barrons posts
FeedPosted Nov 8th 2009 6:40PM by Sheldon Liber (RSS feed)
Filed under: Earnings reports, Rants and raves, Applied Materials (AMAT), Sunday Funnies
In this week's (November 9) Preview Section of Barron's (subscription required) I was surprised to find that on Wednesday (11/9) it is noted that Computer Sciences (CSC), Applied Materials (AMAT), and Macy's (M) reported "profits." How do they know this?
On other days they refer to the "earnings" of various companies reporting. Perhaps I am splitting hairs, perhaps it is editorial haste (like you might find on our site), or perhaps there is no difference in some people's minds? From my perspective there is a difference between earnings and profits. Every quarter, public companies report their earnings. They do not always report a profit.
Continue reading Sunday Funnies: Barron's predicting profits?
Posted Nov 2nd 2009 11:20AM by Elizabeth Harrow (RSS feed)
Filed under: Analyst reports, Analyst upgrades and downgrades, Products and services, Competitive strategy, Google (GOOG), Motorola (MOT), Research in Motion (RIMM), Options
An article in Barron's suggests that Motorola (NYSE: MOT) is on the verge of regaining some of its former mojo. The company recently offered a solid outlook for the remainder of the year, and it could garner new business after debuting two smartphones featuring Google's (NASDAQ: GOOG) Android operating system -- namely, the Droid and the Cliq.
The author cites analyst Ed Snyder of Charter Equity Research, who believes Motorola is on the cusp of "an extended upswing in handsets ... over the next several quarters." Snyder believes that the firm's ailing handset division could achieve break-even results as soon as the second quarter of 2010.
Continue reading Barron's, Citigroup bet on a comeback for Motorola
Posted Jul 6th 2009 2:20PM by Sheldon Liber (RSS feed)
Filed under: Newspapers, Rants and raves, Workspace, Technology, Recession

When I picked up my copy of Barron's weekly business journal from the front lawn this weekend I immediately felt something was different -- the weight of the journal and the thickness were definitely reduced by my measure. As a big fan of Barron's I thought, oh no, they are in trouble too.
When I examined it I found that the July 4 edition was a scant 32 pages. Last week's June 29 edition was 40 pages -- whoa --
a 20% reduction! That's a big reduction.
I keep my old copies of Barron's, so I was able to go back in time a ways to see if this was trend or an anomaly. First off I realized that the journal does fluctuate in length from week to week seemingly with the average being about 44 pages in the past few months. Then I went back further and noticed the trend was moving down. I thought well maybe it was the time if year, and of course the economy had to affect it too.
Continue reading Barron's struggling like everyone else
Posted May 26th 2009 11:40AM by Elizabeth Harrow (RSS feed)
Filed under: Major movement, Analyst reports, Analyst upgrades and downgrades, Options
The shares of First Solar, Inc. (NASDAQ: FSLR) have started the week on a rocky note. Not only did Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. downgrade the stock from Market Perform to Underperform, the alternative energy issue was also the topic of a skeptical Barron's article over the weekend.
In a note to clients, brokerage firm Friedman cited weak polysilicon prices and the stock's overrich valuation for its downgrade. FSLR closed last Friday at $191.72 per share, compared to Friedman's price target of $110.
Meanwhile, the cautious Barron's write up [subscription required] observes that the Intersolar trade show begins Wednesday in Munich, and pits FSLR against many lower-priced rivals. "One leading customer says it will ditch First Solar's 'thin-film' panels if crystalline silicon alternatives keep getting cheaper.
That seems likely. Silicon prices are expected to drop another 30% by year end. First Solar profits -- and its shares -- could get cut in half," commented the financial paper.
Continue reading First Solar gaps lower on downgrade, bearish Barron's article
Posted Apr 22nd 2009 5:15PM by Andrea Chalupa (RSS feed)

Will financial reporting ever have a Woodward and Bernstein, the two metro desk Washington Post reporters who broke the Watergate Scandal? After attending last night's panel on Financial Journalism Under Fire: Did We Do Our Job?, hosted by the New York Financial Writers Association, the answer is clear: no. (Changes may and should happen, and I'll touch on a few of those).
I have a theory that if you took a psychological assessment of a sports writer, a political reporter, and a financial writer to see who was the most cynical, the answer would most definitely be the financial writer. They're reporting on an industry ruled by greed and people who make more money in a year than they'll see in a lifetime. The system is just too large, too shady, and too encouraged to be bad in the name of profits (deregulated) that reporting on any of this would be best reserved for some hippie outlet like Mother Jones, not the respectable Wall Street Journal. Big scoops in finance usually involve mergers and acquisitions, company and exec failures -- going after anything else is cute idealism. (In fact, someone last night compared it to steroids and baseball -- you don't want to know where those home runs are coming from, you just want to enjoy the game).
Continue reading Financial media mourns its Pulitzer
Posted Mar 9th 2009 4:00PM by Jon Ogg (RSS feed)
Filed under: General Electric (GE), Citigroup Inc. (C), Bank of America (BAC), Genentech Inc (DNA), Wells Fargo (WFC)

We had the possibility of three or four big mergers today and no major macroeconomic news to rock us down other than added overseas selling. But a general lack of enthusiasm and additional selling from the public kept today from chasing the late Friday stock market gains. Even a
slighty less pessimistic Nouriel Roubini, a.k.a. "Dr. Doom," failed to inspire any contrarian thoughts. Despite this, there were many winning stocks and sectors.
Here are today's unofficial closing bell levels:
Dow 6,523.48 -103.46 (-1.56%)
S&P 500 676.53 -6.85 (-1.00%)
Nasdaq 1,268.64 -25.21 (-1.95%)
Top Analyst CallsContinue reading Closing Bell: Merger Mania fails to wake buyers (BAC, C, GE, DNA, GERN, HGSI, WFC)
Posted Feb 9th 2009 11:15AM by Zac Bissonnette (RSS feed)
Filed under: Television

Back in August of 2007,
Barron's Bill Alpert slammed Jim Cramer's stock-picking abilities in a
cover story (subscription required). At the time, Alpert reported that "Over the past two years, viewers holding Cramer's stocks would be up 12% while the Dow rose 22% and the S&P 500 16%, according to a record of 1,300 of the CNBC star's Buy recommendations compiled by YourMoneyWatch.com, a Website run by a retired stock analyst and loyal Cramer-watcher."
Now Alpert is back for more. In the latest issue of Barron's, he
writes (subscription required) that "Cramer's recommendations underperform the market by most measures. From May to December of last year, for example, the market lost about 30%. Heeding Cramer's Buys and Sells would have added another five percentage points to that loss, according to our latest tally."
Continue reading Barron's slams Jim Cramer again
Posted Feb 7th 2009 11:08AM by Peter Cohan (RSS feed)
Filed under: Magazines, Market matters, Money and Finance Today, Personal finance
CNBC's Jim Cramer has an audience of 600,000 for his Mad Money. But Barron's has gone to great lengths to investigate how his stock picks have performed and it has concluded that they lag the market averages by about five percentage points. Specifically, Barron's concluded that from May to December of 2008, the S&P 500 lost about 30% and "heeding Cramer's Buys and Sells would have added another five percentage points to that loss."
Cramer's Sells do better than his Buys. Specifically, his Sells outperformed the market on the downside by five percentage points while his Buys lost up to 10 percentage points more than the market. One finance professor estimated using options-market activity that betting against Cramer's Buy recommendations can yield 25% in a month.
Continue reading Are Cramer's stock picks five percentage points worse than the market?
Next Page >