CBS CORP CBS
February 15, 2011 - 3:44pm EST by
skca74
2011 2012
Price: 21.50 EPS $0.00 $1.51
Shares Out. (in M): 694 P/E 0.0x 14.0x
Market Cap (in $M): 14,921 P/FCF 0.0x 10.0x
Net Debt (in $M): 5,715 EBIT 0 2,235
TEV ($): 20,636 TEV/EBIT 0.0x 9.2x

Sign up for free guest access to view investment idea with a 45 days delay.

 

Description

The company will generate a significant amount of free cash flow (we believe 25% of mkt cap over 2 years) over the next several years as it is levered to a cyclical recovery in advertising and will continue to monetize its premium programming via licensing deals and through affiliate agreements as they get renegotiated.  The stock is extremely cheap trading at under 10x 2011 FCF with improving returns on capital and minimal capital requirements.  The management team is very strong and focused on returning capital to shareholders. The company is worth a minimum of $30/share based 15x 2012 EPS and/or 8x 2012 EBITDA.  So we see 50% plus upside in the stock.

History

CBS spun out of Viacom on Jan 3, 2006 at $21.64/share and hit a high of $35/share on July 23, 2007.  Summer Redstone remains a majority shareholder (6% owner) and 81% voting power and serves as its chairman.  Leslie Moonves, CEO of CBS, was previously the co-coo of Viacom and oversaw all of Viacom’s domestic and international broadcast tv operations, radio division and outdoor advertising.  He joined CBS in 1995 as president of entertainment after a successful career at Warner Bros Television where he was President and oversaw the television division that supplied the greatest number of programs over nine years (including ER, Friends, the Drew Carey Show).  Since the spin, the sold the parks business, some radio stations serving smaller markets and bought CNET for $1.8bn in June 2008.

 

Investment Highlights

 

Significant Operating Leverage should support continued margin expansion

-          CBS is high fixed cost business with a majority of costs coming from programming and thus the ability to sell that programming through other avenues (e.g. though syndication, international distribution, internet) and/or sell advertising slots at higher prices all goes to the bottomline

o        Since 2004, segment operating expenses ranged from $10.8bn to $11bn showing the fixed cost nature of the business while Revenues peaked in 2004 at $14.5bn and troughed in 2009 at $13bn; during the same time period Ebitda has gone from $3.3bn in 2004 to $1.8bn in 2009 – clearly leverage goes both ways

§         For the 1st 9 months of 2010, Rev increased by about 650MM and 60% of that went to the bottomline demonstrating the operating leverage in the model in a recovery

§         For 2011

 

Advertising Recovery underway with local advertising providing the next leg up

-          CBS is levered to an ad recovery (about 64% of revenues – improved pricing goes straight to the bottomline; note that the other 35% of revenues are more recurring in nature coming from licenses, affiliate fees, and subscription fees) which is already underway.   Local advertising should be a later cycle play while national advertising continues to recover and should do well with company’s sporting great balance sheets and record profits

 

Upside from re-negotiation of Affiliate Agreements

-          In the last 2 years, the company has signed large long-term contracts with Time Warner (expire 2013) and Comcast; requiring re-transmission fees for the right to carry local television stations via cable systems;

o        The 10yr deal with Comcast includes escalations and analyst have projected CBS would earn $0.5/sub/month in fees so for 2012  - the company would receive $75MM/yr

o        Similar deals with are coming with other MSO, satellite operators, Verizon, etc.

o        Company has guided to $250MM by 2012 and growing beyond that which would be up from approximately $50MM in 2009

o        The opportunity could be as much as $750MM – but it will take time to achieve that level of re-transit fees

 

Syndication opportunities are significant

-          Given that CBS owns a majority of its programming, the ability to monetize this through syndication deals is incremental to revenues

-          International syndication has grown every year over the last five – last year the company launched three new shows (Hawaii Five-O, Blue Bloods and The Defenders) and received $2MM/episode foreign

-          Domestic syndication is still an opportunity for strong programming and CBS’s batting average has been pretty good (this makes sense given the CEO’s background in programming); they are able to sell hit shows earlier and at record prices

 

Strong management team and capital allocators

-          The management team, led by Les Moonves, has done a good job divesting non-core businesses (e.g. Parks business), weaker performing radio stations at 12-14x EBITDA valuations, and managing expenses while also driving content.  The management team has been particularly shareholder friendly.  Since 2007, the company has returned $5.4bn to shareholders via dividends and share repurchases and on Nov 4, 2010 – announced a $1.5bn share repurchase starting Jan1, 2011 over an 18 month period. He recently has said that he is not interested in M&A and is likely to increase the dividend this year.  At the right multiple, he would sell the outdoor business which could go for 14x forward EBITDA or close to $6bn.  (note: LMAR advertising trades at 11x 2012 EBITDA).

