TLS - Telstra Corporation

[prawn_86]

Is that quite fair? Mr Burns is just being honest enough to express his uncertainty publicly, something I expect many others also feel.

Perhaps consider something you're always promoting, i.e. more comment on stock threads. His questions have provoked responses from multiple other posters. If you only encourage questions and comments from people who are confident about what they're doing, you're going to significantly limit any discussion imo.

(I'm personally appreciative of the input of others on this thread.)

Without meaning to derail the thread (so this will be my last post on the matter), there is a lot of agonising that he goes through for each investment decision, as far as i can tell.

I am all for asking questions, and you will note that most of the questions have been answered, but if it is just a should I/shouldn't I/its seems like a gamble comment, that is never going to change and be like that for every stock until the investor has a plan. I would have thought that since the last investment decision (which was very successful for MrBurns) there would have been more research about the market and the stock and then he would know what questions to ask rather than bemoaning if he should put more money into it because it is a gamble.

Personal view only of that one specific post, many other posts have some very good questions which have generated a lot of discussion

 

[MrBurns]

Is that quite fair? Mr Burns is just being honest enough to express his uncertainty publicly, something I expect many others also feel.

Perhaps consider something you're always promoting, i.e. more comment on stock threads. His questions have provoked responses from multiple other posters. If you only encourage questions and comments from people who are confident about what they're doing, you're going to significantly limit any discussion imo.

(I'm personally appreciative of the input of others on this thread.)

Thanks Julia I was going to respond to that effect but couldn't be bothered, sometimes online comments get misinterpreted, but annoying to have a query thrown off track by an unhelpful comment.

Waiting on NAB trade , they've taken so long the price has increased 3c while waiting for their newby girl to get things right.

Have just doubled my investment, I expect it to be volatile but ok in the end.

 

[MrBurns]

Bloody unreal the price went up so much they had to come back to me to transfer more across to buy the quantity I wanted, s l o w

 

[MrBurns]

Without meaning to derail the thread (so this will be my last post on the matter), there is a lot of agonising that he goes through for each investment decision, as far as i can tell.

I am all for asking questions, and you will note that most of the questions have been answered, but if it is just a should I/shouldn't I/its seems like a gamble comment, that is never going to change and be like that for every stock until the investor has a plan. I would have thought that since the last investment decision (which was very successful for MrBurns) there would have been more research about the market and the stock and then he would know what questions to ask rather than bemoaning if he should put more money into it because it is a gamble.

Personal view only of that one specific post, many other posts have some very good questions which have generated a lot of discussion

Don't worry about it prawn, I was flushing out the experienced thoughts of any ASF members that cared to answer and to them I say Thank You

 

[Ves]

TLS is a good example why valuations are mostly a waste of time and the market determines the price of a share regardless of theoretical valuations. For at least 12 months all the brokers have had valuations on Telstra well below the market price.

All are saying that that there will be no impact on TLS when the coalition wins government. All are saying that their DCF valuation is around the $4 mark and most have a neutral recommendation. Yet the price has kept rising as the market determines its own value.

Yet another poster trying to claim that valuation is useless because a few brokers got it wrong (pushing their own "technical analysis or the highway type agenda.") I've had several PMs and such over the last 18 months saying that I will never make any money relying on DCFs and valuation models and that I should read such and such technical analysis classic because it will cleanse my mind (and line someone else's pockets of course).

I'm not sure if you are implying the following, but the assumption that all valuations are most likely wrong if the price keeps rising above them is naive at best as is the reverse you are probably be wrong because the stock is falling.

Just to clarify - there were value investors (same post here) buying this well under $3.50 when some chartists were saying that it would be silly to buy it as it was in the mother-of-all-downtrends. I don't think the same people bought this on valuation grounds at $9, either.

Value exists - and just because it doesn't appear in time for the nightly news doesn't mean that the price won't track it over the long-term.

I'm sure I'll get a chorus of angry posters saying "how dare I respond to your post in this fashion." But I don't really care any more, the claim that something that has worked for others and myself "is mostly a waste of time" is a bit much for me.

 

[Country Lad]

Yet another poster trying to claim that valuation is useless because a few brokers got it wrong (pushing their own "technical analysis or the highway type agenda.") ..................................

I'm not sure if you are implying the following, but the assumption that all valuations are most likely wrong if the price keeps rising above them is naive at best as is the reverse you are probably be wrong because the stock is falling.

No I haven't implied that and if you are going to read that sort of crap into my posts I would prefer you don't respond to any of my posts - put me on the ignore list would be good, so that I don't have to read your garbage as a response to something I didn't say.

CL

 

[Ves]

No I haven't implied that and if you are going to read that sort of crap into my posts I would prefer you don't respond to any of my posts - put me on the ignore list would be good, so that I don't have to read your garbage as a response to something I didn't say.

CL

You are making an argument for efficient market hypothesis whether you know it or not. My post is not that far off the mark for this reason. Please explain how you are not saying emh exists?

 

[Country Lad]

You are making an argument for efficient market hypothesis whether you know it or not. My post is not that far off the mark for this reason. Please explain how you are not saying emh exists?

Sorry, I don't respond to nonsense

 

[Ves]

Sorry, I don't respond to nonsense

Do you even know what the position of EMH is? Because you pretty closely described it in your first post.

