3SOF

True. It is just unnatural to wish things going down ... I have to work on my mental problem on that. Another thing, when I looked at your recommendations for the day and I imagine I would feel a bit "safe" seeing you have short stops on BIDU, FMCN and IBN, weird huh? Or maybe just because I am too old.

Yeh, if the market crashes like that I would miss most of the "fun". But I think it is less likely these days: you have mysterious PPT in the working; you have a handson Fed; and more importantly, you have how much money US workers pump into their 401Ks every 2 weeks? There is even a new regulation proposing that: if a worker didn't choose a 401K portfolio, his/her contribution will go to a default moderate equity portfolio instead of staying in the money market fund which is the current default choice. Back in 1987, there is none of all these.

Quote from: David Randolph on March 14, 2007, 08:11:31 AM

I agree. But maybe you have just a bit of something in you against wishing things to go down ... you rather buy something that goes up, even if it is a bearish directional trade.

Yep, good idea. Against that you just have the 1929 crash when the Dow went down 48% in a couple of months and the 1987 crash when it went down 34% in just two weeks.

The study of these two crashes was what made me go from long to short so rapidly, when the market fell so much with that kind of volume on February 27, 2007, I was afraid the market could just crash right there.

Quote from: realcoolhead on March 14, 2007, 08:29:53 AM

True. It is just unnatural to wish things going down ... I have to work on my mental problem on that. Another thing, when I looked at your recommendations for the day and I imagine I would feel a bit "safe" seeing you have short stops on BIDU, FMCN and IBN, weird huh? Or maybe just because I am too old.

Yeh, if the market crashes like that I would miss most of the "fun". But I think it is less likely these days: you have mysterious PPT in the working; you have a handson Fed; and more importantly, you have how much money US workers pump into their 401Ks every 2 weeks? There is even a new regulation proposing that: if a worker didn't choose a 401K portfolio, his/her contribution will go to a default moderate equity portfolio instead of staying in the money market fund which is the current default choice. Back in 1987, there is none of all these.

Quote from: David Randolph on March 14, 2007, 08:11:31 AM

I agree. But maybe you have just a bit of something in you against wishing things to go down ... you rather buy something that goes up, even if it is a bearish directional trade.

Yep, good idea. Against that you just have the 1929 crash when the Dow went down 48% in a couple of months and the 1987 crash when it went down 34% in just two weeks.

The study of these two crashes was what made me go from long to short so rapidly, when the market fell so much with that kind of volume on February 27, 2007, I was afraid the market could just crash right there.

I think a financial disaster is more likely when the majority of people share the same view as this... Dont worry everything is fine we are looked after by the FED etc... Its when you let your guard down when the worst things are possible. Just like a crash usually happens when the bulls are out parading with their guards down.

You are right. I agree sooner or later there will be a financial disaster.

What I meant to say is that the crash might not happen in a very short period of time. There will be several "attempts" to "rescue" the market, therefore there will be plenty of money to be made on the short side, even if one starts bear market operation late. I recall in late 2000 when NASDAQ was well on its way to "crash", several stocks, like SUNW or INTC, even made new all-time highs. By the time 2001 started, it was very clear we were in a bear market. Yet if you were so late that you just started shorting in 2001, you could still make a bundle.

That being said, I see a flaw in my strategy: that is what if David's short picks were so good that they could go down even if the market goes up...

Quote from: nullzero on March 14, 2007, 09:44:35 AM

I think a financial disaster is more likely when the majority of people share the same view as this... Dont worry everything is fine we are looked after by the FED etc... Its when you let your guard down when the worst things are possible. Just like a crash usually happens when the bulls are out parading with their guards down.

QuoteThat being said, I see a flaw in my strategy: that is what if David's short picks were so good that they could go down even if the market goes up...

Nah, at best I'll break even with my short campaign, which I guess isn't all that bad. What I don't like is to lose money, to be the same for some time doesn't bother me much.

The more I think about shorting, the more I dislike it, you know? Think of the long term estimates for a short pick ... they will always be lousy when compared to outstanding long picks.