 

Momentum continuing in Showtime

-          The company increased subs by 1.5MM in the last year to 18MM subs (note: HBO is at 28MM Subs) and have grown subs over the last five years through rebuilding programming efforts

 

After four years of decline, the radio station business has stabilized and is turning the corner

-          Listenership in radio is exactly the same as it was ten years ago and after the company changed its format in 25 of their radio stations, the company is growing and believes it will continue

-          Margins are strong at the 30% range with local advertising turning the corner – they expect to continue to grow margins in this business; they have taken costs out and incremental dollars come at 85% margins

 

Outdoor coming back vigorously

-          Margin expansion should continue as past the bad transit deals that were done in the past;; company believes it can get back to $600MM in EBITDA which was the peak in 2007 from $270-$290MM in 2010

-          Currently trying to renegotiate the large, London Underground contract, with the municipalities; the Olympics in the UK in 2012 should provide upside

 

Valuation

-          Low capex requirements - $260-$270MM annually

-          Shares Out: 694MM fully diluted

-          Share Price: $21.5

-          Cash: $1.1bn; Debt: $6.8bn; Net debt: $5.7bn

-          Mkt Cap: $14.9Bn, EV: $19.6bn

 

Summary Multiples

 

 

 

 

2011

2012

Price

$21.50

 

Ebitda

2,791

3,198

Shares Out

694

 

EPS

$1.51

$1.97

Mkt Cap

$14,921

 

FCF

        1,504

        1,749

     Net Debt

   5,715

 

 

 

 

EV

$20,636

 

EV/EBITDA

7.4x

6.5x

 

 

 

P/E

14.2x

10.0x

 

 

 

P/FCF

9.2x

7.9x

-           

 

Target Ebitda Multiple

 

8.0x

 

 

 

 

  EBITDA

 

 

3,198

EV

 

 

25,585

Net Debt

 

 

  5,715

  2011 FCF

 

1,504

 

 

 

 

Market Cap

 

      21,373

  Shares Out

 

694

Price Target

 

$30.80

  Upside

 

 

54%

 

 

 

Catalyst

-          Major share repurchase expected; Next two years of $3.3-$3.4bn in FCF

-          Potential asset sale of outdoor

-          Earnings on Feb. 16th – should be strong and analyst day on Feb 24

 

 

Risks

-          Possibility of an NFL lockout next year – the company said  it won’t greatly affect the bottomline but the stock will clearly take a hit if this happens

-          Increased Investment in the “movie” business – for now its very small – they have done 3 movies so far with the last two being breakeven (Note: last movie cost $12MM to make); expect them to do 2-4 movies/yr over the next two years with small budgets

-          With 65% of revenues tied to advertising, the company is highly correlated to GDP growth and the overall macro environment

-          The emergence of new, alternative viewing platforms could permanently impair the value of their content (if content owners are not careful to preserve the value they receive per view) – but to date CBS has been the most conservative in making its content available (they did not join Hulu, NFLX, Google TV yet)

-          Some difficult headwinds to overcome from a year over year comparison including (superbowl in 2010 and not in 2011 – however they make no margins on the superbowl, political advertising in 2010 not in 2011, CBS loses Oprah this fall – but the company has indicated that this is a low margin business and the financial impact will be minimal)

Catalyst

-  Potential asset sale of outdoor
- Earnings on Feb. 16th - should be strong
- Analyst day on Feb 24
- Potential deal with NFLX
    sort by   Expand   New

    Description

    The company will generate a significant amount of free cash flow (we believe 25% of mkt cap over 2 years) over the next several years as it is levered to a cyclical recovery in advertising and will continue to monetize its premium programming via licensing deals and through affiliate agreements as they get renegotiated.  The stock is extremely cheap trading at under 10x 2011 FCF with improving returns on capital and minimal capital requirements.  The management team is very strong and focused on returning capital to shareholders. The company is worth a minimum of $30/share based 15x 2012 EPS and/or 8x 2012 EBITDA.  So we see 50% plus upside in the stock.

