An amusing disclaimer

I found the following on the Yahoo! stock message boards. It is the disclaimer of JohnBravo48. I find it to be an amusing and appropriate disclaimer (although it is quite ungrammatical).

The statements, re-statements and mis-statements contained in this message are based on, including but not limited to, the beliefs as well as assumptions and estimates made by and from information including, but not limited to publicly available and actual results in the future may differ materially from those projected anywhere due to risks and uncertainties that exist in the business environment including, but not limited to: the success of the company’s business initiatives and strategies, personal hygiene, competitive factors and pricing pressures, shifts in market demand, general economic and atmospheric conditions and other factors, including (but not limited to) changes in mental acuity, demand for the company’s products or franchises, the bankruptcy and failure of individual franchisees and the impact of competitors’ actions. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties, including (but not limited to) everything reasonably or unreasonably imaginable, adversely affect the company or should underlying assumptions, suggestions, nuance or estimates prove incorrect, somewhat correct, or almost correct, actual results may vary materially from, including (but not limited to), those described, postulated or coagulated herein as anticipated, believed, estimated, expected or intended.

Disclosure: I have a disclosure policy too, but it is boring.

Who is on the other side of the trade?

In every stock trade there is a buyer and a seller. Outside of those trades motivated by tax planning, overall portfolio issues (e.g., meeting margin calls), and other reasons not related to the stock being traded, either the buyer or the seller will have turned out to make a better choice. Every gain comes at the expense of someone who misses out on the gain. On average, everyone earns the market return (unless they short, in which case they lose the market return). But beating the market (which is what every stockpicker aims for) is a zero-sum game.

Chess and fisticuffs are other examples of zero sum games. In both cases, the market return (or, more accurately, the expected return) is zero. The average chess player will win half the time and lose half the time. Imagine that you are playing a chess tourney for big money. Further, imagine that you have no clue whether you will face Gary Kasparov or a guy who learned to play a week ago. Would you expect to win the tourney or even to do well? No, because you will likely run up against some very talented players quickly. If you do well, it will be due to luck alone.

The stock market (and other financial markets) are like this chess tournament. You have no clue who you are up against, but it is likely that you will face very skilled opponents. Think about who might be selling when you are buying, such as a hedge fund manager or short seller or company executive. If that scares you, perhaps you should be in index funds. If that doesn’t scare you, it still makes sense to be invested in index funds.

I learned this the hard way a year ago. Now, most of my money is in index funds.

Meeting the woman who sold me my stock

About a year ago I wrote a recommendation of Building Materials Holding Co. [[blg]] for my investment club. The report found its way into the hands of a hedge fund manager who was shorting the stock. Eight months later, when we met, she showed me my report with her notes made eight months earlier. She had noted that the company should be selling for 40% less than its price then of $24. It had fallen to $13, exactly her target price. It is now 50% lower than that price. Needless to say, she was smarter than I was from day one and she turned out to be right.

Generally, it pays not to be on the other side of the trade from someone who is very smart. So if insiders are buying, it is generally profitable to invest with them. If they are selling a lot, it is generally a good idea to follow their lead. Buying alongside activist hedge-fund managers can also be profitable, though less so than following the move of company executives.

Knowing who is on the other side of the trade is one of the reason I like short selling penny stocks. I can usually be confident that the buyer of the stock I sell is naive and greedy. Those two characteristics do not make for smart investing.

Disclosure: I thankfully no longer own BLG.

I answer the questions my readers’ searches pose, Part II

Q: Is NNRI very undervalued?
A: Ha ha ha ha. Seriously, what is wrong with you? What could be undervalued about a little over-hyped penny stock with no assets, no sales, sketchy management, and a $66 million market cap?

Q: Are there problems with technical analysis?
A: Yes. It doesn’t work. Actually, I have to qualify that: there is some evidence that momentum exists, such that companies near their 52-week highs (or lows) tend to outperform (or underperform). However, complicated technical analysis is worse than useless.

Q: I want to invest in YTBLA.
A: I mourn for your net worth, which shall soon fall.

