Record numbers coming out of CLCT.
SethChandler
Posts: 1,720 ✭✭✭✭
SethChandler
Posts: 1,720 ✭✭✭✭
SethChandler
Posts: 1,720 ✭✭✭✭
Comments
Hope they can keep that fat dividend going for awhile
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
For those of that only submit coins...........not so good. Primarily because PCGS increased their fees this year so I would expect their profits to go up. They've increased return mailing fees as well.
However, turn around times have been in the toilet which basically tells me that, while they and the stock holders are making a profit, I am not.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
Hope they can keep that fat dividend going for awhile
Until all the coins and bills in the world have been graded! (Then what will we use for currency in that dividend?)
(Just think of city streets clogged with a hundred thousand horses each generating 15 lbs of manure every day...)
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
they still have room to raise prices. The PSA division charges 10% GP for their submissions.
World Coins appear to be their engine of growth for volumes. China will be profitable next quarter already and submissions are growing over 100%/yr there.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
<< <i>I knew it would happen as soon as I sold ... but I needed the money for a submission
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
the dividend.
I have only watched CLCT in the last year, maybe someone can tell me why they
increased the dividend in 2011 and 2012 while the earnings were falling.
In 2010 the company earned $2.20 and paid out .80 in dividends.
All that said, the CLCT could be good for a trade here if it can break
thru the resistance just above 12.
the dividend.
I have only watched CLCT in the last year, maybe someone can tell me why they
increased the dividend in 2011 and 2012 while the earnings were falling.
In 2010 the company earned $2.20 and paid out .80 in dividends.
All that said, the CLCT could be good for a trade here if it can break
thru the resistance just above 12.
I've tried to explain this but have been rebuffed here on numerous occasions. GAAP earnings are an accounting fantasy. The $2.20 was a one time gimmick transferring accrued losses to gains. What you need to watch out for is cash flow. They had GAAP earnings of 29c as reported last night but cash flow was much, much higher( the dividend is 32.5c). Out of GAAP comes non-cash things like amortization, stock option grants (which actually add to cash when exercised), etc. The company added $1.2M to their cash pile AFTER expenses, taxes, and paying the dividend. Apple gets racked through the coals for keeping all that cash. CLCT gives it back to shareholders and everyone complains; except me. CLCT now has $18.7M in cash which is probably far in excess of what they need to run their business and grow. Heck, they could increase the dividend or share buyback and take on some debt instead.
Their tax rate was 40%. Every large company pays a fraction of that. The offshore offices will enable them to lower their effective tax rate substantially and add to cash as well.
CU is a very transparent company. They publish their "stats" on a daily basis. This was very easy to see to anyone who chose to see it.
more than these amounts in dividends.
I think that CLCT has potential for a catch up move versus the broader market averages which
have performed much better in the last 3 years.
What the company really needs is a catalyst. Something that gets investors thinking
that CLCT could have a large increase in revenues, cash flow, and earnings.
Something like the sports card craze of the 1990s.
With no debt, I am sure that there are some buyout groups that have had CLCT pop
up on their radar too.
more than these amounts in dividends.
Cash is cash. I don't know where S&P gets their numbers but here are cash numbers for the last few years as reported to the SEC:
June 2010: $20.321M
June 2011: $21.926M
June 2012: $21.214M
March 2013: $18.7M
typically they add to cash in this current quarter as well.
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
That's like a $40,000 coin. Think of their liability for the life of that coin should there be an issue. 1% seems fair in that regard.
<< <i>Yes, well it cost me over $520 to get a 1895 Proof 58 Morgan crossed. Comes out to about a five times increase in fees with the new 1% program, so I am not surprised.
That's like a $40,000 coin. Think of their liability for the life of that coin should there be an issue. 1% seems fair in that regard. >>
Exactly!! Why should PCGS create value for the submitter with not much in it for them except increased liability under their guarantee? The coin didn't change one IOTA, but the perceived value did.