    History

    CBS spun out of Viacom on Jan 3, 2006 at $21.64/share and hit a high of $35/share on July 23, 2007.  Summer Redstone remains a majority shareholder (6% owner) and 81% voting power and serves as its chairman.  Leslie Moonves, CEO of CBS, was previously the co-coo of Viacom and oversaw all of Viacom’s domestic and international broadcast tv operations, radio division and outdoor advertising.  He joined CBS in 1995 as president of entertainment after a successful career at Warner Bros Television where he was President and oversaw the television division that supplied the greatest number of programs over nine years (including ER, Friends, the Drew Carey Show).  Since the spin, the sold the parks business, some radio stations serving smaller markets and bought CNET for $1.8bn in June 2008.

     

    Investment Highlights

     

    Significant Operating Leverage should support continued margin expansion

    -          CBS is high fixed cost business with a majority of costs coming from programming and thus the ability to sell that programming through other avenues (e.g. though syndication, international distribution, internet) and/or sell advertising slots at higher prices all goes to the bottomline

    o        Since 2004, segment operating expenses ranged from $10.8bn to $11bn showing the fixed cost nature of the business while Revenues peaked in 2004 at $14.5bn and troughed in 2009 at $13bn; during the same time period Ebitda has gone from $3.3bn in 2004 to $1.8bn in 2009 – clearly leverage goes both ways

    §         For the 1st 9 months of 2010, Rev increased by about 650MM and 60% of that went to the bottomline demonstrating the operating leverage in the model in a recovery

    §         For 2011

     

    Advertising Recovery underway with local advertising providing the next leg up

    -          CBS is levered to an ad recovery (about 64% of revenues – improved pricing goes straight to the bottomline; note that the other 35% of revenues are more recurring in nature coming from licenses, affiliate fees, and subscription fees) which is already underway.   Local advertising should be a later cycle play while national advertising continues to recover and should do well with company’s sporting great balance sheets and record profits

     

    Upside from re-negotiation of Affiliate Agreements

    -          In the last 2 years, the company has signed large long-term contracts with Time Warner (expire 2013) and Comcast; requiring re-transmission fees for the right to carry local television stations via cable systems;

    o        The 10yr deal with Comcast includes escalations and analyst have projected CBS would earn $0.5/sub/month in fees so for 2012  - the company would receive $75MM/yr

    o        Similar deals with are coming with other MSO, satellite operators, Verizon, etc.

    o        Company has guided to $250MM by 2012 and growing beyond that which would be up from approximately $50MM in 2009

    o        The opportunity could be as much as $750MM – but it will take time to achieve that level of re-transit fees

     

    Syndication opportunities are significant

    -          Given that CBS owns a majority of its programming, the ability to monetize this through syndication deals is incremental to revenues

    -          International syndication has grown every year over the last five – last year the company launched three new shows (Hawaii Five-O, Blue Bloods and The Defenders) and received $2MM/episode foreign

    -          Domestic syndication is still an opportunity for strong programming and CBS’s batting average has been pretty good (this makes sense given the CEO’s background in programming); they are able to sell hit shows earlier and at record prices

     

    Strong management team and capital allocators

    -          The management team, led by Les Moonves, has done a good job divesting non-core businesses (e.g. Parks business), weaker performing radio stations at 12-14x EBITDA valuations, and managing expenses while also driving content.  The management team has been particularly shareholder friendly.  Since 2007, the company has returned $5.4bn to shareholders via dividends and share repurchases and on Nov 4, 2010 – announced a $1.5bn share repurchase starting Jan1, 2011 over an 18 month period. He recently has said that he is not interested in M&A and is likely to increase the dividend this year.  At the right multiple, he would sell the outdoor business which could go for 14x forward EBITDA or close to $6bn.  (note: LMAR advertising trades at 11x 2012 EBITDA).

