SSYS Down -27% in AH trading

Again, you seem to be claiming that TMF knows that they made a mistake and won’t admit it while knowing it.

Sorry Anurag, I was referring to each of us and our reluctance to admit TO OURSELVES, that we made a mistake. It’s not conscious. I’ve done it many times myself.

Can you show me any instance where this is said or practiced?

Yes, I would consider the lack of any exit strategy in SA and RB says, or at least implies subliminally, that you should buy and hold forever, with rare exceptions.

I will try to be kinder to the MF, but the MF is a very successful business, and very self-confident as an organization, and I don’t think they are affected at all by my occasional rants.

Best,

Saul

4 Likes

Yes, I would consider the lack of any exit strategy in SA and RB says, or at least implies subliminally, that you should buy and hold forever, with rare exceptions.

Check facts, please. Here is SA exit strategy (http://newsletters.fool.com/18/help/index.aspx?source=isasit…)


When should I sell?

Knowing when to sell a stock requires that you monitor a company’s business and prospects for growth. We do that for you with all of our recommendations here at Stock Advisor.

We’ll recommend selling only when we think a stock will no longer outperform the market over the next three to five years. You won’t catch us trying to time the market, applying any type of technical analysis, or anything like that. When we do sell, it’s usually because one of two things has happened: either all of the good news is already factored into the stock’s price, or something material has changed at the company or in the business.

Tom watches the financials like a hawk. After all, his picks are based on detailed assumptions. Tom’s a patient man, but if a company fails to deliver — say, on cash flow growth — he will think hard about selling. David is more forgiving, more focused on the franchise than the relationship between the financials and the stock price.

And just so we’re clear: You will be the first to know when we are no longer recommending a stock and why. We’ll get the word to you in the newsletter, through our updates, and on our website.

Will you ever sell a Starter stock?

We’d be fools (with a lowercase f) to say we’d never sell a Starter stock. We will, however, reiterate that our list of Starters will change infrequently. These are our long-term winners, after all. That said, if our investing thesis changes for a stock in our Starter list, we will consider removing it — and alerting all our Stock Advisor members right away.


I will try to be kinder to the MF, but the MF is a very successful business, and very self-confident as an organization, and I don’t think they are affected at all by my occasional rants.

All that matters is be precise in what we say. You have seen how I have needled the advisors on GG/HG boards endlessly, critiqued the performance of Bill Mann, Fool Funds, MDP and I didn’t even spare Tom Gardner on EP boards. And you are right that your rants don’t dent TMF but imprecise statements can cause untold financial damage to many of the naive lurkers around here who could genuinely benefit from following TMF services in the intended manner. Trust me, that is a guilt you don’t want to live with.

I am yet to see a single person around here actually report outsized portfolio returns based on what you do (not what you say - you do say good stuff) and that is why for the benefit of all I have started the tracker spreadsheet of your actions on the other thread. Let us make people more successful than TMF following your actions and for free. That would be a great deed indeed and families will remember you for generation for creating wealth for them. No pressure.

Anurag

13 Likes

I never understood the idea that every home would have a 3DP. A metal screw making machine would be handy too, but it’s easier and cheaper to to go to the hardware store when you want a screw. If they don’t have what you want, Amazon or eBay will.
It seems the market is slowly catching on that metal additive printing (Arcam especially) has little to do with consumer plastic 3DP because AMAVF is only down a bit today. Arcam earnings out 2/5/15

I have looked into SLM Solutions, a German company , involved in metal laser smelting. With it and Arcam have a similar percentage share of the metal 3DP market.But while sales are going up, it is losing money. So there is no evidence that a doubling of sales in the next couple of years won’t just lead to more losses. It is on the Frankfort exchange, symbol AM3D .

1 Like

Let’s take depreciation. Say a company spent $X to put fibre in the ground. The company will now depreciate the fibre over some number of years, while selling fibre to customers and getting an income. Over time, the fibre may need replacement, but that replacement will essentially be a new investment. The depreciation is there to show the value of the assets but it’s not having a bearing on the cash other than requiring new investment some years down the road.

Anirban.

I disagree. If the company is in the fiber business replacement fiber is replacement, not new investment. But that is not really the issue.

When the company bought the fiber with an expected ten year useful life it figured that during each one of those ten years it would have some revenue that is not pure profit, you have to deduct some of the capital value of the fiber, in this case 10%, otherwise your profit calculations are all wrong.

Let’s take the case where a company invests in non-physical assets (computer code), calls it R&D, and expenses it rather than capitalizes it. When the code is being written you have a huge expense and little revenue from it. Later you have pure revenue with no cost. But if instead of computer code you had built a smelter you would capitalize it and depreciate it. (Very not the same for different companies. That GAAP standardizes accounting between companies is an urban legend). Let’s take an example of a software company, say Microsoft. Having expensed Windows the day it was written, Widows appears on the books at ZERO VALUE. No matter how crappy it might be, there is no doubt that Windows is valuable. Suppose for the sake of argument that Oracle bought Microsoft. It would pay a few million for Windows which is valued at zero. That excess payment becomes Good Will on Oracle’s books while it was non-existent on Microsoft’s books. How is it possible that the same “thing” is nothing on Microsoft’s books but it is an asset (goodwill) Oracle’s books? Not very standard reporting at all.

