Beyond the Music and IPOs
TheStreet.com publishes selected email received by the publication and its staff members. To send an email intended for publication in this section, write to letters@thestreet.com and include your full name and city. Letters may be edited for length, style, clarity and accuracy.
Performance Pricing
Ben Holmes:
In response to
Enough of the One Hand Clapping Sound, Already!, looking at IPO performance one day postoffering is not always the best measure of transaction strength. It is possible, for example, that the underwriter may have underpriced an offering to ensure a strong pop at pricing. I suspect this is particularly true in choppy market conditions.
A more reasonable measure is to look at the after-market performance over one day, one week, 30-day and 60-day periods postoffering. Strong deals should hold up throughout that time period and, in fact, even appreciate. So I'm not sure your assessment is a truly valid way of measuring underwriter performance.
--
Susan Baker
(received 9/6)
Beyond the Music
Kaya Laterman:
About your
The Coming Week in Asia: The Japanese Stock Market Sings a New Tune , I don't "get" the rock and roll terminology used in your article referring to stock information. I have absolutely no idea of the names used or their relation to stock movement. Is it a code for those under 35? Sorry, I'm past that. Keep in mind, our generation is the one with the money!
--
Dr. Dale Tompkins
(received 9/6)
Kaya Laterman:
Your article on the
TheStreet Recommends
Japanese stock market has one too many references to songs I've never heard!
I get the point, I'm 22 years old, with about four years of active investing experience. But I'm hoping this industry doesn't push me to these extremes. Let me know now, because I might take up baseball cards or beenie babies.
--
Duchuy Huynh
(received 9/5)
Advertising Edge
James Cramer:
About
Why the Dot-Coms Cannot Live on Ads Alone, I think too many sites try to have it both ways. If I am going to pay a fee, I expect a fast site where I do not have to wade through a lot of junk to find the content. Some sites have excellent content, but many mornings I simply do not have the time to wait for the graphics to load. I find that the services I rely on are those that deliver their content by email.
--
Mike Hugo
(received 9/6)
James Cramer:
You're right.
Web sites will never make it on advertising alone. Just look at TV and Radio!
--
David Ruvin
(received 9/4)
It Was the Best of Times, It Was the Worst of Times
David A. Gaffen:
Only the most naive would believe the slant of
David Gaffen's
article,
Stock Wealth and Spending Don't Go Hand in Hand. Stock ownership is probably higher than he cites due to 401ks, IRAs, etc., and if they feel richer, they spend! Greenspan thinks so, and I do also. Writing just to offer a contrary slant will not benefit most of us.
-- Jack Salkovics
(received 9/2)
David A. Gaffen:
Excellent
piece on the wealth effect and its play on consumer spending. I think you are right on the mark when you write that we haven't even seen a spending boom based on wealth generated from the stock market. Last year's continued spending right in the middle of the late summer/early fall correction proved that consumer spending has been fueled by something other than the stock market. Personally, I have just finished refinancing my home and took cash out. No spending spree just yet, however. I'm a manager at
UPS
and I'm waiting to see what our pending IPO holds. I'm hoping to take the cash from my refinancing and get in pre-IPO. In fact, I was planning to put this cash into UPS stock before our purchases were suspended. After the IPO ... save me a parking space at the mall!
-- Scott Love
(received 9/2)
A Cabletronoid Speaks Out
Dan Colarusso:
In reply to your article,
Cabletron Rumors Aren't Adding Up, the fact is that
Cabletron
(CS)
is a company on the move.
Patel
is a sharp guy who knows the business and what needs to take place in order for this company to compete in the marketplace. CS may never be a
CSCO
(CSCO)
, but it can be a profitable, well-performing company. And who cares about a buyout if the company is performing? I think earnings are going to surprise some people and that is why the stock is up. I purchased CS in May '99 for a little over 7.