     

    Momentum continuing in Showtime

    -          The company increased subs by 1.5MM in the last year to 18MM subs (note: HBO is at 28MM Subs) and have grown subs over the last five years through rebuilding programming efforts

     

    After four years of decline, the radio station business has stabilized and is turning the corner

    -          Listenership in radio is exactly the same as it was ten years ago and after the company changed its format in 25 of their radio stations, the company is growing and believes it will continue

    -          Margins are strong at the 30% range with local advertising turning the corner – they expect to continue to grow margins in this business; they have taken costs out and incremental dollars come at 85% margins

     

    Outdoor coming back vigorously

    -          Margin expansion should continue as past the bad transit deals that were done in the past;; company believes it can get back to $600MM in EBITDA which was the peak in 2007 from $270-$290MM in 2010

    -          Currently trying to renegotiate the large, London Underground contract, with the municipalities; the Olympics in the UK in 2012 should provide upside

     

    Valuation

    -          Low capex requirements - $260-$270MM annually

    -          Shares Out: 694MM fully diluted

    -          Share Price: $21.5

    -          Cash: $1.1bn; Debt: $6.8bn; Net debt: $5.7bn

    -          Mkt Cap: $14.9Bn, EV: $19.6bn

     

    Summary Multiples

     

     

     

     

    2011

    2012

    Price

    $21.50

     

    Ebitda

    2,791

    3,198

    Shares Out

    694

     

    EPS

    $1.51

    $1.97

    Mkt Cap

    $14,921

     

    FCF

            1,504

            1,749

         Net Debt

       5,715

     

     

     

     

    EV

    $20,636

     

    EV/EBITDA

    7.4x

    6.5x

     

     

     

    P/E

    14.2x

    10.0x

     

     

     

    P/FCF

    9.2x

    7.9x

    -           

     

    Target Ebitda Multiple

     

    8.0x

     

     

     

     

      EBITDA

     

     

    3,198

    EV

     

     

    25,585

    Net Debt

     

     

      5,715

      2011 FCF

     

    1,504

     

     

     

     

    Market Cap

     

          21,373

      Shares Out

     

    694

    Price Target

     

    $30.80

      Upside

     

     

    54%

     

     

     

    Catalyst

    -          Major share repurchase expected; Next two years of $3.3-$3.4bn in FCF

    -          Potential asset sale of outdoor

    -          Earnings on Feb. 16th – should be strong and analyst day on Feb 24

     

     

    Risks

    -          Possibility of an NFL lockout next year – the company said  it won’t greatly affect the bottomline but the stock will clearly take a hit if this happens

    -          Increased Investment in the “movie” business – for now its very small – they have done 3 movies so far with the last two being breakeven (Note: last movie cost $12MM to make); expect them to do 2-4 movies/yr over the next two years with small budgets

    -          With 65% of revenues tied to advertising, the company is highly correlated to GDP growth and the overall macro environment

    -          The emergence of new, alternative viewing platforms could permanently impair the value of their content (if content owners are not careful to preserve the value they receive per view) – but to date CBS has been the most conservative in making its content available (they did not join Hulu, NFLX, Google TV yet)

    -          Some difficult headwinds to overcome from a year over year comparison including (superbowl in 2010 and not in 2011 – however they make no margins on the superbowl, political advertising in 2010 not in 2011, CBS loses Oprah this fall – but the company has indicated that this is a low margin business and the financial impact will be minimal)

    Catalyst

    -  Potential asset sale of outdoor
    - Earnings on Feb. 16th - should be strong
    - Analyst day on Feb 24
    - Potential deal with NFLX

    Messages


    SubjectNFLX deal signed
    Entry02/22/2011 03:29 PM
    Memberskca74
    A coulple of nice catalyst
    - Earnings were great as expected and free cash flow should continue to grow
    - Company just signed 2yr exclusive deal with NFLX w/an option for an additional 2 yrs. LA times reported NFLX was paying DIS $150-$200 for a 1yr deal for ABC content.  At $100/yr would be 10c acretive to earnings. 
    - Analyst day on thursday - coming

    Subjectcomparison to News Corp
    Entry08/22/2011 06:47 PM
    Membertyler939
    Do you have any thoughts on the relative value of CBS versus News Corp?  I'll post this on the News Corp thread, too.

    Subjectbuy backs
    Entry08/24/2011 03:43 PM
    Membermiser861
    agree, but you will get an even higher px if you keep it levered 1.5x1 and use the cash to buy back stock.  it should add $5 or so to tgt px

    Subjectlibrary
    Entry09/15/2011 08:55 AM
    Membertyler939
    With NFLX blowing up, I am worried that CBS is missing their opportunity to license their current shows to an on line provider.  What exactly are they waiting for, and if they don't sell to nflx, is there another player that will pay a higher price.?  One can argue that NFLX is now desperate for content, but having seen their stock get crushed over the last 2 months, is NFLX willing to pay the same kind of money it was thought they would offer LSTZA?  The same goes for any other potential competitors.  When NFLX had a $15 billion market cap, it was easy to see why a potential competitor would be willing to pay up for content.  Given recent events, I would be surprised if they weren't having second thoughts.  What am I missing?

