Go to Jeff Salisbury LWGate Home Page.From: "Katherine Malm" <kmalm@earthlink.net>
Subject: [CANSLIM] PSFT: Accounting Shenanigans
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 18:17:49 -0600
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan "Katherine Malm"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01FC_01C1A503.6DE9AC40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tom, I have accidentally deleted your last comment on this issue, so = this is a continuation of the discussion. After reading your comments about analysts doing what is expected of = them, trusting the DGO to use diligent researchers, etc, a few thoughts = came to mind. First regards earnings estimates. This is where the analysts are = supposed to do the leg work for us by pouring through the financials, = interviewing the company, etc etc. But this is only *one* piece of = information in the DGO charts and only *one* of many hurdles that a = stock candidate must pass to be considered a buyable candidate under = CANSLIM guidelines. I use the forward growth rate as the single most = important hurdle when considering a candidate. If it doesn't pass = minimum standards, I don't even look at the stock. So far, I've not met = many forecasters who *under* forecast anything, so meeting a minimum = hurdle doesn't lose any candidates. But what it *does* do is let = marginal companies with marginal businesses and high expectations by the = analyst community past the gate. This is the first reason that I think = due diligence is necessary. During this process, I am looking at the = business to see if the estimates pass the test of reasonableness. I = don't take anybody at their word when it comes to forecasting. I've = dealt with too many manufacturing businesses to know better. Second has to do with past fundamentals. When DGO reports, they use the = proforma numbers NOT the GAAP numbers. In other words, they delete all = the one time and extraordinary charges just like everybody else before = they report and calculate the resultant QoQ and YoY growth rates. Every = once in a while, they can't take the extraordinary items out per their = procedure, so they put a little mark next to the numbers to let you know = this. BUT, they don't adjust any of the growth rates as a result. So = here we already have a big discrepancy. I first became keenly aware of = this when I owned JDSU in '99-'00. I'm looking at the GAAP numbers and = seeing red, looking at the proforma numbers and seeing green. Not only = that, but the difference was *huge.* So, again, due diligence and = digging through the 10K's and 10Q's to sniff out the quality of earnings = and revenues is a must in my mind. Also, any shenanigans around balance = sheets would only show up in the ROE numbers reported in DGO and/or in = the cashflow vs. EPS comparisons. When these numbers don't jibe...I'm = off to the 10K's with red pen in hand. In all, this is the very reason = that I do not mine for candidates based on DGO data. I *especially* = don't trust the EPS rankings and I pretty much ignore the SMR in favor = of doing my own assessment of revenues, margins, earnings, ROE and = cashflow. It takes time, but I think in the end it's worth it. It = certainly doesn't mean I'm an expert at it, but at least I've put forth = the effort. In the end, I have only myself to blame and not some 27 year = old kid getting paid $1m/year to have lunch with CEO's. Speaking of which....here's the due diligence blunder of the year... = MCAF...will its lessons never end? After some follow-up discussions here on my MCAF selling blunder, I = wrote to MCAF's IR department asking them exactly how they generated = income from the "Windows XP tie-in" that was so heavily touted about the = time MCAF started its run. This I should have done *while* I was doing = my DD, not in post analysis. Here is the IR reply to my inquiry: My question: It was my understanding that MCAF was the security service of choice = under the Microsoft Windows XP OS, yet a friend of mine recently = purchased a Dell with XP and it came with Symantec's product installed. = How, specifically does the tie in work and how does it generate revenues = for MCAF? Dear Ms Malm: McAfee.com is a tab in the XP version of Windows Instant Messenger. = Windows Messenger has a large community of users and by putting our = services in front of so many users; it will translate to subscribers, = which will translate to revenue. Dell has chosen the Symantec product to bundle on its computers. Regards, Marisa Lewis, Investor Relations Manager Well...I'll mark this one for the "journal of duh", as one of my friends = likes to call it. --Katherine - ------=_NextPart_000_01FC_01C1A503.6DE9AC40 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV>Tom, I have accidentally deleted your last comment on this issue, = so this=20 is a continuation of the discussion.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After reading your comments about analysts doing what is expected = of them,=20 trusting the DGO to use diligent researchers, etc, a few thoughts came = to=20 mind.