Anyway, this is CIMT's thread. Look how volume is drying but the stock held up so well. This tells me there will be another bull run soon. But I don't care much about that, what matters most is the company keeps on track with my long term estimates, that show a 29% average annual return for the next 10 years.

I'll continue holding CIMT.

CIMT had another low volume day as it consolidates Monday's huge run up. The following news was out:

• Cimatron Releases Application for Design of Progressive Dies
PR Newswire (Thu 9:56am)

That one day 100% plus rally is justified by the company having its best quarter ever, delivering $0.07 EPS for the quarter. From what I've been reading on the news, things can only get better going forward.

This is just a $22 M market cap without any historical dilution, remember.

I'll continue holding CIMT.

I dont see news causing the drop, so I decided to jump in here at 2.48, hopefully the 10 ema starts to act as support soon.

Good entry.  CIMT looks good.  Today is just short term noise.

I was looking over their quarterly SEC filing:

I noticed operating income is $336K, but net income is $557k. I don't see an explanation for difference. (No asset sale or capital gains mentioned)

If anybody can please explain, I would greatly appreciate it.

David,

Looking at the growth in revenues and net income. I am wondering why you chose CIMT over SILC for 3 stocks on fire portfolio, SILC has a proven track record of 12 straight quarters of increasing revenues and profits. CIMT had one good quarter. the rest of the year the revenues have been flat with net income fluctuating from positive to negative in previous quarters.

Thanks

Quote from: eggman11 on March 16, 2007, 02:47:56 PM
I was looking over their quarterly SEC filing:

I noticed operating income is $336K, but net income is $557k. I don't see an explanation for difference. (No asset sale or capital gains mentioned)

CIMT discloses the breakdown from op income to net income in the annual reports but not in the quarterly reports.  http://www.cimatron.com/download.aspx?FolderID=22&lang=en

In 2005, the difference between net and op income was attributed to the change in valuation of the euro in relation to the US dollar:

"The increase in financial income (expenses), net, in 2005 was due primarily to the devaluation of the Euro in relation to the U.S. dollar. The increase in financial income in 2004 was due primarily to the revaluation of the Euro in relation to the U.S. dollar"

There were also tax loss carryovers at the end of 2005:

"We believe that we had tax loss carryforwards in Israel in the aggregate amount of $5,894,000 as of the end of 2005. In addition, as of December 31, 2005, we had approximately $6.8 million in net operating loss carryforwards in North America, $1.7 million in Germany, $2.2 million in France and $0.4 million in the U.K."

http://www.cimatron.com/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/0/1310.pdf

Thanks

Quote from: buddjas1 on March 16, 2007, 03:39:48 PM

Quote from: eggman11 on March 16, 2007, 02:47:56 PM
I was looking over their quarterly SEC filing:

I noticed operating income is $336K, but net income is $557k. I don't see an explanation for difference. (No asset sale or capital gains mentioned)

CIMT discloses the breakdown from op income to net income in the annual reports but not in the quarterly reports.  http://www.cimatron.com/download.aspx?FolderID=22&lang=en

In 2005, the difference between net and op income was attributed to the change in valuation of the euro in relation to the US dollar:

"The increase in financial income (expenses), net, in 2005 was due primarily to the devaluation of the Euro in relation to the U.S. dollar. The increase in financial income in 2004 was due primarily to the revaluation of the Euro in relation to the U.S. dollar"

There were also tax loss carryovers at the end of 2005:

"We believe that we had tax loss carryforwards in Israel in the aggregate amount of $5,894,000 as of the end of 2005. In addition, as of December 31, 2005, we had approximately $6.8 million in net operating loss carryforwards in North America, $1.7 million in Germany, $2.2 million in France and $0.4 million in the U.K."

http://www.cimatron.com/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/0/1310.pdf

Thanks Buddjas,

The dollar is still weak against most currencies, should we should continue to see the exchange rate benefit going forward. I really hope CIMT has turned the corner. Revenues have been flat to down for many years. Their CFO is the former CFO for SILC.