    Subjecteuro exposure
    Entry09/23/2011 11:45 AM
    Membertyler939
    What kind of exposure does CBS have to the Euro and to any potential breakup of the EMU?

    SubjectAnyone have updated thoughts?
    Entry01/18/2013 05:00 PM
    Membertyler939
    This has been a terrific pick.  Does nayone have updated thoughts?

    SubjectRE: Updated Thoughts!
    Entry02/04/2014 04:55 PM
    Membertyler939

    Cross (or anyone else), would you mind giving your updated thoughts?  I am particularly interested in the following:  1) Just how important do you believe accomplishing the outdoor spin is (they recently updated the S-11, this time with a proposed symbol, among other things, so I assume that is one more sign this is happening soon);  2)  My operating assumption has been that Aereo is largely a non-event (by hook or by crook, even if Congress has to intervene, it gets worked out).  Do you agree, and even in the end if this gets worked out, is it still going to hangover the entire space for a while? 3)  How concerned are you about declining viewership in its most popular shows ex. Big Bang Theory?  My view was that this is just noise.  Do you agree, or is the landscape changing with more alternative programing 4) Any other concerns/positives since your last post?  Anything in particular you are looking for on the next call (I am not talking about metrics, but strategic stuff)?  Thanks.


    SubjectMea culpa
    Entry03/01/2014 08:51 PM
    Membertyler939
    Aparently my question on this thread (I am making this assumption but I think I am right) didn't show the requisite amount of diligence on my part and came across as an attempt to outsource research (or alternatively, I was asking about some stuff that was deemed non material).  I thought my latest question was more than just a tell me what's new.  In particular, I think it is incredibly hard to try to estimate how much approval of the REIT is baked into the stock price given the how LAMR reacted (where it seemed obvious it was a done deal for a while), and given how much less important to the story it is (for the record, I was thinking about short term options when I asked the question).

    Also, I am a big believer in known unknowns and unknown unknowns, particularly when it comes to stock research.  Presumably, the poster of an idea is far more familiar with the subject matter than most of the readers, so if something changes, particularly if it is not an operating metric but something tangential such as a threatened change in the regulatory landscape or a competitor coming from an unobvious direction, what might be obvious to the poster might not to the reader. My view of VIC is that ideally, you provide two really good ideas on which you are an expert and which you can help others and that others do the same.  I don't believe you have any obligation to spoon feed anyone, and it is the reader's job to try to learn as much as possible about the idea if they are really interested.  That said, I don't think asking if anything new has come up in the last four and a half months is an unreasonable question.  If I have abused the site, I am sorry.  In any event, all I can say is I will try harder to ask more intelligent questions, more relevent questions or answer my own questions prior to posting in the future.  

    For anyone who feels that I have abused the site, or that I am representative of those that do, please feel free to use me as an example and respond, or consider doing it in the topic section.

    SubjectRE: Mea culpa
    Entry03/01/2014 09:01 PM
    Membertyler939
    If I gave the impression I didn't think the outdoor REIT IPO was a done deal, my appologies for not wording my question correctly.

    SubjectRE: RE: Mea culpa
    Entry03/02/2014 10:39 AM
    Memberaagold
    FWIW, I fully agree with your "view of VIC is that ideally, you provide two really good ideas on which you are an expert and which you can help others and that others do the same".
     
    I don't see anything at all inappropriate in the question you asked.
     
    Also, is it really such a bad thing to "outsource research", as long as you provide at least two *really* good ideas per year and you have deep knowledge on at least those two good ideas?  I'm not saying anybody should be totally lazy and ask dumb questions that could easily be answered by a quick reading of the latest 10K or 10Q, or something like that, but what's so bad about not being the world's leading expert on every stock in your portfolio?
     
    For a guy like me who has an organization size of exactly one, myself, I don't see how it's possible to have both a reasonably diversified portfolio *and* extremely deep knowledge of all stocks in my portfolio.
     