-- Matt Meyer
(received 9/2)
Globalstar: Lost In Space
Bill Simon:
Your comments (see below) on
Herb Greenberg's
analysis of
Globalstar
undefined
,
Why Some Investment Pros Are 'Bonding' With Globalstar, should be tilted "Globalstar: No Hope" instead of "Globalstar: New Hope." They are in trouble and Bill can be sure he'll be the last to know. The $500 million Bill refers to in his comments was secured by
Loral
(LOR)
, whom Bill should know owns a 42% stake in Globalstar. In other words, Globalstar was able to get their most recent financing closed not because
Bernie Schwartz
and company were able to convince the bankers at
Bank of America
(BAC)
that Globalstar would be a commercial success and able to pay back their debt, but because Loral secured it. One is left to presume that, without such security, Globalstar would NOT have been able to raise this money from the street. Bill should know, being a regular reader of
The Street.com
, that no one is putting any fresh money to work on satellite phone deals -- not now.
The Street is done dumping money on these satellite phone deals unless and until one of them can prove there is sustainable demand for their service -- and, in light of the absolute failure of
Iridium
(IRIDQ)
-- to prove that there is only propaganda left until the rubber meets the road. For Globalstar, that time is coming sooner rather than later.
If Globalstar doesn't show a significant number of subscribers (at least 100,000) within the first six months of operations, which according to Mr. Schwartz will begin "on a limited basis by September 1999," shareholders won't need to wait for the company's cash to run out to hear the wake-up call. Instead, they'll be trying to sell their shares in Globalstar on
eBay
(EBAY)
, as a retail holder of Iridium's stock tried to do a few days ago
after
Iridium was delisted. EBAY quickly forced the hapless fellow to pull his offer; instead, those shares are only worth the paper they're printed on.
-- Gregory W. DeFelice
(received 9/2)
Exodus and the Right Stuff
Spencer Ante:
I applaud your recent article,
As Exodus Stock Rises, So Do Customer Complaints, on finding every possible negative detail imaginable about
Exodus
undefined
communications. I have three years experience on Wall Street meeting with companies such as Exodus,
Digex
undefined
,
Abovenet
undefined
,
Qwest
(QWST)
,
Psinet
(PSIX)
, and many others. In addition, I have two years experience working in the datacenter business. Exodus was my main competitor and I can guarantee that they've made many mistakes. However, if you are going to write an article criticizing the effectiveness of a company, why don't you do some homework and see what the industry average is for latency, customer service, network downtime, etc.
Take a look at Exodus' revenue line compared to its closest competitors. And make sure you understand who its competitors ("rivals") are. They are not Qwest and
UUnet
as you stated in your article. As a matter of fact, Exodus has no competition with those guys at all. They are Abovenet, Digex,
Globix
undefined
, etc.
As you can probably guess, I own some Exodus stock. I also own some Qwest, Globix, Digex, and Abovenet. Why? Because it is the best sector to be in. You got that right, but you seem to have gotten just about everything else wrong. Hopefully you will do a little more research next time.
-- Dan Vene
(received 9/1)
You
hit the nail on the head with Exodus, but there is one problem with your story and that is you forgot to mention
Digital Island
(ISLD)
. In addition to increasing our domestic customer base we also have a distinct advantage internationally with a presence in over 20 countries. As the international economy starts to come back to life and the dollar continues to get hammered, our service becomes even more attractive overseas. Stay tuned, the sleeping giant will awaken.
-- Ronald Wikander
(received 8/31)
Taking A Step Back With Coulter
Jesse Eisinger:
Thanks for a great job with your article
Coulter Investors Gulp After FDA Says "Resubmit", which saved me some real pain. I know you wrote that first article in a fair, even-handed manner. I made my decision to sell my stock in
Coulter
(CLTR)
based on the accuracy of your reporting, and I was able to get out of a risky position early. My reasoning went pretty much as follows:
I felt the rumor had some validity. The analyst at
Avalon
gave specific reasons why the application might be rejected. The price of the stock seemed to be based on a favorable ruling, and I wondered how high the stock could go? On the other hand, the downside loss could be staggering. The risk did not seem worth it. I held those shares nearly a year. I had even added to my holdings a month before. (Their annual report is very compelling, it includes testimonials from patients using the drug.) I hope the rejection of the application does not hurt their chances for a full recovery, but I don't think it can help. But if something is true and good, it usually survives the rumors and the doubts concerning its efficacy. In the meantime, I will follow Coulter and I may reinvest at some time in the future. Thanks again.