All I know is that I got in back in November at $9.52, and now I'm up 25%+, not including the dividend (which works out to >13.5% based on my buy-in price).
My only regret is not buying more.
Even if they started buying shares at the current market price today, there is enough money in the program to cover many days worth of average volume. The company could make this stock price jump tremendously any time they wish just by using the money already approved to buy their own shares, and that doesn't even count all of the extra buying that would occur when the shorts start having to cover their short positions when the prices start running up.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
Even if they started buying shares at the current market price today, there is enough money in the program to cover many days worth of average volume. The company could make this stock price jump tremendously any time they wish just by using the money already approved to buy their own shares, and that doesn't even count all of the extra buying that would occur when the shorts start having to cover their short positions when the prices start running up.
Sometimes the threat of a "bazooka" is better than the use of a bazooka. Last time they bought back shares was when they bought back 20% of the company at $5 through a tender offer. Prior to that, they bought back a bunch at $4 and lower. Buying back their stocks says they can't figure out a better way to invest their own money. I prefer the expansion into China which has probably cost them $1M in the last year but will pay many times that in coming years.
I trust these guys. They are smart. Even evil geniuses. I figure they know what they are doing and I just sit back and collect the dividend and watch them do what they do. Everyone else thinks they are morons and questions everything they do and says they will never submit another coin because of the last thing they did.
<< <i>In reading the transcript of the earnings conference call, I find it interesting that they have $3.7 million available under a stock repurchase program, but they haven't made any open market purchases since 2008. What the heck are they waiting for??? Why didn't they buy when it was less than $10/share???? Come on!!!!
Even if they started buying shares at the current market price today, there is enough money in the program to cover many days worth of average volume. The company could make this stock price jump tremendously any time they wish just by using the money already approved to buy their own shares, and that doesn't even count all of the extra buying that would occur when the shorts start having to cover their short positions when the prices start running up.
Sometimes the threat of a "bazooka" is better than the use of a bazooka. Last time they bought back shares was when they bought back 20% of the company at $5 through a tender offer. Prior to that, they bought back a bunch at $4 and lower. Buying back their stocks says they can't figure out a better way to invest their own money. I prefer the expansion into China which has probably cost them $1M in the last year but will pay many times that in coming years.
I trust these guys. They are smart. Even evil geniuses. I figure they know what they are doing and I just sit back and collect the dividend and watch them do what they do. Everyone else thinks they are morons and questions everything they do and says they will never submit another coin because of the last thing they did. >>
Doesn't giving away just about all of the free cash flow in the form of a dividend also show they have nothing better to do with the cash? Buying back stock has already been approved by the board and shows confidence that the company thinks it is undervalued in the market.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
David Hall owns roughly 1M shares. He doesn't get paid an exorbitant salary. He doesn't have exorbitant benefits. He makes a nice living off his dividend at a tax advantaged 15% and so do I. I like the dividend.
Did the Pogues crack and submit their 1804 Dollar a dozen times in hope of a 69?
Any thoughts as to why?
Did the Pogues crack and submit their 1804 Dollar a dozen times in hope of a 69?
Any thoughts as to why?
Haha!! that was you!!. Nice question. You asked it very well.
Why? Maybe they got a bunch of modern gold submissions? The average value of a single coin submitted was just under $900 so it wasn't a huge number of ASE's. Maybe it was the restoration service. They did mention that coin show submissions were up 77% Higher value coins get submitted at shows and want immediate results...hence the push back and delay on regular submissions.
<< <i>What I thought was most interesting (and I asked this on the conf call) was the VALUE of submissions was up a staggering 60%. From $320 million to little over $500 million. Yet coin submission totals were relatively the same.
Did the Pogues crack and submit their 1804 Dollar a dozen times in hope of a 69?
Any thoughts as to why?
Haha!! that was you!!. Nice question. You asked it very well.
