Bob Alcaro
Active Member
Anyone have any favorites that are undervalued and they would like to share.......
Market's turning up.....
- Thread starter Bob Alcaro
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Jeff S 2
Member
Sun ("JAVA"). Their stock is GROSSLY undervalued at the moment.
On the other hand, I'd recommend avoiding Sirius ("SIRI") unless you can afford to buy at least a thousand shares, and risk losing it all if they go bankrupt. Why at least a thousand? With their current price (40c/share), a reverse-split is practically assured... otherwise, they'll be delisted from NASDAQ in a couple of months. Most of the online brokerage companies I know of charge $20 if there's a split or reverse-split. Buy 100 shares of SIRI at 40c/ea, and by the time you factor in $10 to buy, $20 for the nearly-assured reverse-split, and $10 more to sell it, you've doubled its acquisition cost to 80c/share. Even worse, if the $20 fee for a reverse-split were to end up costing more than the stock itself were worth, as far as I know there's no way to metaphorically abandon the stock and walk away from it to avoid paying any more fees.
If it weren't for the damn $20 reorganization fee when/if they do a reverse split, Sirius would be a no-brainer to buy a few hundred shares of as a metaphorical lottery ticket. But unfortunately, that fee DOES throw a big monkey wrench into the equation by massively increasing the ownership cost of just a few hundred shares.
On the other hand, I'd recommend avoiding Sirius ("SIRI") unless you can afford to buy at least a thousand shares, and risk losing it all if they go bankrupt. Why at least a thousand? With their current price (40c/share), a reverse-split is practically assured... otherwise, they'll be delisted from NASDAQ in a couple of months. Most of the online brokerage companies I know of charge $20 if there's a split or reverse-split. Buy 100 shares of SIRI at 40c/ea, and by the time you factor in $10 to buy, $20 for the nearly-assured reverse-split, and $10 more to sell it, you've doubled its acquisition cost to 80c/share. Even worse, if the $20 fee for a reverse-split were to end up costing more than the stock itself were worth, as far as I know there's no way to metaphorically abandon the stock and walk away from it to avoid paying any more fees.
If it weren't for the damn $20 reorganization fee when/if they do a reverse split, Sirius would be a no-brainer to buy a few hundred shares of as a metaphorical lottery ticket. But unfortunately, that fee DOES throw a big monkey wrench into the equation by massively increasing the ownership cost of just a few hundred shares.
Bob Alcaro
Active Member
Jeff,
I'm leery of Sirus even tho they bought their only competition, and everyone that has one simply LOVES it........ I'm thinking that very soon HD radio will hurt Sirus badly............
I'm leery of Sirus even tho they bought their only competition, and everyone that has one simply LOVES it........ I'm thinking that very soon HD radio will hurt Sirus badly............
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
JeffS,
I dunno about Sun. They have been taking a beating the past 5+ years. Their products, especially hardware are about that far behind the industry. When it comes to CPM (cost per MIPs) their hardware with proprietery Solaris software hasn't kept pace with COTS (common off the shelf) hardware from Dell, IBM, and others running Linux.
Our company moved away from Sun hardware and software years ago. Now we only rebrand Dell and Linux (2950s and RedHat to be exact).
About the only thing that I see Sun doing right is their JRE (Java Runtime Environment) implementation.
TJR
I dunno about Sun. They have been taking a beating the past 5+ years. Their products, especially hardware are about that far behind the industry. When it comes to CPM (cost per MIPs) their hardware with proprietery Solaris software hasn't kept pace with COTS (common off the shelf) hardware from Dell, IBM, and others running Linux.
Our company moved away from Sun hardware and software years ago. Now we only rebrand Dell and Linux (2950s and RedHat to be exact).
About the only thing that I see Sun doing right is their JRE (Java Runtime Environment) implementation.
TJR
Jeff S 2
Member
Well, Sun DOES have a couple of things in their favor... positive cash flow being one of them. Sun might give most of their products away... but the ones they DO charge for, well... dear god... they make Oracle Enterprise software look downright cheap. "Java" is only "free" when the end-user downloads and installs it himself, and the VM's authors don't charge for it. The moment you want to SELL something with Java already installed, or write a non-free implementation of it for something like a cell phone or PDA, well... let's just say you'd better have a healthy amount of cash in the bank.
It's an effective submarine strategy, because it gets people to develop things for sale under the belief that Java is "free", only to discover too late that if you want to sell some Java-based device to random soccer moms (or some other group for whom the need to download and install java themselves would be a deal-killer), you're going to have to pay Sun for the privilege of shipping your device with Java already installed. Ditto, for independent implementations of it. Anyone can write a JVM and give it away... but if you want to write a JVM and SELL it (or distribute it without source, or any other scenario that violates the SPL), you're going to have to pony up cash for Sun's share of the profits. And they won't be cheap.
The same thing goes for MySQL (now owned by Sun). It's free to download, install, and run... but if you want to write some application that needs it, and distribute it as a complete turnkey solution pre-installed on a computer, or bundled with your own application's installer... it's not cheap. In fact, it's pretty expensive. And the way the license is written, just about anything you could do to automate its download and installation for the end user is verboten. That includes having a paid consultant download and install it FOR the end user. The end user has to personally download and install it himself, or Sun is going to sue the software vendor, hardware vendor, and/or consultant for software piracy.
It's an effective submarine strategy, because it gets people to develop things for sale under the belief that Java is "free", only to discover too late that if you want to sell some Java-based device to random soccer moms (or some other group for whom the need to download and install java themselves would be a deal-killer), you're going to have to pay Sun for the privilege of shipping your device with Java already installed. Ditto, for independent implementations of it. Anyone can write a JVM and give it away... but if you want to write a JVM and SELL it (or distribute it without source, or any other scenario that violates the SPL), you're going to have to pony up cash for Sun's share of the profits. And they won't be cheap.
The same thing goes for MySQL (now owned by Sun). It's free to download, install, and run... but if you want to write some application that needs it, and distribute it as a complete turnkey solution pre-installed on a computer, or bundled with your own application's installer... it's not cheap. In fact, it's pretty expensive. And the way the license is written, just about anything you could do to automate its download and installation for the end user is verboten. That includes having a paid consultant download and install it FOR the end user. The end user has to personally download and install it himself, or Sun is going to sue the software vendor, hardware vendor, and/or consultant for software piracy.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
JeffS,
Yep, great strategy that open source software.
Java...Free!
MySQL...Free!
I guess you have to make it up in volume if you want to make a profit!
Yep, great strategy that open source software.
Java...Free!
MySQL...Free!
I guess you have to make it up in volume if you want to make a profit!
Nelson Atwell
Well-Known Member
I would buy Apple.