-- Dave Reutter
(received 9/1)
Globalstar: New Hope
Herb Greenberg:
Your column titled
Why the ICO Bankruptcy May Not Be Good for Globalstar is not only wrong, it's bordering on fraudulent. He believes
Globalstar
undefined
will have to "raise more cash, and raise it sooner rather than later," and that "the capital markets are closed to the concept." Globalstar has had no problems in raising capital and in fact has a $500 million credit facility in place, which according to CEO Bernard Schwartz, is more than adequate to start service, including all promotion/advertising costs.
-- Bill Simon
(received 8/31)
It's All About the Benjamins
Ian McDonald:
I am writing in response to your article
Commission Practice Has Fund Investors on Lookout for Conflicts. As you already know this practice is still pretty pervasive and in my 10 years or so in the business most fund families have run this at one point or another. The biggest culprits are the "proprietary" shops (i.e.
Merrill Lynch
) where the incentives are very much slanted toward what they want the representative to sell. My experience is that the extra comp is too strong for most reps to resist for even the biggest producers who still worry about where their next buck is coming from.
-- Joseph Reeves
(received 8/31)
Dave & Buster's Revisited
TSC Readers:
Seems like most of the
responses are from investors older than the typical crowd at
D&B
(DAB)
-- that's why they are wrong! In your twenties and tired of that old bar scene? Yes. Then, go to Dave & Buster's! It's everything the 21-to-30-year-old age group ever dreamed of. Where else can you find booze, pool, gambling (fake, of course) and simply amazing arcade games all wrapped up into one. Sure it's a theme restaurant, but it's much more. That's the uniqueness of the company and why investors who categorize D&B as your typical theme establishment -- a la Planet Hollywood
undefined
or Rain Forest Cafe
(RAIN)
-- are missing the boat on this one. Seems to me that a great deal of investing opportunities come from overreactions to news and/or misunderstandings about a company's business. Add in a clean balance sheet, and this could very well be one of those rare buys we all look for.
-- Dan Bernstein
(received 8/31)
Investing vs. Daytrading
James J. Cramer:
I really loved your
Time
column from Aug. 23. It's remarkably close to the op-ed piece I did for
The New York Times
on Aug. 23 -- a timely coincidence, that. (Jim Cramer also wrote
about this topic on
TheStreet.com
.) Yes, there is a difference between a do-it-yourself investor and a daytrader. And I trust my piece in
The New York Times
was clear in making the same differentiation that your fine column did. A casino mentality is a formula for failure. By the way, you were wonderful to
stand up for me a few weeks ago. Life is full of surprises ... but it will go on!
-- John Bogle
(received 8/30)
Latin Tea
James J. Cramer:
About your comment on oil at the end of
The Cutting Room: Dave Kansas and Jim Cramer Both Get a Word in Edgewise , I think your repeated calls on oil are wrong. In my opinion, Saudi Arabia knows Venezuela's current internal problems, and even more so its history of adherence or nonadherence to its quota. Why did Saudi Arabia go to Venezuela in advance of the next
OPEC
meeting? I think it was to warn Venezuela that if it doesn't adhere to its quota, Saudi Arabia will open the taps and crush them. Saudi Arabia can stand the pain more than Venezuela, or anybody else for that matter. Saudi Arabia and the other "smart" OPEC nations don't want oil much above $20 or other fields in the world become economical to explore and produce. People forget or don't realize how cheap it is for Saudi Arabia and other Middle East countries to produce oil -- most load crude on tankers for less than $4 to $5 a barrel. Maybe I'm wrong about the direction of oil prices, but I feel I have an edge in this part of the market. I worked in Middle East for almost 20 years and am still in this industry -- now as a consultant for the drillers. Here's my prediction for oil: $15 to $25 through 2001.
-- Thomas S. Pessarra
(received 8/30)
Some Light Cream
Cory Johnson:
About your column
Tomorrow's News: Making Crime Pay. Lighten up on
John Daly
! Your attempt at humor is misplaced and out of line! Daly is attempting to combat personal health problems. Golf fans, people suffering from similar problems and compassionate people from around the world wish him success and hope to see him back playing championship golf. Ridiculing Daly when he is down shows a total lack of ethics on your part. SHAME!
-- Peter Holst
(received 8/30) You got me! Thanks,
I needed that . I take this stuff way too seriously.
