

Where do Second Mortgages Fit In?

The questions keep going. What about second mortgages? Where do those fit in? Does Bank of America forgive debt on the second first or keep the higher-rate (mostly unsecured) second debt and reduce the principal on the first? How does that get figured out.

What did McGee Mean?

In the end Paul is right - what is Bank of America really considering with these loan modifications and principal reductions as they mentioned in their sweeping press release about homeownership. Did they “misspeak”? Were they only pointing to the options available in the entire universe of home-saving? It’s a question that needs to be drilled down on and Bank of America needs to be held accountable to what they said for the sake of all participants in this market.

What do you think?

Source [blownmortgage]

Bank of America announced that it plans to work-out approximately $40 billion of loans in trouble at Countrywide as part of it’s acquisition of the failed mortgage lender. BofA estimates that the $40 billion will result in a little over a quarter-million homeowners keeping their homes instead of losing them to foreclosure.

From the Pacific Business News on the new BofA initiative:

In addition, BofA says it will continue its policy of allowing tenants living in properties facing foreclosure to remain on site for 60 days after the completion of foreclosure proceedings. They will receive $2,000 to defray moving expenses if they leave voluntarily within 30 days of the completion of foreclosure proceedings.

BofA (NYSE: BAC) says it plans to spend $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years in community-development efforts that focus on affordable housing, economic development and consumer and small-business lending. BofA is the second-largest bank in the Sacramento region, based on deposits, according to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

You can read the full press release from Bank of America on the initiative here.

Source [blownmortgage]

Filed under: Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A), Battle of the Brands

This post is part of our Battle of the Brands feature. Let us know which brand you prefer, and check out other Battle of the Brands posts.

Cold Stone Creamery vs. Dairy Queen? This is Liston vs. Ali, American Idol vs. 60 Minutes, Sacha Baron Cohen vs. Woody Allen. The young, brash upstart vs. the wily veteran champion. With butterfat.

Dairy Queen is, of course, the veteran. At 4,500 readily recognizable locations throughout the U.S., the Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) company serves up a time-tested menu of coney dogs, Dilly Bars, and Blizzards at prices that the average Joe can afford. So what if the décor is 1980s, and its ice cream is to cream as bologna is to steak?

Cold Stone is the brash upstart, starting in 1988 in Tempe, Arizona. Owned by the privately-held Kahala Corp., it has grown to over 1,400 outlets in strip malls across the country. The super-premium product it serves is hand-scooped, full of butterfat and bounteous flavor. The price is also bounteous, though; in my neighborhood, a single scoop of vanilla on a wafer cone sets me back $3.58.

Continue reading Battle of the Brands: Cold Stone Creamery vs. Dairy Queen

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Via [bloggingstocks]

Filed under: Google (GOOG), Marketing and advertising

Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) ventured further into mobile advertising this past week with the introduction of display ads geared for mobile phones. From the smallest cellphone screen resolution to the iPhone, Google wants to ensure that it will be able to display ads on all those billions of tiny screens in the very near future. This should come as no surprise, as CEO Eric Schmidt seems to always promote Google’s mobile efforts every single chance he gets. It’s no surprise — there are way more mobile users in the world than there are PC users.

Can Google become as successful on the mobile screen as it has been on the PC screen? That’s a tough one to chew on, but the extremely limited real estate of a cellphone screen may make that effort quite difficult. Google just can’t line up paid ads down the side of a cellphone screen like it can on that laptop screen or that 21″ LCD monitor on the desk at home or in the office.

The iPhone changed the game a bit last year, giving customers a very large screen — both physically and in resolution — to play with. However, the number of iPhones pale in comparison with total cellphones with a smaller color screen. Google’s Android cellphone operating system, which has a huge partnership following, may be able to increase available inventory on the mobile screen for Google’s ads. In fact, that was probably a top priority. However, it will be quite a while before customers have that at their fingertips. Google’s mobile ad efforts, until then, will be highly complementary to its regular advertising business on the PC screen, but nothing more.

Close
E-mail It