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>First regards earnings estimates. This is where the analysts are = supposed=20 to do the leg work for us by pouring through the financials, = interviewing the=20 company, etc etc. But this is only *one* piece of information in the DGO = charts=20 and only *one* of many hurdles that a stock candidate must pass to be = considered=20 a buyable candidate under CANSLIM guidelines. I use the forward growth = rate as=20 the single most important hurdle when considering a candidate. If it = doesn't=20 pass minimum standards, I don't even look at the stock. So far, I've not = met=20 many forecasters who *under* forecast anything, so meeting a minimum = hurdle=20 doesn't lose any candidates. But what it *does* do is let marginal = companies=20 with marginal businesses and high expectations by the analyst community = past the=20 gate. This is the first reason that I think due diligence is necessary. = During=20 this process, I am looking at the business to see if the estimates pass = the test=20 of reasonableness. I don't take anybody at their word when it comes to=20 forecasting. I've dealt with too many manufacturing businesses to know=20 better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Second has to do with past fundamentals. When DGO reports, they use = the=20 proforma numbers NOT the GAAP numbers. In other words, they delete all = the one=20 time and extraordinary charges just like everybody else before they = report and=20 calculate the resultant QoQ and YoY growth rates. Every once in a while, = they=20 can't take the extraordinary items out per their procedure, so they put = a little=20 mark next to the numbers to let you know this. BUT, they don't adjust = any of the=20 growth rates as a result. So here we already have a big discrepancy. I = first=20 became keenly aware of this when I owned JDSU in '99-'00. I'm looking at = the=20 GAAP numbers and seeing red, looking at the proforma numbers and seeing = green.=20 Not only that, but the difference was *huge.* So, again, due diligence = and=20 digging through the 10K's and 10Q's to sniff out the quality of earnings = and=20 revenues is a must in my mind. Also, any shenanigans around balance = sheets would=20 only show up in the ROE numbers reported in DGO and/or in the cashflow = vs. EPS=20 comparisons. When these numbers don't jibe...I'm off to the 10K's with = red pen=20 in hand. In all, this is the very reason that I do not mine for = candidates based=20 on DGO data. I *especially* don't trust the EPS rankings and I pretty = much=20 ignore the SMR in favor of doing my own assessment of revenues, margins, = earnings, ROE and cashflow. It takes time, but I think in the end it's = worth it.=20 It certainly doesn't mean I'm an expert at it, but at least I've put = forth the=20 effort. In the end, I have only myself to blame and not some 27 year old = kid=20 getting paid $1m/year to have lunch with CEO's.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Speaking of which....here's the due diligence blunder of the = year...=20 MCAF...will its lessons never end?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>After some follow-up discussions here on my MCAF selling blunder, I = wrote=20 to MCAF's IR department asking them exactly how they generated income = from the=20 "Windows XP tie-in" that was so heavily touted about the time MCAF = started its=20 run. This I should have done *while* I was doing my DD, not in post = analysis.=20 Here is the IR reply to my inquiry:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My question:</DIV> <DIV> <P class=3DMsoNormal style=3D"MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5in"><FONT face=3D"Times = New Roman"=20 size=3D3><SPAN style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt">It was my understanding that = MCAF was the=20 security service of choice under the Microsoft Windows XP OS, yet a = friend of=20 mine recently purchased a Dell with XP and it came with Symantec's = product=20 installed. How, specifically does the tie in work and how does it = generate=20 revenues for MCAF?<?xml:namespace prefix =3D o ns =3D=20 "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" = /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Dear Ms=20 Malm:<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></DIV> <DIV> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: = Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">McAfee.com is = a tab in=20 the XP version of Windows Instant Messenger. Windows Messenger has a = large=20 community of users and by putting our services in front of so many = users; it=20 will translate to subscribers, which will translate to=20 revenue.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: = Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT><FONT=20 face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Dell has = chosen the=20 Symantec product to bundle on its = computers.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: = Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P> <DIV> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-no-proof: = yes">Regards,</SPAN></FONT></P> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-no-proof: = yes"></SPAN></FONT><FONT=20 face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-no-proof: = yes">Marisa=20 Lewis, </SPAN></FONT><FONT face=3DArial color=3Dnavy size=3D2><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-no-proof: = yes">Investor=20 Relations Manager</SPAN></FONT></P> <P class=3DMsoNormal><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" = color=3D#000000><SPAN=20 style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-no-proof: = yes"><STRONG><EM>Well...I'll=20 mark this one for the "journal of duh", as one of my friends likes to = call=20 it. = - --Katherine</EM></STRONG></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML> - ------=_NextPart_000_01FC_01C1A503.6DE9AC40-- - - - -To subscribe/unsubscribe, email "majordomo@xmission.com" - -In the email body, write "subscribe canslim" or - -"unsubscribe canslim". Do not use quotes in your email.
Previous Article (by Subject): Re: [CANSLIM] Mr. Greenspan "Katherine Malm"
Articles sorted by: [Date]
[Author]
[Subject]