<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Starbucks Q1 2007 results: right on the money]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/31/starbucks-q1-2007-results-right-on-the-money/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/31/starbucks-q1-2007-results-right-on-the-money/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/31/starbucks-q1-2007-results-right-on-the-money/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/earnings-reports/" rel="tag">Earnings Reports</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/press-releases/" rel="tag">Press Releases</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/sbux/" rel="tag">Starbucks (SBUX)</a></p><p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2006/10/starbucks_pastry.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="0" />Analysts expected Starbucks Corporation (NASDAQ:<a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/starbucks-corporation/sbux/nas">SBUX</a>) <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/25/starbucks-q1-2007-earnings-will-holiday-drinks-lift-the-company/">to earn 26 cents a share</a> for the fiscal first quarter ended December 31, 2006. <a href="http://investor.starbucks.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=99518&amp;p=irol-newsArticle&amp;ID=956577&amp;highlight=">Starbucks earned</a>? 26 cents a share. Right on the money.<br /><br />Not only did we see exactly-met earnings, we also saw a same-store sales growth of a comfortable 6% -- nothing like the 4% that had everyone running scared this fall. Other bullet points on the report included net revenues of $2.4 billion, net earnings of $205 million, an increase of 18% over the year-earlier quarter, and "record quarterly Starbucks Card activations of $287 million" up 30%.<br /><br />Disappointment hidden on page 2: evidently the bottled Frappuccino coffee drinks and DoubleShot espresso drinks, and the Starbucks ice cream, aren't doing so well; although it had a very small impact on the bottom line it's an interesting sideline to track.<br /><br />Starbucks investors seemed quite happy, though, sending the stock up sharply in afterhours trading. SBUX closed out the trading day at $34.94, up 38 cents or 1.10%, and was falling a bit before the results; then bounced back up to $35.72, up 2.23% from yesterday's close.</p>
<p><em>Also check out </em><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/20/earnings-reports-go-head-to-head-against-the-experts/"><em>some other earnings reports</em></a><em> that we're following, and let us know your thoughts on earnings expectations.</em></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/31/starbucks-q1-2007-results-right-on-the-money/">Starbucks Q1 2007 results: right on the money</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:37:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/31/starbucks-q1-2007-results-right-on-the-money/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/746081/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2007/01/31/starbucks-q1-2007-results-right-on-the-money/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>2006 earnings</category><category>2006Earnings</category><category>2007 earnings</category><category>2007Earnings</category><category>26</category><category>26 cents</category><category>26 cents a share</category><category>26Cents</category><category>26CentsAShare</category><category>earnings</category><category>fourth quarter</category><category>FourthQuarter</category><category>q1</category><category>q1 2007</category><category>q1 earnings</category><category>Q12007</category><category>Q1Earnings</category><category>q4</category><category>q4 2006</category><category>q4 earnings</category><category>Q42006</category><category>Q4Earnings</category><category>sbux</category><category>starbucks</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Sarah Gilbert]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:37:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Auto sales misleading: Autoblog looks at 'real' September sales numbers]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bad-news/" rel="tag">Bad News</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/blogs/" rel="tag">Blogs</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/rants-and-raves/" rel="tag">Rants and Raves</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/dai/" rel="tag">Daimler (DAI)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/f/" rel="tag">Ford Motor (F)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gm/" rel="tag">General Motors (GM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/tm/" rel="tag">Toyota Motor Corp. (TM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketmatters/" rel="tag">Market Matters</a></p><p><em><img id="vimage_1" alt="consumers were running (not walking) to their toyota dealer this september" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2006/10/cars_bridge.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="0" />Auto sales weren't so bad after all!</em> we all agreed, shaking hands and congratulating the industry, feeling a bit smug (despite Toyota's walloping of <em>all things American</em>). And at first blush, it looked to be true: sales at Ford Motor Company (NYSE:F) <a href="http://f.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/03/september-auto-sales-no-ambulances-needed-ford-rises-chrysler/">were actually up</a> vs. September 2005, 4.7%, and sales at DaimlerChrysler AG (NYSE:DCX) and General Motors Corporation (NYSE:GM) weren't down as much as many industry watchers feared.</p>
<p>That's all well and good, when you're looking at raw units sold. But <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/03/by-the-numbers-september-2006/">Autoblog's John Neff went a little deeper</a> and considered the way auto dealerships operate: in "selling days." September 2006 selling days were 26, vs. only 25 in September 2005. And if you know auto dealerships, the guys behind the desk are really looking at DSR: daily sales rate.</p>
<p>Were we all snookered into placidity by one of the oldest tricks in the car sales guys' book? Here's what John found when he looked at DSR instead of gross sales:</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Auto sales misleading: Autoblog looks at 'real' September sales numbers</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/">Auto sales misleading: Autoblog looks at 'real' September sales numbers</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 04 Oct 2006 13:44:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/03/by-the-numbers-september-2006/>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/679532/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2006/10/04/auto-sales-misleading-autoblog-looks-at-real-september-sales/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>2006</category><category>25</category><category>26</category><category>autoblog</category><category>daily sales rate</category><category>DailySalesRate</category><category>dsr</category><category>f</category><category>ford</category><category>ford motor company</category><category>FordMotorCompany</category><category>general motors</category><category>GeneralMotors</category><category>gm</category><category>john neff</category><category>JohnNeff</category><category>sales</category><category>selling days in september</category><category>SellingDaysInSeptember</category><category>september</category><category>september 2005</category><category>september 2006</category><category>september sales</category><category>September2005</category><category>September2006</category><category>SeptemberSales</category><category>toyota</category><category>toyota motor company</category><category>ToyotaMotorCompany</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Sarah Gilbert]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2006 13:44:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