Q: Why is YTBLA’s stock price declining?
A: Because the company’s business is nothing more than a pyramid scheme that shall soon fall apart.

Q: I want to find a blog on cheap stock under $2.
A: Um, just because a share price is cheap does not mean anything. That is like saying that a 14″ diameter pizza cut into 100 slices is bigger than one that is cut into 4 slices. What matters is the stock price in relation to earnings per share, book value per share, and cash flow per share.

Q: Who are some famous short sellers?
A: Jim Chanos is probably the most famous. Jesse Livermore made money both long and short back in the day. Manuel Asensio achieved some prominence. Andrew Left of Citron Research is a prominent short seller of microcaps. I will soon join the ranks of famous short sellers.

Q: Are hedge funds an Illuminati scam?
A: Yes. I work directly for the core council of the Illuminati, so I would know. We also control all short selling activity, the UN, all major governments, and just about every union and company. The only major entity not controlled by the Illuminati is Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. Of course, he has his own issues.

Q: Who are Krispy Kreme Short sellers?
A: They are smart people. I almost shorted Krispy Kreme [[kkd]]. I didn’t and I missed out on making a lot of money. C’est la vie. My hunch is that Krispy Kreme will go bankrupt within the next two years. I am not willing to bet money on that, though.

Q: What about Continental Fuels Inc?
A: It continues its slow slide into irrelevance. That is the usual occurrence after a penny stock is pumped (that was last April and May in this case). The company’s stock price has fallen by 60% since I last called it way overvalued and over 90% from its peak.

Q: Is the SEC investigating Continental Fuels (OTC BB: CFUL)?
A: No. I previously contacted the SEC’s enforcement division about the company’s promotion of its stock at the same time it valued its stock at 1% of the market price in certain debt conversion transactions. The enforcement division never followed up on this activity. I guess people like Martha Stewart are a lot more dangerous than pump-and-dump schemes that bankrupt the gullible.

Q: Is it true that you cannot short sell OTC BB stocks?
A: No. It is just that most brokers do not allow it. I am aware of only a couple that do allow it. Also, for stocks priced below $2.50, there is negative leverage involved in short selling. A short seller needs $2.50 in cash for every share sold short (even if the shares are $0.50). This is why many OTC stocks maintain absurd market caps: their low share prices prevent short sellers as a practical matter from selling them short.

Disclosure: I have no interest in any company mentioned above. I have a disclosure policy.

Off topic: Don’t ‘gift’ me anything

A bit off-topic, but I hate people who use ‘gift’ as a verb. While that is not a modern invention, it was out of use until just a few years ago. Why say ‘gift’ when ‘give’ works well and means the same thing?

gift (verb). Despite its antiquity (first recorded in the 16th c.) and its frequent use, esp. Scottish writers, since then, it has fallen out of favour among standard speakers in England, and is best avoided. On the other hand, gifted [as in] ‘talented’ (a gifted violinist) is standard. (p. 330)

From this blog.

Regifting” is a phrase that should be destroyed and forgotten lest its evils destroy all of society. I am generally not a fan of any kind of verbification (turning nouns into verbs to replace otherwise good verbs). Gifting combines verbification with overuse and instant cliche status and is thus, as they say in French, pire que le mal.

Why short selling is risky

I often write about companies I dislike and companies that I have sold short. I have made a good return on my short sales. Yet I have always recommended against short selling. Why I recommend against short selling was amply demonstrated by the stock of microcap Noble Roman’s (OTC BB: NROM) yesterday. The stock shot up 46% on no news. What happened? My bet is that the critical article on Noble Roman’s that I posted on Monday encouraged some people to short the stock and it encouraged some momentum longs to sell. That drove the price down 30% over the next two days. Yesterday some short sellers started to cover and that drove the stock price up a bit. Momentum players jumped back in long and soon the stock was back up to where it was Monday. Of course, this is just my idle speculation, but the effect on the stock price is quite real, no matter how it happened.