Why? Maybe they got a bunch of modern gold submissions? The average value of a single coin submitted was just under $900 so it wasn't a huge number of ASE's. Maybe it was the restoration service. They did mention that coin show submissions were up 77% Higher value coins get submitted at shows and want immediate results...hence the push back and delay on regular submissions. >>
I was thinking it could be the new reconsideration service. Lots of high dollar coins out there in old green holders that deserve upgrades, but the owners were always unwilling to crack them out or have them regraded and risk their coins coming back in a new holder at the same grade it was before. The reconsideration service allows those nice coins in old green holders to be reviewed and only put in a new holder if upgraded and collectors can keep the coin as is in the older holder if not an upgrade. Win-win for the collector and a big win for PCGS given the fees they charge for the service. Not sure they provide a breakdown of how much value was sent in under this service, but I'm guessing it's pretty significant.
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
What is the fee if it does not upgrade? Just some small fee?
What is the fee if it does? 1% plus some fee?
I think you are on to something here
<< <i>What is the fee if it does not upgrade? Just some small fee?
>>
Same grading fees as if it were a raw coin or regular regrade.
<< <i>
What is the fee if it does? 1% plus some fee?
>>
The normal grading fee + 1% guarantee premium
Michael Kittle Rare Coins --- 1908-S Indian Head Cent Grading Set --- No. 1 1909 Mint Set --- Kittlecoins on Facebook --- Long Beach Table 448
<< <i>Yes, well it cost me over $520 to get a 1895 Proof 58 Morgan crossed. Comes out to about a five times increase in fees with the new 1% program, so I am not surprised.
That's like a $40,000 coin. Think of their liability for the life of that coin should there be an issue. 1% seems fair in that regard. >>
My point was that in this case they have a nearly five-fold increase in revenue for doing essentially the same thing and that should impact their profitability. If that does not, I do not know what will.
And what is exactly their increased liability from moving a coin from NGC to PCGS? That they did not see some problem? That is could be a good fake? Isn't that what was covered by the original submission fee and the reason for tiers (based on value) anyway? I am not arguing they are not allowed to raise their prices. God Bless America and all that, but anyway you slice this, it is awful stiff.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes, well it cost me over $520 to get a 1895 Proof 58 Morgan crossed. Comes out to about a five times increase in fees with the new 1% program, so I am not surprised.
That's like a $40,000 coin. Think of their liability for the life of that coin should there be an issue. 1% seems fair in that regard. >>
Exactly!! Why should PCGS create value for the submitter with not much in it for them except increased liability under their guarantee? The coin didn't change one IOTA, but the perceived value did. >>
Again, they are allowed to do anything they want with their prices, and the only point would be that you should expect to see an increase in both revenue and profit with this new policy.
But to your point, isn't this true for any raw coin they grade as well? I would guess that moving it from NGC to PCGS would have a less of a statistical occurrence of a "problem" then a raw coin.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Yes, well it cost me over $520 to get a 1895 Proof 58 Morgan crossed. Comes out to about a five times increase in fees with the new 1% program, so I am not surprised.
That's like a $40,000 coin. Think of their liability for the life of that coin should there be an issue. 1% seems fair in that regard. >>
Exactly!! Why should PCGS create value for the submitter with not much in it for them except increased liability under their guarantee? The coin didn't change one IOTA, but the perceived value did. >>
Again, they are allowed to do anything they want with their prices, and the only point would be that you should expect to see an increase in both revenue and profit with this new policy.
But to your point, isn't this true for any raw coin they grade as well? I would guess that moving it from NGC to PCGS would have a less of a statistical occurrence of a "problem" then a raw coin. >>
Yes and there have been some raw coins [like some ASEs] that got ms70 First Strike that brought $5K on ebay. You gave PCGS a $100 bill and got $5K in change. There have been any number of recent windfalls like that. The au58 1895 Proof Morgan is an exceptionally valued coin for the fee in comparison to a $400 coin which might cross under similar circumstances. Maybe they should raise the submission fee to $500 for a coin like that. Hopefully if they've done their business properly, the chance of paying off on the guarantee should be slim. Don't you think that reward should be commensurate with risk?