-- Jeff Fletcher
(received 8/30)
Simplicity Rules
Gary B. Smith:
Your
column Turn Off the Tube, Log Off the Boards and KISS Off Complex Strategies was right on. I believe in the MIS KIS strategy: Make It Simple and Keep It Simple. My simple rules are based on simple assumptions: Most of the volume in stock trades comes from the fund people. When's the last time you bought a million shares of anything? The people who do most of the trading, the fund people, establish the price. This is simple supply and demand. Most of the fund people receive the majority of their compensation based on short-term performance. That's why they are nervous and trade a lot. Trading a lot with short-term focus makes them trade with mob psychology. Why else, when
Dell
(DELL)
announced that its growth rate would "slow" to 40%, would every other PC hardware stock fall? So here are the Simple Rules: If you buy what the fund managers are buying, you are going to win. If you buy what the fund managers are selling, you are going to lose. Oh yeah, one more acronym: BAH, or Buy And Hold! -- David. M. Johnson (received 8/30)
Gary B. Smith: According to your
Turn Off the Tube, Log Off the Boards column, I should resolve to read only one column per day on
TheStreet.com
. This would certainly make things much simpler. I become confused when I read a column like that and then turn to the excellent
opinion on
Amazon
(AMZN)
shared by Jeff Matthews in
Herb Greenberg's
column. How can I keep things simple if I am analyzing the sequential sales growth of new Internet companies?! Anyway, keep up the fine writing. I'll just resolve to stay confused.
-- Mike Squillace
(received 8/30)
Early Birds Hit the (Tri)Mark
Dan Colarusso:
What a scoop on
In the Clear: Merrill Sets Back-Office Deal With Knight/Trimark , with the
Merrill Lynch
(MER)
and
Knight/Trimark
(NITE)
agreement. Two days later NITE is trading up 20%-plus. Great reporting! I'm certainly glad to have the opportunity to average down on NITE. You've made my subscription a bargain!
-- Stan Starr
(received 8/26)
Miss America, the Beautiful
James Padinha:
Thank you for writing
Pulp Fiction: The New Era Growth/Productivity Squeeze at
TheStreet.com
and explaining a very dry subject, such as the economy, in such a way that it makes easy reading. Because I am not so good at American English (I live in Vienna) I could not follow your polls at the beginning. Now I believe they are just fun. I take them every day trying to guess which answer will create the most responses. I have no clue what the correct answer is, but I try to predict the correct, or majority, answer. Like the market, I don't know which way it will go, but I'm still trying to get it right. Carry on.
-- Alois Lippert
(received 8/26)
James Padinha:
Don't tell me you missed
Maine .
-- Kristopher Day
(received 8/26)
Ask Not...
James J. Cramer:
As for your comments on the cribbers, in
Real Clough-t , the attitude is why wear out your shoe leather looking for stories when you can lift information from better-informed sources? This is the ethics of the '90s and it started with
Bill Clinton's
way of operating. Be unethical, lie and apologize. Have you noticed that many more things go wrong through lack of commitment to customers, clients, etc. People think when they say, "We apologize, etc.," the slate is wiped clean. We are on our way to becoming a second-class nation because of complacency instead of commitment.
-- Peter Green
(received 8/27)
At the Margins
James K. Galbraith:
In your column
The Fed's Fighting the Wrong Battle , you state, "Since 1993, margin borrowing has tripled in relation to GDP. In relation to capitalization, margin debt now stands at levels surpassed only in the run-up to the crash of 1987. The actual volume of margin debt, $177 billion in June, is up 80% over 1996." What I really want to know is the dollar amount of margin debt by all holders, compared to the dollar amount of stocks, bonds and other financial assets held by these same players. My personal margin debt might have increased 200% in the past three years. But if the stocks, bonds and other financial assets held to secure this debt has increased by 500%, then I am really being more conservative than before. The fact that margin debt is up 80% since 1996 is not particularly relevant in and of itself. Since 1996, the
Dow
is up about 99% and the
Nasdaq
is up about 143%. So as I see it, margin debt as a percentage of stock market valuation is actually falling.
-- Richard Ranney
(received 8/26)
As originally published, this feature contained an error. Please see
Corrections and Clarifications.