If someone shorted the stock at its low yesterday, that person would now be out a lot of money. They might even blame me for their losses. Yet for any stock, the short term is not indicative of the long term. In the short term the stock market is a voting game. Especially for small, illiquid stocks, prices fluctuate greatly depending upon supply and demand. But in the long term, the stock market is a weighing mechanism, and poor companies’ stocks will inevitably flounder. Most people have a hard time holding on to stocks they have bought (long) despite swings in short term prices. It is even harder to hold on when, with short selling, losses can theoretically be infinite. So stay away from short selling.

Disclosure: I am still short NROM and have not traded it since my first article on it last Monday, as per my disclosure policy.

Yet more junk from the OTC BB

I just received some OTC stock spam on behalf of Ido Security (OTC BB: IDOI). The company has 34.3 million shares outstanding (see the most recent 10Q for details), and at a recent price of $2.02 per share it has a market cap of $69 million. This despite a book value of $2 million, no revenues, and a loss of $9 million over the last nine months. The company has spent only $200,000 over the last nine months on R&D and yet it hopes to compete in the field of metal detectors.

Send this pumped-up penny stock into the trash can. Do not pass Go and do not collect $2 million (for those of you playing the updated Monopoly).

Following is the text of the spam email I received regarding this stock. I love the last paragraph:

Find out today, it will rock tomorrow IDO Security INC (IDOI.OB) Last Trade: Tuesday December 4th: $ 2.02

LOOK OUT Read this Great news about IDIO, and watch it trade on Wednesday!

The Honorable Tom Ridge Teams with IDO Security

IDO Security (OTC Bulletin Board: IDOI), a provider of innovative solutions for the homeland security market, today announced that The Honorable Tom Ridge, the first Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, will provide special consulting services for the company. Governor Ridge will work with the company to accelerate U.S. implementation of the MagShoe high speed shoes-on portable footwear weapons detection system.

IDO Security, (OTC Bulletin Board: IDOI ) the provider of MagShoe(TM) high speed shoes-on portable footwear metal weapons detection system, commented on a joint assessment issued on October 24th by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis that terrorists may be stepping up their shoe bombing efforts. The report was prompted by the capture of a suspect with a metal blasting cap concealed in a shoe.

IDO Security Inc., (OTC Bulletin Board: IDOI ) a provider of innovative detection solutions for the homeland security market including the MagShoe(TM) high speed shoes-on portable footwear metal weapons detection system, today announced the sale of additional MagShoe(TM) units from Port Lotniczy Gdansk Spolka z.o.o., the operators of Lech Walesa International Airport’s terminal facilities. This sale expands a prior installation of MagShoe(TM) units at the airport providing the capability to quickly and accurately screen all passengers for metallic weapons.

Information within this report contains forward looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21B of the SEC Act of 1934. Statements that involve discussions with respect to projections of future events are not statements of historical fact and may be forward looking statements. Don’t rely on them to make a decision. Past performance is never indicative of future results. We own 400,000 shares of IDOI, and intend to sell these share. This could cause the price to go down. Un-affiliated Third parties may own stock and will sell those shares without notice to you. This report shall not be construed as any kind of investment advice or solicitation. If you are not a savvy pink or bully investor we suggest you sit back and watch. You could lose all your money.

I love bicycling and reading and anything to do with animals. In Japan I grew up with baseball so I know a lot of the players over thereAt this point, only the radical third cam lobe actuated the valves for timing and liftWhen we saw some of her portfolio shots we knew we needed her–so much that we sent a photography team out to the backwoods of the Sunshine State to capture herWhat’s the best part of modeling?Choosing a radiator and a cap is only the beginning when it comes to upgrading your cooling We wanted them to leave! They were yelling out things like, “We know you can smile; just smile damn it!” We had to give the guys some Polaroids to make them go away. Not to mention it looks pretty dope on your crusty-ass ride.In conjunction with a variable-length intake manifold, the advanced VTEC engine anticipates having a 13-percent increase in combustion efficiency over current i-VTEC powerplants. After removing the OEM cat, we welded and bolted up an OBD II Magnaflow ceramic-core catalytic converter in place of the stock one. In early 2004, Ueo began designing AE86 suspension products under his label Desukara Desune With the Magnaflow cat installed, the Honda turned the rollers to the tune of 150hp and 107 lb-ft . The difference between the Laptop Dyno and the inertial dyno were negligible at best, with a difference of less than 2 hp and lb-ft of torqueWhat do you listen to?Additional mods include extending the arms into the rear cabin and welding brackets, making this kit better suited for the serious enthusiast.However, if you are running a rich mixture, the metallic cat is still your best bet.For me, the simple stuff is better: nice jeans, nice top, no braEvery girl wants an honest manIn addition, an advanced VTEC engine is slated to be released, sporting continuously variable-valve lift control and phasing of valve switchover timingWhen he starts talking about how great he is-like where he lives, what he drives, what he does after a few dates-you will know what kind of person he is.So if you could chose to live anywhere …How do you like being romanced?.

