Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its just a 6 minute interview with the CEO (the guy who came in and saved the company from near-bankruptcy) and is now pushing to make Ford an investment-grade stock.
Thank you. Mullaly is indeed a charismatic CEO. He ignited the culture in the company. Going as far as giving engineering the tools and respect it deserved. The old Ford was run by accountants. It is now more balanced. Isn't it incredible? How one of the oldest startups in the history of the U.S.A. has managed to come back?
Ford vs Facebook
61–70 of 75 posts
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#62I've heard so many people talk about buying Facebook "as soon as I can get in". I think that's ridiculous. When it comes to individual stocks, buying or selling without concern for price is for suckers. That's what got us into the last bubble (or few): people who would buy something (like a house) regardless of the price based on an obscene overconfidence that it would appreciate. I have no idea what the thing's wort…
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#63Valuation lower than assets means you get eaten by corporate raiders, unless you're as big as Ford or the majority of the stock is held by a single family. That just shows how unhealthy Ford is.
Could you please elaborate on this?
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
The OED doesn't know your social connections, your sexual orientation, your date of birth, your address, your previous address, your current location, your gender, your age, your interests, your employer, all the websites you've visited or even what you look like.
So, they have good information for advertising. And that's going to valuable, no doubt... ...but that's it. They aren't building a physical product, they're going to sell other people's products. Or, sell information so that other people can sell other people's products. I find it absurd that the market for web based adverting, between Google and Facebook and others, can be this valuable in the long run. These are ad…
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#65This is the Dot.com era all over again The "dot-dot-com" era?
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#66Ford is a capital intensive industry that reminds me of Berkhire Hathaway - the textile company that Warren Buffett could never figure out how to make money from. It has competitors everywhere making relatively undifferentiated products.
Facebook on the other hand, is more like a media company. It has 1 billion eye balls who spend an average 30 minutes a day on its site on user-generated content. If you were a TV station, how much would you be valued at with that kind of metrics? FB has a beachhead in the sense that it is a marketplace of users who create content, and users who view them. This makes it incredibly sticky and also difficult for a competitor to come about. The downside with FB is that audiences can be fickle. If they think FB is a fad, they will start leaving. Therefore, FB had to establish itself as a habit-forming medium, like e-mail, so that people constantly reengage with it.
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Investors don't invest because of curiosity. They want to earn money.
Yes. Investors believe Facebook's value perception will catch up with its reality, since they are currently out of whack. They believe the current imbalance is in their favor. It's the only way to make money investing.
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#68I've heard so many people talk about buying Facebook "as soon as I can get in". I think that's ridiculous. When it comes to individual stocks, buying or selling without concern for price is for suckers. That's what got us into the last bubble (or few): people who would buy something (like a house) regardless of the price based on an obscene overconfidence that it would appreciate. I have no idea what the thing's wort…
But there is got to be a catch.
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will take a look at the book value of Ford's debt tomorrow on Bloomberg. I agree that the market value of debt should be used for the analysis, but I don't think it will change the conclusion.
It will. Issued debt rarely ever trades at 100 (except in special cases - ie debt near maturity etc). And, in any case, you cannot compare market values of two companies with different leverages such as FB and Ford without renormalizing earnings to the same leverage level. Earnings on equity are amplified if the company has debt (which Ford has). FB has no leverage - its unleveraged earnings give it a whopping market…
You can compare two companies with different levels of leverage. They both have Enterprise Value (EV), which is normally calculated as operating income (EBITDA to be precise) * a multiplier. Market capitalization, or equity value, is by definition the different between the EV and the net debt (debt - cash). (P/E ratios are usually not as useful as the EV/EBITDA approach for understanding a company, btw.)
One company may be highly debt financed and the other may be pure equity financed. As you say, debt financing supercharges equity earnings (see below), but this comes at a higher risk. And in principle, the higher earnings are balanced out by the higher risk and therefore enterprise value is unchanged.
What is a bit harder is comparing two companies in entirely different industries, like Ford and FB!
Equity returns are supercharged by debt because in a growing company debt coupons are cheaper than equity returns. e.g., say you invest $100 to build a company that makes $20 a year. You get a 20% equity return. But imagine you invest $50 and borrow $50 to build a company that makes $20 a year. Your debt pays a typical 5% coupon, so you pay 50*5% = $2.5 in interest. The remaining $17.5 goes to your equity and you get a 35% equity return. BUT if you're unlucky and your earnings are delayed one quarter, it's the bank that gets your 35% equity return cuz you bankrupt, sucka.
Re: Ford vs Facebook
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will take a look at the book value of Ford's debt tomorrow on Bloomberg. I agree that the market value of debt should be used for the analysis, but I don't think it will change the conclusion.
It will. Issued debt rarely ever trades at 100 (except in special cases - ie debt near maturity etc). And, in any case, you cannot compare market values of two companies with different leverages such as FB and Ford without renormalizing earnings to the same leverage level. Earnings on equity are amplified if the company has debt (which Ford has). FB has no leverage - its unleveraged earnings give it a whopping market…