[quote]The HBS guys have MAD SWAGGER. They frequently wear their class jackets to boston bars, strutting and acting like they own the joint. They just ooze success, confidence, swagger, basically attributes of alpha males.[/quote]
Basically. KO might not be the best stock to own but it's a tremendous company. Problem is it's done growing. LULU has been a pretty great stock to own, but conversely it's probably a shitty business in the long run. Growth potential makes a stock, but it doesn't necessarily make a good business. In fact sometimes it means the business is shitty since it has a lot of room to improve or become better in one aspect or another.
Strong competitive advantages. Return on invested capital is greater than company's cost of capital. Does not need to expend much capital expenditures to grow. Strong margins. Capable management. Solid corporate governance. Capable capital allocation abilities.
Strong competitive advantages. Return on invested capital is greater than company's cost of capital. Does not need to expend much capital expenditures to grow. Strong margins. Capable management. Solid corporate governance. Capable capital allocation abilities.
Strong competitive advantages. Return on invested capital is greater than company's cost of capital. Does not need to expend much capital expenditures to grow. Strong margins. Capable management. Solid corporate governance. Capable capital allocation abilities.
Strong competitive advantages. Return on invested capital is greater than company's cost of capital. Does not need to expend much capital expenditures to grow. Strong margins. Capable management. Solid corporate governance. Capable capital allocation abilities.
How do you know what if their margins are strong? Simply based on comparing their margins to their comparables'?
"Respect others in their view, and demand that they respect yours. Love your life, perfect your life, beautify all things in your life."
Strong competitive advantages. Return on invested capital is greater than company's cost of capital. Does not need to expend much capital expenditures to grow. Strong margins. Capable management. Solid corporate governance. Capable capital allocation abilities.
How do you know what if their margins are strong? Simply based on comparing their margins to their comparables'?
Yea, I guess at least better than industry peers. In absolute terms, I consider profit margin below 5% as weak and anything above 10% would pretty good. There's really no rule and it definitely depends on the industry. You have to look not only at the industry you're examining, but all the other industries and get a good feel about what's considered strong. Takes intuition.
first of all the question is stupid. If you think from an investor's perspective a company is good only if it is a good stock. A stock is "good" only because it is a good investment. the real question here is what makes a stock a good investment. and the answer for this is very simple: PRICE . Price is the main determinant of your return, NOT growth. What good is growth if it is already priced in the stock???????? would I buy facebook at 100bn valuation? hell no. Would I buy facebook at 10bn valuation? hell yes. The only way it makes sense to buy facebook at ABOVE 100bn is if you believe the growth is even higher. Personally I think 100bn valuation for facebook implies astronomic growth. even if that growth is achieved, you're not benefiting from it because you already paid for it, hence your return is simply the discount rate. its the same logic that some companies (the smart ones) apply when doing M&A. yeah synergies means you can pay a higher price for the company but if you paying for ALL of the synergy value then the acquiror's return on investment (investment=acquisition of the target company) will simply be whatever "cost of equity" was used in the wacc (i.e.9-10% as an example)....this assuming the target company will meet all the growth targets used in the valuation (...cause if not, their return on investment would be even lower than the cost of equity used in the wacc). So, growth in itself, without taking into account the price, is a crap answer to the question of "what makes a good stock a good investment". Understand the mechanics of what I have just written here and I guarantee you, you will be in a better position that 90% of your competition, come buyside (PE and HF) recruiting season.
first of all the question is stupid. If you think from an investor's perspective a company is good only if it is a good stock. A stock is "good" only because it is a good investment. the real question here is what makes a stock a good investment. and the answer for this is very simple: PRICE . Price is the main determinant of your return, NOT growth. What good is growth if it is already priced in the stock???????? would I buy facebook at 100bn valuation? hell no. Would I buy facebook at 10bn valuation? hell yes. The only way it makes sense to buy facebook at ABOVE 100bn is if you believe the growth is even higher. Personally I think 100bn valuation for facebook implies astronomic growth. even if that growth is achieved, you're not benefiting from it because you already paid for it, hence your return is simply the discount rate. its the same logic that some companies (the smart ones) apply when doing M&A. yeah synergies means you can pay a higher price for the company but if you paying for ALL of the synergy value then the acquiror's return on investment (investment=acquisition of the target company) will simply be whatever "cost of equity" was used in the wacc (i.e.9-10% as an example)....this assuming the target company will meet all the growth targets used in the valuation (...cause if not, their return on investment would be even lower than the cost of equity used in the wacc). So, growth in itself, without taking into account the price, is a crap answer to the question of "what makes a good stock a good investment". Understand the mechanics of what I have just written here and I guarantee you, you will be in a better position that 90% of your competition, come buyside (PE and HF) recruiting season.
Some of that is true and some of that is complete bullshit. Just because you know what Weighted Average Cost of Capital does not mean you know what the hell you're talking about. Growth is the biggest factor in regards to buying. Sure, price is a factor but it shouldn't be the ultimate because it is nearly impossible to time the market correctly. For example, if I bought RIM at 20 (selling .5-.6x book value), it would be comparably "cheap" to its highs but if i bought it at there I would of lost about 65% of my investment as of now. Growth and beating expectations is what moves the prices up. And why do prices go up because of the beat expectation numbers... because of implied GROWTH in the future. OP listen to that post with a grain of salt.