Disclosure: I have no interest in IDOI. I have a disclosure policy that has a $480 billion dollar contract with Homeland Security to produce a thought-control device with a range of 800,000 miles . However, I plan to subvert the government’s plan for imperial domination by using the device to encourage people to vote for Ron Paul.

Zopa USA is here!

Zopa is now in the USA. For those not in the know, Zopa is the British version of Prosper.com (they actually pioneered person to person lending). Unfortunately, because of US regulation, Zopa cannot do in the US what it does in Britain. Rather, it can only offer a CD at 5.1% while letting credit unions do the actual lending. Not very p2p, but a 5.1% return beats the -1% return I have received on my Prosper.com loans over the last 1.6 years.

Random fact: ZOPA stands for “zone of possible agreement

Disclosure: I ‘invested’ money in p2p loans at Prosper.com. I have no connection to either Prosper or Zopa.

Parkervision Responds to Barron’s Article

See the response from Business Wire here.

If I were a betting man (which I am not, thanks to my friend Ed and a bet on test scores in school a decade ago), I would bet that Parkervision [[prkr]] is wrong, the company has no viable technology, and the company eventually goes bankrupt. That being said, I do not know the technology and am not going to risk any of my own money selling the company’s stock short.

Disclosure: I have no position in PRKR. I have a disclosure policy that has never been criticized in a Barron’s article.

Noble Roman’s Strategy Falls Flat

Noble Roman’s (OTC BB: NROM.ob, $2.48, market cap: $45 million) is a company that franchises two fast-food concepts: Noble Roman’s Pizza and Tuscano’s Italian Subs. You can see a bit more about what they do on their website. The company provides a perfect example of what I call operating accruals and why they are bad for companies. (Note–this is probably not the correct term. If there is a better term for what I discuss, please tell me.) By operating accruals, I mean that the business is operating in such as way that earnings today are coming at the expense of poor earnings (or even losses) in the future. The obligations that go along with today’s earnings accrue in reality, but not on the financial statements. Accounting accruals are different but no less bad. Just google ‘Sloan accrual anomaly‘ and you can learn more about why accounting accruals can be bad.

Strategy Problems

I have thought about franchising from both the selling and buying sides. There are two benefits to franchising from the buyer’s side. The first benefit is that the franchisee gets training / products / a system. Otherwise it can be very hard to start anything from scratch. For example, a restaurant is not just about good food, but choosing the right kind of food and food that is high margin (has a high ratio of price to raw material and labor costs) . (Watch Gordon Ramsey’s Kitchen Nightmares a few times and you will get a feel for how important non-quality aspects of a restaurant’s food are.) Secondly, franchising gets you instant credibility and name recognition. It is for this reason that McDonald’s can charge more for its franchises than can other franchisors. It is this name recognition that helps the average McDonald’s franchise to achieve annual revenues of $1.9 million versus $500,000 for the average Noble Roman’s franchise (according to some estimates, although my estimates are significantly lower). Because of this extra name recognition McDonald’s can charge an initial franchise fee of $45,000 (plus 4% of ongoing sales) versus an initial franchise fee of $6,000 (plus 7% of sales on an ongoing basis) at Noble Roman’s.

The problem with Noble Roman’s is that it does not do any significant advertising. Its product is in a highly competitive industry and it is not differentiated from its competitors. The one advantage to choosing to franchise a Noble Roman’s concept is that it is cheap. While this is advantageous for the franchisees, it is not good for Noble Roman’s. The low capital requirements and low initial franchise frees likely draw many inexperienced and poor restaurant operators to the franchise.