    Maybe this discussion is better for a topic thread than the CBS thread, but I'm all out of my new topic allocation for this year.  (Actually, I was supposed to receive an additional topic this year since my "fair discount of closed-end fund" topic was very popular, but the VIC gods never gave it to me even after I complained twice.) 
     
    - aagold

    SubjectRE: Looking for personal criticism
    Entry03/02/2014 03:52 PM
    Memberaagold
    Wow... I commend you for being so open to criticism that you're actually *asking* for it.  Is it even humanly possible to have no ego?  I find that idea fascinating, especially for someone in this line of work.  I'd say this is one of the *least* likely places to find an "ego-less" person.
     
    - aagold
     
     

    SubjectRE: RE: Looking for personal criticism
    Entry03/03/2014 09:22 AM
    Membertyler939
    Nothing serious.  There has been some talk off line in the past about the value of VIC, particularly the idea that members take advantage of people who writeup ideas to do all subsequent research (but there may be broader criticism/resentment out there by some in the community that too many people are not contributing enough, which is one of the reasons I thought it would be a useful topic for discussion).  Recently, someone made a comment questioning the value of VIC and asking who Tyler939 was.  This wasn't a rant, just an offhand comment that they hadn't visited VIC lately and hadn't missed much.
     
    So why did I spend so much time posting about this? 1) lack of social life; 2) If I'm doing something wrong, I would like it pointed out to me.  Ideally, I will get a response saying "you could have gotten this information yourself by looking at XYZ",and next time I will know to look at XYZ.  3)  I think having the discussion  might make VIC a more valuable tool (it depends on what direction the conversation goes and whether there is a concensus that more has to be done and whther people take that seriously), and I am willing to be the poster child for everything that is wrong with VIC.  Also, I am willing to take criticism from anyone.  You don't have to be the person who made the comment to post on this, and if you are worried about comming off in a negative light, don't, becaseu I have specifically asked for criticsim, and if that's not enough, just try to phrase things constructively, but I really would appreciate any negative feedback.
     
    My guess is that a lot of people feel that there are a lot of free riders on VIC that either don't do their follow up work or post substandard ideas.  Again, the moderators should make this a topic, but I can't use up my quota for it, so if anyone has a problem with me in particular or VIC member contribution in general, I would like to start a conversation about it.
     
    Getting back to your question, it probably looks like something huge happened from my response, but as far as I personally am concerned, there was no drama, just an offhanded, non specific comment, implying I was one of the people who made VIC less valuable.

    SubjectRE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Looking for personal criticism
    Entry03/03/2014 01:53 PM
    Membertyler939
    Risk, there is no huge controversy or event.  It may seem like it because I just typed a lot, but there is no drama here.
     
    There are several members who have expressed their opinion elsewhere that a lot of members on VIC don't pull there own weight or abuse their membership by relying too much on authors of write ups for follow up information (ie. they treat them as their research associates with respect to any given name asking for general updates or questions they should have tried to get he answer to, as opposed to saying "thanks for the idea, I will take it from here and do my own research").  I have no idea how widespread this view is, but if it is widespread, it is hurting the utility of this site. One member who has expressed this opinion in the past and who I have a lot of respect for (and who I don't wish to identify) made a comment recently on another venue that they hadn't visited VIC in a while and didn't miss out on much.  Then they asked "who is tyler939".  I made an assumption that the two comments were connected, and wanted to know what I did wrong.  I assumed the comment must have been prompted by something I recently posted.  So far, this is all me making a mountain out of a molehill.
     
    Then I thought it would be a really great topic to get members opinions on what is expected of an author after they post, and what is expected of a reader (how much work should they be expected to do), before asking a question.  I asked the moderators to post this topic, but I didn't want to use up my quota on it, and they didn't do it.  Since a lot of members out of courtesy would be reluctant to criticize others without specific provocation, I volunteered to be the pin cushion.  If members are unhappy with the level of participation at VIC, and you want to use somethingI posted as a specific example, go right ahead (I readily acknowledge that in the past I have been guilty of asking the general "can you give me an update" question, which I have tried not to do lately, which is why I was surprised my name came up).

    SubjectRE: RE: RE: Looking for personal criticism
    Entry03/03/2014 06:34 PM
    MemberHolland1945
    "I don't know a single person who solely relys on these comment threads to make portfolio decisions."
     
    Nails, there are an awful lot of "VIC pops" that prove otherwise.
      Back to top