Today we completed a 50% retacement of CIMT massive one day run-up. From about $1.40-$3.40. Today our low was about $2.40. w Hopefully, we will consolidate and move up form here.

QuoteDavid,

Looking at the growth in revenues and net income. I am wondering why you chose CIMT over SILC for 3 stocks on fire portfolio, SILC has a proven track record of 12 straight quarters of increasing revenues and profits. CIMT had one good quarter. the rest of the year the revenues have been flat with net income fluctuating from positive to negative in previous quarters.

Thanks

Hi eggman11, because SILC reminds me of HAUP, it sells some high tech products that may become obsolete in a few years. CIMT is a software company operating in a niche market, now expanding sales across the world. I guess I prefer CIMT's long term outlook (also CIMT is just a $19.8 M market cap and SILC is $70 M - and CIMT has more annual revenues than SILC).

My take is CIMT is SILC when SILC was a $2.53 stock

As for Friday's sell off, I guess I was wrong over the short term, but that means nothing. The stock was up so much over the short term that anything could happen, it could have gone up another 100% or rest a bit, going down 12% as it did on Friday. It's really unpredictable.

As for the long term fundamental picture, I keep seeing the outstanding long term growth that I saw before and I'll continue holding CIMT.

I can't help thinking that CIMT is a wonderful pick, despite the stock being down 13.8% from my buying price. The fundamental setup is so powerful, that if growth momentum continues this tiny $19 M market cap can really be a multi bagger. Nothing technical will shake me out of this position, nothing.

I worked too hard to find CIMT and I'll keep on holding it whatever happens.

David Technically this stock should start its way up from tomorrow ...

We should see some activities tomorrow .. 

Quote from: Garoh on March 20, 2007, 02:45:52 AM
David Technically this stock should start its way up from tomorrow ...

We should see some activities tomorrow .. 

Great short term call Garoh

CIMT went up 10% today, but my take is all these movements will be just a blip on the long term chart some quarters down the road. The company set the stage with Q4 2006 record revenue of $6.03 M and $0.07 EPS. Now it just needs to keep the revenue and earnings momentum.

Just with the information I have now I believe CIMT should be a $10.64 stock. Why?

Because it made $0.07 EPS for the 4th quarter (let's not care about special items for now), so we can reasonably expect at least $0.28 EPS for 2007, and the company's industry, the Technical & System Software industry, trades at a 38 times earnings multiple. If you multiply a legit $0.28 EPS estimate by a 38 times multiple you get to $10.64.

I'll continue holding CIMT with strong hands.

Quote from: David Randolph on March 20, 2007, 06:19:02 PM

Quote from: Garoh on March 20, 2007, 02:45:52 AM
David Technically this stock should start its way up from tomorrow ...

We should see some activities tomorrow .. 

Great short term call Garoh

CIMT went up 10% today, but my take is all these movements will be just a blip on the long term chart some quarters down the road. The company set the stage with Q4 2006 record revenue of $6.03 M and $0.07 EPS. Now it just needs to keep the revenue and earnings momentum.

Just with the information I have now I believe CIMT should be a $10.64 stock. Why?

Because it made $0.07 EPS for the 4th quarter (let's not care about special items for now), so we can reasonably expect at least $0.28 EPS for 2007, and the company's industry, the Technical & System Software industry, trades at a 38 times earnings multiple. If you multiply a legit $0.28 EPS estimate by a 38 times multiple you get to $10.64.

I'll continue holding CIMT with strong hands.

David,

Q4 2006 was not record revenue. In Q4 2004 they had $6.4M in revenue. Which is one of the things that concern me. Their revenues have been inconsistent (up and down compared to prior year results) over the years. You get your $.28 estimate by taking the current quarter and multiply it by 4 quarters. There is no evidence that this will happen. Taken from their 1Q06 earings report - the normal seasonal pattern 1Q revenues are generally weaker, however 1Q06 remained at the same level as 4Q05, but revenues were $5.4, which was down from $5.6M from 1Q05. I don't think estimates can be made simply by taking the current quarter and multiplying it by 4.