Even worse, Noble Roman’s has tried to expand quickly by introducing a second level of franchising. Area developers pay the company for the right to develop franchises in a geographic area. They then receive a portion of the initial and ongoing franchise fees of new franchises in their area. This leads to what I call an operating accrual. Noble Roman’s reports strong earnings in the present and by selling more areas to area developers it can grow its current earnings. But Noble Roman’s will receive a much smaller chunk of money from new franchises than it does from current franchises and it will still be responsible for training the new franchisees. And soon enough there will be no more area developer rights to sell. So the company is essentially giving up future revenue to gain revenue now. This type of strategy rarely works.

I am not the only one to criticize Noble Roman’s strategy. See the following article on the Franchise Blog, where Kevin Murphy, a franchising lawyer widely known as Mr. Franchise, comments quite negatively on Noble Roman’s area developer strategy.

Valuation

Let’s say that the whole area developer thing goes well and all the new franchises get built. Noble Roman’s signs over 30% of the initial franchise fee and 2/7 of the continuing franchise fee of 7% of sales. Considering that the company has a timetable for its new franchises and the average franchise brings in $500,000 per year, I can do a simplified discounted cash flow analysis on the extra revenue from those franchises. Noble Roman’s will receive $4,200 of the initial franchise fee and approximately $25,000 each year from each additional franchise (if you buy the $500,000 per year in sales, which I do not). See the attached Excel spreadsheet for four different valuations of the company using different assumptions. I discuss the assumptions and valuations below. I discuss below the assumptions of the different valuation models.

First, for all the valuations I use earnings as a proxy for free cash flow. It is not that bad of an assumption considering that Noble Roman’s does not have much in the way of depreciating assets. I separately value new stores and existing stores. All the valuations use a discount rate of 10%, which is reasonable for a highly competitive business like fast food.

The first and rosiest valuation is as follows: For the existing stores, I assume that sales remain flat and that revenues remain at the same (high) level as they were in the most recent quarter. This gives us $2.8 million per year in FCF from present stores. For a terminal valuation I use book value. I assume that all new planned stores get built and that they achieve $500,000 in sales in the first and all subsequent years. For the terminal value of the new stores I use 5x the previous two years’ revenues. I also assume that the new franchises have zero cost for Noble Roman’s and that Noble Roman’s cut of the sales goes straight to the bottom line. This analysis yields a value for the company of $146 million, or 220% of the company’s current market cap.

One problem with the first valuation is that a lot of the current revenues (that I have modeled as existing stores) come from area developer fees and initial franchise fees. Eventually there will be no more areas to develop and initial franchise fees are accounted for in my model in the new store valuation. Subtracting out those revenues from the current store revenues leaves a current annualized profit run rate of only $256,000. This lowers the valuation to about $100 million, or about 121% above the current market price (this is shown on the second worksheet of the valuation spreadsheet).

However, this second valuation assumes over-optimistically that each new franchise will generate $500,000 annually in revenue. A 5% cut of this gives Noble Roman’s $25,000 per franchise per year. Rather than using estimates, I should use actual royalties received from current franchises to estimate what the average franchise gets in revenues and gives to Noble Roman’s in royalties. In the most recent 10Q, Noble Roman’s breaks down its royalties into the various types, including area developer royalties and initial franchise fees. For the most recent quarter continuing royalties totaled $2.044 million. Multiply that by four to get the annual run rate (because pizza is not seasonal) and we get $8.18 million annually in royalties from 1,033 franchises. This averages out to $7,920 per franchise per year. Multiply that by 14.3x (the inverse of the royalty rate of 7%) and we get average revenues of $113,143. For the new franchises under the area developers Noble Roman’s only gets 5% of revenues, so we can expect Noble Roman’s to receive $5,650 in revenue for each new franchise per year.