 

[drsmith]

To me, the difference in performance between the materials sector and the defensive high dividend yielders may be leading to a bubble in the latter as capital chases equity yields due to declining deposit interest rates.

A healthy rise in the equity market to me would be one where the outlook for sectors that contribute majorly to our economy participate in the positive trend.

That being said, it's difficult to know when bubbles are going to pop. Telstra might be $7 in a years time, it might be $3, who knows.

 

[MrBurns]

To me, the difference in performance between the materials sector and the defensive high dividend yielders may be leading to a bubble in the latter as capital chases equity yields due to declining deposit interest rates.

A healthy rise in the equity market to me would be one where the outlook for sectors that contribute majorly to our economy participate in the positive trend.

That being said, it's difficult to know when bubbles are going to pop. Telstra might be $7 in a years time, it might be $3, who knows.

I agree but Telstra are in a unique position so my guess it is protected to a great degree, though the last time I was right was ..........errr I forget

 

[skyQuake]

sinner posted a chart a whole ago showing how broker valuations tend to be backwards looking rather than forwards looking.

See below for TLS Price targets for Credit Suisse and Citi. vs TLS price

Lets keep it civil

 

[McLovin]

Broker reports are good for certain things, like if you need an estimate of how profitable a division/product line is. They're rubbish for just about everything else. It would be interesting to see the difference between buy side and sell side forecasts.

 

[Boggo]

Broker reports are good for certain things, like if you need an estimate of how profitable a division/product line is. They're rubbish for just about everything else. It would be interesting to see the difference between buy side and sell side forecasts.

Gotta agree.

I have yet to see a broker report that makes any sense, especially when a stock is in freefall.
They seem to keep their amateur Buffetoligists amused but as far as anyone surviving on their expert advice they may need to also include where baked beans are on special.

Here is just one example from last November... (there are many others and they never fail to amuse)

UBS rates BBG as Buy
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 - 10:24

Billabong Director and US boss Paul Naude is set to put the fox amongst the chickens, indicating his intention to put together a leveraged buyout (LBO) plan to purchase the company. He will step aside from duties while formulating a plan, with the broker noting that at this point it appears that he's out on his own.

The broker has its doubts, believing financing will be difficult to secure, while shareholders and the board are likely to have a much different view on value than new lenders/investors would have.

In short, a deal is unlikely and the downside is that if this LBO fails, it may be the last of Paul Naude, who is well regarded. Buy call, price target and forecasts maintained.

Target price is $1.10 Current Price is $0.82 Difference:$0.28 - (brackets indicate current price is over target). If BBG meets the UBS target it will return approximately 35% (excluding dividends, fees and charges - negative figures indicate an expected loss).

The company's fiscal year ends in June.

UBS forecasts a full year FY13 dividend of 1.00 cents and EPS of 9.00 cents. At the last closing share price the estimated dividend yield is 1.23%.

At the last closing share price the stock's estimated Price to Earnings Ratio (PER) is 9.06.

 

[McLovin]

I have yet to see a broker report that makes any sense, especially when a stock is in freefall.
They seem to keep their amateur Buffetoligists amused but as far as anyone surviving on their expert advice they may need to also include where baked beans are on special.

Like I said, what a buy side analyst and sell side analyst are saying about a stock is probably vastly different. I doubt you've ever seen a buy side analyst report.

 

[Muschu]

Isn't the only reality the SP movement and (volume) momentum?

I have no idea how to judge tops and bottoms.

---

---

 

[TikoMike]

Broker reports are good for certain things, like if you need an estimate of how profitable a division/product line is. They're rubbish for just about everything else. It would be interesting to see the difference between buy side and sell side forecasts.

Brokers make their money of activity and absolutely love activity. I don't think anyone with a brain should be following their buy/sell forecasts. But yeah you're right, most of the reports are generally rubbish except for the financial data they can present. Just their opinion is questionable.

 

[sinner]

You go through this over and over every time you are thinking of making an investment decision. Either find an adviser you trust, learn to do it youirself with confidence, or accept that it is just gambling and get on with it rather than umming and ahhing for weeks each time

If someone did have reliable answers then it would be easy wouldnt it.

I concur wholeheartedly.

 

[MrBurns]

Well, better close this web site,if it's not here for advice and discussion it has no purpose.

 

[MrBurns]

Chinese in running for Optus 4G deal



Chinese telecommunications company Huawei is likely to emerge with all or part of a $2-plus billion contract to build an ultra-fast mobile network for Optus.

The deal to build a national 4G network for the carrier would expand Huawei's presence in Australia after it was locked out of the national broadband network on security grounds.

The move could reignite scrutiny around Huawei given Optus has contacts with the Department of Defence, albeit on its satellite service.

Huawei, which ranks as one of the world's biggest telco firms, was banned last year by the federal government from participating in tenders to supply equipment to the NBN largely because of undisclosed national security concerns.

etc etc etc..........

Huawei is expected to renew efforts to win lucrative supply contracts in the NBN rollout if the Coalition wins the federal election.

The Coalition has promised if it wins office to review the decision in the light of the ''complete advice'' and intelligence material compiled by ASIO.

In opposition it is entitled to only an extract from ASIO's report on Huawei.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/chinese-in-running-for-optus-4g-deal-20130426-2ijze.html