You are an idiot, forward EPS is not a fact and non-GAAP EPS is a distortion, both are used to mask valuation. Tobin's Q and the other valuation metrics used are for that purpose.
But you are an idiot, so what else in news. Oh buy the momentum!
You are an idiot, forward EPS is not a fact and non-GAAP EPS is a distortion, both are used to mask valuation. Tobin's Q and the other valuation metrics used are for that purpose.
But you are an idiot, so what else in news. Oh buy the momentum!
1. Non-GAAP EPS is a factual number. You may not like it, but it's a real thing.
2. Tobin's Q is not used to mask valuation.
Oh, Snap!
Reality checker wrote:
1. Non-GAAP EPS is a factual number. You may not like it, but it's a real thing.
2. Tobin's Q is not used to mask valuation.
1. Non-GAAP number has no standard, and GAAP is the only number required to be reported and certified by the CEO and CFO in documents submitted to the SEC.
2. Tobin's Q is a valuation model used to uncover the masking of distorted markets (use of non-GAAP accounting, stock buybacks, forward EPS estimates).
Including ridiculous investments like SNAP!
Oh, SNAP. Down 15% on the year and losing money at the rate of $2.93 a share. Perfect investment for the DGTD crowd!
Oh Snap!
Earnie(ings) FactCheck wrote:
Reality checker wrote:1. Non-GAAP EPS is a factual number. You may not like it, but it's a real thing.
2. Tobin's Q is not used to mask valuation.
1. Non-GAAP number has no standard, and GAAP is the only number required to be reported and certified by the CEO and CFO in documents submitted to the SEC.
2. Tobin's Q is a valuation model used to uncover the masking of distorted markets (use of non-GAAP accounting, stock buybacks, forward EPS estimates).
1. It's relevancy may be up to debate, but non-GAAP is still a factual number.
2. Tobin's Q is backward looking. Fact.
Reality checker wrote:
Earnie(ings) FactCheck wrote:1. Non-GAAP number has no standard, and GAAP is the only number required to be reported and certified by the CEO and CFO in documents submitted to the SEC.
2. Tobin's Q is a valuation model used to uncover the masking of distorted markets (use of non-GAAP accounting, stock buybacks, forward EPS estimates).
1. It's relevancy may be up to debate, but non-GAAP is still a factual number.
2. Tobin's Q is backward looking. Fact.
1. non-GAAP is a number, that has no uniform standard
2. Tobin's Q is a model that indicates current level of stock market valuation, which is currently close to two standard deviations above the norm. The Office of Financial Research, Department of Treasury used this metric and the two others mentioned earlier to point out the overvaluation in the market.
Oh Snap!
Festus Bestus wrote:
Reality checker wrote:1. It's relevancy may be up to debate, but non-GAAP is still a factual number.
2. Tobin's Q is backward looking. Fact.
1. non-GAAP is a number, that has no uniform standard
2. Tobin's Q is a model that indicates current level of stock market valuation, which is currently close to two standard deviations above the norm. The Office of Financial Research, Department of Treasury used this metric and the two others mentioned earlier to point out the overvaluation in the market.
1. Correct. Still it is a factual number completely explained by the required financial reports, despite what the troll Igy wants you to believe.
2. False. Tobin's Q is based on past performance, not current levels.
Gruntz wrote:
Festus Bestus wrote:1. non-GAAP is a number, that has no uniform standard
2. Tobin's Q is a model that indicates current level of stock market valuation, which is currently close to two standard deviations above the norm. The Office of Financial Research, Department of Treasury used this metric and the two others mentioned earlier to point out the overvaluation in the market.
1. Correct. Still it is a factual number completely explained by the required financial reports, despite what the troll Igy wants you to believe.
2. False. Tobin's Q is based on past performance, not current levels.
1. False. Despite what DD/Trews wants you to believe. Last year SEC had to clarify non-GAAP usage in earnings reports because of corporate misuse of non-GAAP measures:
https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/guidance/nongaapinterp.htmGruntz wrote:
Festus Bestus wrote:1. non-GAAP is a number, that has no uniform standard
2. Tobin's Q is a model that indicates current level of stock market valuation, which is currently close to two standard deviations above the norm. The Office of Financial Research, Department of Treasury used this metric and the two others mentioned earlier to point out the overvaluation in the market.
1. Correct. Still it is a factual number completely explained by the required financial reports, despite what the troll Igy wants you to believe.
2. False. Tobin's Q is based on past performance, not current levels.
2. False interpretation. I never said Tobin's Q was not based on past data. Where else would the data come from? The point is it is a model that points to security or market valuation. And as stated earlier used in the piece by the Office of Financial Research, Department of Treasury:
https://www.financialresearch.gov/briefs/files/OFRbr-2015-02-quicksilver-markets.pdfDD/Trews wants you to believe in his "never not a time not to buy stocks" foolish meme.
Oh SNAP!
Down again today!
Grunting wrote:
Gruntz wrote:1. Correct. Still it is a factual number completely explained by the required financial reports, despite what the troll Igy wants you to believe.
2. False. Tobin's Q is based on past performance, not current levels.
2. False interpretation. I never said Tobin's Q was not based on past data. Where else would the data come from? The point is it is a model that points to security or market valuation. And as stated earlier used in the piece by the Office of Financial Research, Department of Treasury:
https://www.financialresearch.gov/briefs/files/OFRbr-2015-02-quicksilver-markets.pdfDD/Trews wants you to believe in his "never not a time not to buy stocks" foolish meme.
I wasn't replying to you. Try to keep up.
Read the reply from Grunting. I doubt whether you can keep up. Above your pay grade.
Read it again. That's who I replied to. Try to keep up.
Oh, Snap! Igy gets undressed.
Sure, whatever, DD/Trews...good night.
Uncle Beemer wrote:
Hurricane to hit market?
I guess this week's record highs answered that question.
Karnack Magnificent wrote:
It is amazing that I actually predicted the beginning of what will be a really BIG DECLINE! Way more than 1%. How much, well, how does a 65% decline in the S&P 500 sound?
OK! "So the big decline has gotten off to a slow start". It's going to happen".
"I predicted it 3 years ago". As of today, I'm spot on with my predictions".
"Don't doubt me on this you ignorant passive investors".
mellon wrote:
Karnack Magnificent wrote:It is amazing that I actually predicted the beginning of what will be a really BIG DECLINE! Way more than 1%. How much, well, how does a 65% decline in the S&P 500 sound?
OK! "So the big decline has gotten off to a slow start". It's going to happen".
"I predicted it 3 years ago". As of today, I'm spot on with my predictions".
"Don't doubt me on this you ignorant passive investors".
Go Chiefs!