One important note–a lot of the current and new franchises are dual-concepts–a Tuscano’s Subs franchise and a Noble Roman’s franchise. Even though these are usually within the same restaurant they are counted as two franchises, which explains the low per-franchise revenues. Still, $230,000 sales per restaurant is horrid. Now, I will be charitable and assume that the new franchises produce 50% more revenues than the current stores. But even with this rosy assumption, the valuation of Noble Roman’s falls dramatically. The company is then fairly valued at $42 million, 7% less than its current valuation.

What is worse is that even this valuation involves optimistic assumptions. It assumes that current franchises do not close. It assumes that all the proposed stores get built (which the management just admitted will not happen). It assumes that revenues are 50% greater at new stores than at existing stores. It does not account for the discount that multiple-franchise stores get (saving $2000 on the initial franchise fee). It does not account for the extra training costs (however small) that each new franchise entails. If only half of the projected 868 new franchises are built and new franchises have only as much revenues as old franchises, then the company’s stock should fall 47% to a market cap of $28 million.

Disgruntled Franchisees

Another problem I see with Noble Roman’s, though I cannot quantify it, is that there are a few very disgruntled franchisees out there. The reason I can tell this is by looking at all the negative posts about Noble Roman’s on the Yahoo! stock message boards. Those boards are usually not informative, but in this case they are. Normally, most negative posts on such boards are written by short sellers. But judging from the short interest in NROM, it appears that I am the only one who has sold the company’s stock short. So that means that Noble Roman’s really annoyed a few people. I should add that this is only icing on the cake for my case against Noble Roman’s: I never put much weight on such subjective information. In the case of these ‘disgruntled franchisees’, it could be all the work of one lunatic who may not have even been a franchisee and may just hold a personal grudge against Noble Roman’s management.

Conclusion

All in all, things do not look good for Noble Roman’s stock or for its business. In my realistic scenario, the company is priced at over twice its intrinsic value. In a worst-case scenario most of the new franchises will never be sold, the area development agreements will flop, and Noble Roman’s will struggle to earn $1 million per year. In this scenario the company’s stock price could easily fall 75%. Considering management’s past failures to expand Noble Roman’s, the company’s lack of advertising and product differentiation, and the untested strategy of going with area developers, I think it likely that Noble Roman’s will fall far short of achieving its goals for growth.

Lessons

While I do love bashing companies, there is a broader purpose to the above analysis. I wanted to show how a cogent analysis of financial statements and business decisions can help an investor avoid problems. I knew months ago that Noble Roman’s would never build all the new stores they planned to build. I knew that the company’s current earnings were inflated by non-recurring charges (area developer fees and initial franchise fees). I knew all of this just by thinking hard about its business and looking in depth at its financial statements. I did not need any inside information. Yet still I knew enough to avoid the company’s stock and even to take a large short position in the stock.

Many companies are willing to cut corners to improve current earnings. Whether this involves accounting tricks (such as inappropriately capitalizing expenses) or poor business decisions (such as not re-investing enough money in the business to maintain earnings), the individual investor would be wise to beware.

Disclosure: I am short NROM. See my disclosure policy.

Barron’s Slams Parkervision

This is not news for those of you who subscribe to Barron’s, but this morning’s Barron’s had a great article on Parkervision [[prkr]]. I suggest buying the paper and reading the article. If you are an online subscriber you can see the article here after logging in.

Parkervision is another of those companies that sell nothing but hopes and dreams that short sellers like myself love to hate. Another such company is Research Frontiers [[refr]], which I have previously panned. Parkervision’s dream is wireless technology. While the Barron’s article does not bring up any new information it did point me towards PVnotes.com. That website, run by the founder of Rambus and other technology companies (who is also a Parkervision short seller) archives just about all the negative news and opinion on Parkervision. It also contains original opinions on Parkervision’s technologies and patents.

While I have no intention of shorting Parkervision, I will bet my reputation that the company will never produce significant profits and will eventually go bankrupt.

Disclosure: I have no interest in PRKR or REFR. I have no connections to any current PRKR short sellers. I previously sold short both stocks and managed to lose money despite both stocks falling over 30% between when I started shorting them and the present. My disclosure policy has not lost over $160 million over its lifetime, unlike Parkervision.