Expensing certain types of R&D is nothing but a tax gimmick, a loophole, industrial policy, or successful lobbying – take your pick. When Congress wants to give industry a helping hand it authorizes “accelerated depreciation.” Expensing certain types of R&D is “instant depreciation.” It’s not good accounting, but tax policy.

My point is this: Originally accounting was designed to help owners and mangers run their business. Then the tax man found it a useful tool to assess taxes but that creates a conflict of interest. If you want less taxes you hide profits. Then the joint stock company was invented and a new conflict of interest developed between shareholders and managers. Then Congress decided that fairness mattered so they put a straightjacket on the accountants. Now we have three sets of books, one for the taxman, one for owners (GAAP), and one for managers (ADJUSTED).

BTW, did Stratasys overpay? I would say “yes” if it paid cash. But what if it paid with overpriced stock? :wink:

The bottom line is that you have to know your companies ONE BY ONE.

Denny (GAAP IS CRAP) Schlesinger
but beware “Adjusted CRAP!”

BTW, the fiscal year is totally arbitrary. Suppose the fiscal year were ten years and you installed the fiber in year one. At the end of the year it would be used up. No need to capitalize and depreciate, it would not affect your results. Depreciation is needed only when the useful life is longer than the fiscal year. Depreciation is an artifact to “synchronize” the “asynchronous” cash flow vs. cost.

2 Likes

“when other people have acted on your mistake and you feel responsible” Which is why I no longer give market advice to friends and family.

Even if you are right, the stock goes and you sell, the friend may not. Or you may forget to tell them you have changed your mind.

I used to ride motorcycles and fly small aircraft on instruments in limited visibility and survived both but it’s not something I would suggest others do.

2 Likes

Which is why I no longer give market advice to friends and family.

TomE drilled this in my head in 2005. Since then I have only shared philosophy and a subset of my actual actions. People often write to me - privately and publicly - for stock advice and I never oblige them. I merely share my own actions.

Anurag

2 Likes

This is a classic example of how management’s presentation of non-GAAP earnings can be grossly abused

Awesome post Fletch, thanks for taking the time to write that. This post and the last few big threads on the differences between GAAP and Non GAAP have really helped my overall understanding of things

IMO it’s only a matter of time before you become TMFBlazerMania

Wow!

This thread has turned into a long one, looking at buy/sell, GAAP/non-GAAP. Great.

I look at non-GAAP & GAAP, and 'm okay with non-cash expenses being backed out. Companies do all sorts of things with stock, but the diluted eps does capture most of the effects. I 'm not saying one should let SSYS off the hook for a bad acquisition. The market gave them a 31% haircut for the MakerCut acquisition presumably gone wrong. Anyways, I 'm just going to disagree with the GAAP only proponents and not argue this further.

With respect to SSYS, it’s true that they use acquisitions to fuel growth but the underlying business is growing fine. Actually organic growth was better than the growth provided by MakerBot at 30+%, so it’s the acquisition/merger that’s the problem.

With respect to 3D printing at homes, well that’s not how this area is going to grow. It’s the industrial use cases that’s going to drive adoption. The 3D printing at every home is just magazine talk.

What 'm I doing? Not panicking because my position is small. Remember, I have 50 positions, an average position is only 2.5% and this one was smaller (now even smaller). I have to read the earnings transcript to make a decision on adding, but I 'm not selling based on this report. The stock was overpriced and it got a correction following a bad report is how I look at it currently, and I 'm going to digest the call and decide whether to add, sell, or do nothing. I still think 3D printing is an area that will be much bigger 5 years from now and that SSYS is one of the better ways to play this trend.

Anirban

2 Likes

I used to ride motorcycles and fly small aircraft on instruments in limited visibility and survived both but it’s not something I would suggest others do.

nothing wrong with flying on instruments in weather, now flying in weather Not on instruments that’ll kill you. :wink:

I still have the occasional nightmare about flying emergencies. My husband who was a Naval officer has dreams about ship fires…

The 30% or so decline in SSYS was not the whole 3D field. XONE (which granted has already down 80% from its high) was only down another 3.7%, and Arcam was only down 2 cents!

Arcam:

  1. 47% below its peak.
  2. Not a 3D printing firm.
  3. P/S at 11+ is twice that of DDD or SSYS. Pretty expensive it seems.

P/S is a more useful metric for 3D firms, IMO, instead of P/E. Since these firms are acquiring and investing into R&D, sales and not earnings track the firms better.

