No that's Rob, what he does he does to borderline fanaticism, so if you're debating him, he believes he's right and will have hours and hours of research behind him.
Printable View
OCA share price UP 40% from recent lows …..that’s pretty good
Maybe not ….like ARV doesn’t really change things from a business perspective for OCA either
But Suzanne might be bringing good fortune to Oceania …..needs something to go Oceania’s way and she might be that catalyst
Ryman thought they had appointed a good CEO a few years ago but his past life was a bit chequered …..‘unlucky’ it’s called ……and the bad luck continued at Ryman eh
So good Suzanne started on a good footing ….if she is a lucky one and starts presenting a much improved story things might come right for Oceania ….. sentiment is key
The value is either there or it is not, the luck you are talking (seriously or in jest... I can't tell which) is the psychological aspect of investing which influences the prices we see. The value has not changed since the stock price was at 50c to now, only ppls opinion of what the value is worth has changed
I think it helps a lot to have a clear runway to allow the business to keep doing what it has been doing.
Confident and competent would be appreciated. Liz and Brett were a dry combo.
I would never be that bold & things can change over time. But based on the ARV takeover bid at the moment yes.
Definitely not $2.60.
The problem for OCA is that they weren't the takeover target, ARV was. Is their more appetite? Maybe.
My valuation wasn't based on a takeover but that was possible but on a 12 month horizon with interest rates likely to turn.
That's the ARV offer premium to SP, whereas the offer is discount of 0.83x to NTA, which would equate to $1.17 OCA SP. Still cheap as.
If I had ARV I'd be seriously pissed off with the offer for them, like basically selling out for less than the assets value, let alone future earnings.
A problem for OCA? More like OCA dodged a bullet and hopefully doesn't have such weak kneed Directors as ARV in the event that a takeover offer was made.
So much short term SP this, SP that, thinking around here. Only good thing about the SP is how amazingly cheap it is for anyone with a longer term outlook.
All I’ll say about ‘value’ is its rather subjective isn’t it
Brett might have been pretty onto it but the business per se and the share price went nowhere during his tenure.
Always had something (often external) to blame ….bad luck / ill fortune and all that …he a bit like the Ryman guy was just unlucky. That doesn’t often change.
Hopefully this Suzanne is blessed with good fortune and it rubs off on Oceania
No comment re Liz
Liz just seemed to read (badly) off a sheet of paper in front of her and Brett seems to know plenty but is not ceo material.
My concern is that they are doing just ok, I’m likely to benefit from it very nicely but I can’t help but think we could be missing out on better use of the opportunity oca has.
Doesn’t need to be over selling it but I’m comparing to Jeff Greenslade from HGH, he really gave me a lot of confidence.
I probably got into OCA for the wrong reasons but SR kept me in and gave me confidence to add.
Intrinsic value is the present value of the estimated future cash flows, discounted at whatever rate an individual chooses. So value is pretty subjective as it depends on assumptions and the discount rate chosen. It's certainly no exact science - hence why Daytr giving a 99c intrinsic value estimate is so absurd.
But say you require a high return, make conservative assumptions, and require a decent margin of safety, well then you're bound to do well.
I don't claim to know exactly what OCA is worth (no one can), but I am certain of one thing - OCA is worth a hellva lot more than $440m.
Oh yeah good point, I guess it's easy to get bogged down in details. I was thinking from a earnings growth aspect which in reality will play out only one way regardless of anyone's assumptions, but yeah everyone's required return will be different and their desired time period.
In that case winner I stand corrected.
Expanding on what I just wrote, and although present value of future cash flows may be the theoretically correct measure of value, I don't really do it, on account of I'm not really bright enough, for a simpleton like me I'm more likely to introduce more errors and come up with higher levels of inaccurate results.
I've been trying to focus on asset value in combination with earnings power value as outlayed in "Value Investing: From Graham to Buffett and Beyond (Bruce Greenwald)", and even then I'm not the sharpest.
Each to their own and I suspect individuals will look at their target exit price depending on where they bought. I.e if you bought in the low 50s you probably have a different perspective than someone who bought over $1. But of course this isn't the way to value a company.