I truly am willing to put 100 dollars on anything that you got the 100billion dollar valuation is overrated because you were watching CNBC or Bloomberg. I sincerely doubt you know jack dick about the business model of Facebook or its projected growth rates and why people think its faulty.
Deleniti et earum qui aut aperiam iure. Earum nemo praesentium aliquam hic ut quia iste ea.
Sit velit ut numquam voluptas. Officiis quas quasi omnis amet aut cum necessitatibus. Dolores minima sit est quaerat quas quasi veniam eaque. Doloremque quod vero nemo incidunt.
Optio rem voluptatem fuga sed ratione. Corporis modi odit consectetur sequi perferendis itaque aut impedit. Dolor odit consectetur maxime quos eius quo sed quia.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
Sorry, you need to login or sign up in order to vote. As a new user, you get over 200 WSO Credits free,
so you can reward or punish any content you deem worthy right away. See you on the other side!
Growth potential.
Basically. KO might not be the best stock to own but it's a tremendous company. Problem is it's done growing. LULU has been a pretty great stock to own, but conversely it's probably a shitty business in the long run. Growth potential makes a stock, but it doesn't necessarily make a good business. In fact sometimes it means the business is shitty since it has a lot of room to improve or become better in one aspect or another.
Strong competitive advantages. Return on invested capital is greater than company's cost of capital. Does not need to expend much capital expenditures to grow. Strong margins. Capable management. Solid corporate governance. Capable capital allocation abilities.
i try
How do you know what if their margins are strong? Simply based on comparing their margins to their comparables'?
Yea, I guess at least better than industry peers. In absolute terms, I consider profit margin below 5% as weak and anything above 10% would pretty good. There's really no rule and it definitely depends on the industry. You have to look not only at the industry you're examining, but all the other industries and get a good feel about what's considered strong. Takes intuition.
Catalysts
wait, OP your question is what's the difference between a good COMPANY and good STOCK? doesn't the stock represent the company? there's no difference
Valuation.
D1/k-g
Haha had the same question posed to me by every PM I interviewed with for FT.
Good company: easily measured by ROE (decomposed DuPont), strong management, basically everything funkee monkee mentioned
Good stock: an underpriced stock
first of all the question is stupid. If you think from an investor's perspective a company is good only if it is a good stock. A stock is "good" only because it is a good investment. the real question here is what makes a stock a good investment. and the answer for this is very simple: PRICE . Price is the main determinant of your return, NOT growth. What good is growth if it is already priced in the stock???????? would I buy facebook at 100bn valuation? hell no. Would I buy facebook at 10bn valuation? hell yes. The only way it makes sense to buy facebook at ABOVE 100bn is if you believe the growth is even higher. Personally I think 100bn valuation for facebook implies astronomic growth. even if that growth is achieved, you're not benefiting from it because you already paid for it, hence your return is simply the discount rate. its the same logic that some companies (the smart ones) apply when doing M&A. yeah synergies means you can pay a higher price for the company but if you paying for ALL of the synergy value then the acquiror's return on investment (investment=acquisition of the target company) will simply be whatever "cost of equity" was used in the wacc (i.e.9-10% as an example)....this assuming the target company will meet all the growth targets used in the valuation (...cause if not, their return on investment would be even lower than the cost of equity used in the wacc). So, growth in itself, without taking into account the price, is a crap answer to the question of "what makes a good stock a good investment". Understand the mechanics of what I have just written here and I guarantee you, you will be in a better position that 90% of your competition, come buyside (PE and HF) recruiting season.
Some of that is true and some of that is complete bullshit. Just because you know what Weighted Average Cost of Capital does not mean you know what the hell you're talking about. Growth is the biggest factor in regards to buying. Sure, price is a factor but it shouldn't be the ultimate because it is nearly impossible to time the market correctly. For example, if I bought RIM at 20 (selling .5-.6x book value), it would be comparably "cheap" to its highs but if i bought it at there I would of lost about 65% of my investment as of now. Growth and beating expectations is what moves the prices up. And why do prices go up because of the beat expectation numbers... because of implied GROWTH in the future. OP listen to that post with a grain of salt.
I truly am willing to put 100 dollars on anything that you got the 100billion dollar valuation is overrated because you were watching CNBC or Bloomberg. I sincerely doubt you know jack dick about the business model of Facebook or its projected growth rates and why people think its faulty.
Deleniti et earum qui aut aperiam iure. Earum nemo praesentium aliquam hic ut quia iste ea.
Sit velit ut numquam voluptas. Officiis quas quasi omnis amet aut cum necessitatibus. Dolores minima sit est quaerat quas quasi veniam eaque. Doloremque quod vero nemo incidunt.
Optio rem voluptatem fuga sed ratione. Corporis modi odit consectetur sequi perferendis itaque aut impedit. Dolor odit consectetur maxime quos eius quo sed quia.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...