Anurag

1 Like

Why do you say that Arcam is not a 3D printing firm?

I misunderstood the description. It is indeed a 3D printing firm. Thanks for correcting.

Anurag

And, one that is actually making a profit and increasing sales nicely, plus having patents such they are the only ones with that technology and clear markets.

1 Like

3D metal printing has almost nothing to do with the far more mature field of plastics 3DP, especially if it is involved in niches where quality and weight are more important than a few cents cost saved, huge volumes are not needed,and sometimes exotic metals are preferred…

I think XONE is a loser, at least so far they are unable to make money doing what they do, with no convincing argument that larger volume would help.
Arcam is a different matter,.

1 Like

Fletch your posts are so good I feel like I should be sending you money. Maybe I could direct deposit them into your account at BOFI.

JEB

I worked at Boeing for 30 years. Long ago there was an article in the Boeing News (internal publication about stuff at Boeing) regarding “sintering”, i.e. 3D printing, additive manufacturing, whatever name you want to give it.

Boeing had some technology (I don’t whose) in Mfg R&D which they found useful for prototyping parts - but it was basically an experimental toy with no practical production value. Either the parts were too crude and required too much after-work, or the process too slow, or whatever. The technology was just not competitive with traditional manufacturing processes such as precision casting and various removal machining processes (i.e. routing, lathe operations, etc.).

I retired in 2010, and have no idea if any 3D processes are now in use for Boeing production, either at our primary parts fab plant or major sub-contractors. My guess is, if so, it is very limited.

I was invested on DDD for a while, made some money, then watched it go down, sold before all my gains evaporated. This is fascinating technology. There’s no doubt about it. But I really struggle with trying to envision where the market is.

The notion that everyone will want one in their home just doesn’t make sense to me. There are a few tinkerers and would-be inventors who might buy one, but wide-spread home adoption is unlikely IMO. What are you going to make that you can’t buy more easily and probably for less total cost? And before you “print” your creation, you have to come up the design s/w learning curve - I don’t know, but I suspect that’s a big time investment.

As for manufactured production parts - I’ll concede that additive manufacturing will find a role. I can see it especially appropriate for medical applications where each time a “part” is required it needs to be customized for the specific application - no two whatever it is are identical. Perfect application for this technology. Maybe dental labs are already using 3D printers, I don’t know. But when it comes to production of high volume, replaceable parts, IMO the opportunities for 3D applications diminish pretty quickly. There will be some, maybe some assembly operations can be replaced with higher strength 3D parts. Prototyping will provide a market. Short production runs of unique parts (i.e., spares for out-of-production parts) will be a market . . .

But, add all these markets together, I don’t see a lot of printers being sold. I’ll look elsewhere for investments. I’m not enticed by any of the companies in this whole segment.

1 Like

sintering
verb [ with obj. ]
make (a powdered material) coalesce into a solid or porous mass by heating it (and usually also compressing it) without liquefaction.

The quality of the resulting part depends on the alloy used and the temperature of the melting beam. Laser produces a lower temperature than Electron Beam Melting (EBM). GE is making turbine blades for jet engines.

This Electron Gun Builds Jet Engines

Avio developed the technology, called electron beam melting or EBM, together with Sweden’s Arcam. The idea was to improve the manufacturing of parts made from an advanced aerospace material called titanium aluminide (TiAl). The material is 50 percent lighter than the nickel-based alloys typically used for low pressure turbine blades.

http://www.gereports.com/post/94658699280/this-electron-gun-…

Denny Schlesinger

1 Like

I think you are missing a lot of market, especially since the technology is developing at a rapid rate, increasing speeds and precision and lowering costs. First, there is a segment of manufacturing with special requirements such as working with titanium, which is very difficult and expensive to do by subtractive processes. There are also parts which can be built additively that would have to be several parts if done subtractively. And designs which can be done additively that can’t be done additively. These are all important issues in aerospace, particularly since they are the clue to weight savings. And, that is a domain which is not characterized by high volumes.

In addition to the custom parts you mention, there is a much larger domain of short run manufacturing where setup and tooling costs can make parts insanely expensive compared to a similar part in long run manufacturing. 3DP is a way to address those domains much more economically. Think parts for the military, for example.

And, while it may take a while, I wouldn’t dismiss the consumer sector. Sure, it may be a long time before they are as prevalent as paper printers, if ever, but I think there are a lot of specialized possibilities that can get some share. Remember that, for a long time, laser printers were way to expensive for home use, but eventually that changed. My personal favorite idea … might have something to do with having grandkids … would be for Lego to come out with a small printer for maybe $100 capable of printing anything in the Lego lexicon, perhaps for small fees or just for the material. I think there are a number of parents who would see that as a cost saver!

1 Like

I don’t see home printers being prevalent soon, but I can see having a printer where if you need a part for something, you look it up on amazon and download whatever specs you need to print it out with your printer. You don’t have to design anything. That’s the key.