CALDEIRÃO DE BOLSA

Ulisses Pereira Escreveu:"Why Own Lehman?"
...
"So, the individual asked, would I buy the stock? I said, "Why the heck would I do that? To catch a 2- or 3-point rally? There is no earnings power at Lehman."
...
And that's really the rub. These places have oodles of high-priced salespeople, tons of them, and they are all being paid fortunes to sell products that don't work. They sell broken vacuum cleaners with no warranties.
...
That game is over. But the people are still there, as is the overhead. Without this stuff, I don't know how you make a lot of money at an investment firm, particularly when you have decided to shrink your balance sheet and make fewer loans.
...
LEH? I just don't see how they can deliver $5-6 earnings power anymore. Worse, I can't even figure out what they could earn in this environment. The franchise isn't too dicey, just the earnings estimates.
I have so many companies that are delivering consistent, good numbers, why do I need a company that has a fraction of the earnings power that it used to have?
No, I don't want to own Lehman. "
(in www.realmoney.com)

Novamente acho muito divertidos e sobretudo instructivos estes artigos do Cramer !
Eu partilho totalmente do critério - buscar empresas que tenham crescimentos de resultados actuais e projectados -, embora seja verdade que não me esteja a dar bem - por enquanto - com a minha grande aposta actual (começa por S, é holding e está no Psi20. E não, não se chama Semapa ).
Ab+Bn.

E eu que andei pior que estragado nos 2 primeiros dias da semana, por me ter escapado a LEH...

Na quarta, até a avisei, que se voltasse a cair 9% ou 10% sem me avisar, que deixava de gostar dela!!!

Quando li o tópico, até pensei que o Cramer vinha dizer bem pior...

"Why Own Lehman?"

By Jim Cramer
RealMoney.com Columnist
6/5/2008 7:46 AM EDT


"At an investment symposium I attended last night, someone asked me whether I thought Lehman Brothers (LEH - commentary - Cramer's Take) was going under. I said, no, no I didn't think so. It's got a great franchise with a good cash position, reduced leverage, much better management than Bear (BSC - commentary - Cramer's Take) and a buyback that's kicking in that wouldn't if things were as bad as the bears make it out to be.

So, the individual asked, would I buy the stock? I said, "Why the heck would I do that? To catch a 2- or 3-point rally? There is no earnings power at Lehman."

I explained that some stocks are neither longs nor shorts -- that, to me, is Lehman. There's no reason to short it, because I don't think it is going under but many are betting that way, and there is no reason to go long it, because the place is set up for a period of big fees from fixed-income products, from structured products, but clients have at last figured out that they will lose their jobs if they keep buying this nonsense.

And that's really the rub. These places have oodles of high-priced salespeople, tons of them, and they are all being paid fortunes to sell products that don't work. They sell broken vacuum cleaners with no warranties.

It is that stark.

I know that anyone in brokerage is always reluctant to admit that structured products really have no value or are too risky, that they're just a way to figure out how to take a little extra per million -- a fraction, but they do add up. But that's what happened to a lot of these great firms that got fixed-income-heavy. There isn't enough money to be made selling regular commodity fixed-income products, so you have to talk people into buying things they shouldn't that they don't understand.

That game is over. But the people are still there, as is the overhead. Without this stuff, I don't know how you make a lot of money at an investment firm, particularly when you have decided to shrink your balance sheet and make fewer loans. Some can get away with it: Bank of America (BAC - commentary - Cramer's Take), for instance, because it has a deposit base (same reason Wachovia (WB - commentary - Cramer's Take) is worth something, but I don't want to own it, either), doesn't need to rely on structured products to make some money.

LEH? I just don't see how they can deliver $5-6 earnings power anymore. Worse, I can't even figure out what they could earn in this environment. The franchise isn't too dicey, just the earnings estimates.

I have so many companies that are delivering consistent, good numbers, why do I need a company that has a fraction of the earnings power that it used to have?

No, I don't want to own Lehman. "

(in www.realmoney.com)