So you are saying no one should value a company? Of course no one can do it exactly, and value can change with circumstances, but you & SailorBoy do like stating the obvious.
But you say you can estimate future casflows...
How has casflow grown in the last few years?
For those who missed my point, NTA has grown all the time the shareprice has lost 2/3rds it's value, so NTA growth is not a driver of the SP and as you rightly point out cashflow is and yet you ignore the growing gap between fees and the running costs of the villages and the gap is roughly what is generated by the DMF.
So where is this cash being generated to drive the share price so much higher than say the premium paid for ARV?
Winner's Warriors supporter's comparison is so on the money. Those claiming victory in the first five minutes and it's for the great strategy identity by it's supporter's, despite the fact that a 40 knot ARV gale is at their back that is due strengthen at haf time and then the they are in the hands of referee Adrian Orr for some favourable decisions.
It's mostly sitting on the balance sheet easily recorded in NAV. Everyone knows OCA is sitting on a large amount of unsold stock. This will be turned into cash as property volumes pick up.
This reads like all the people who told me I was just lucky to buy crypto early. It's all luck.
As a proud Warrior fan I can tell you that takeovers and interest rate cycles changing were always part of the thesis for buying OCA.
It's been about buying a stock criminally undervalued because of market sentiment. Yes we'll take a victory lap when the stocks up 40%.
Up the Wahs!
one should be asking if oceania is such good value why it was not the takeover target considering arv and oca are similar out of all the RV'S
Doesn't matter bull..SP is already at 71c
Then you are misinterpreting what I am saying.
I have said it was undervalued for quite some time, if the property market looked like improving, but the drivers of change in sentiment wasn't going to be the business model, or that suddenly the market has a light bulb moment.
It was going to be about the macro environment and that trigger, which could be a false start but I doubt it, was Adrian Orr's recent statement on the outlook for interest rates.
So, I suppose for those who ignore the macro, then yes they got lucky. Those who could see that the current cycle is coming to an end and bought on that basis, well done.
The same could be said for those who sold after the Covid sugar rush & those who held even though we were entering a very sharp increase in interest rates and you didn't have to predict that, Adrian Orr told us as much, remember he borrowed the phrase, go hard, go early.
So I totally agree re your first statement of unsold stock. But what if Orr had said rates needed to go back up? Anyway we are in agreement it's the macro driving change in sentiment and market value.
I think of risk in terms of the likelihood of permanent loss of capital, or long run underperformance. So no one metric per se, but a combination of factors that give me a general idea of the level of risk.
Volatility in the downward direction is not a permanent loss of capital.
So much money coming from Arvida.....!
You’ve changed your tune pretty quickly from dog stock, dog stock
Always my dog stock..lol
(X-)Men's best friend?
Always ... anything make money...
Agreed. Poor form. Absolutely no need to rub people's face in it
Congrats to all recent investors... zooming to one buck.
Great news for those who bought in the recent doldrums. Also encouraging news for myself, who bought when the price was waaaaaay higher. Still a way to go though, so I won’t be breaking out the Lindauer just yet.
Bought quite a few more this morning to add to what was a modest holding
Fundamentals still suck but hey why not ride the market sentiment …it’s one of those stocks and has been good to me over the years. OCA owes me nothing
And new CEO might be the one who brings good fortune to Oceania
Be $1 soon
yea i used to rant 1 before 2
Just changed my signature as a reminder not to get too carried away
OCA could easily get back to $1.50 plus …one never knows
Winner are you Jim Cramer?
The point I was making is this. Wealth is neither created nor destroyed when punters transact at higher/lower prices. You become wealthier over the long run when the intrinsic value of your shares increases.
His "worth" doesn't change by the minute, the marketable price of his shares does though. Berkshire's value as a company only changes about 10% a year.
Also can you provide evidence that Buffett has ever sold a single share?
Baa_Baa wise words still echoing through my head …. ’probably bottomed, inflation is falling, property market is bottoming - some rising, and the gap to NTA is closing. Buying cheap OCA might soon be a thing of the past’.
No might about it ….Buying OCA cheap is a thing of the past
After 7 years sp almost at its listing price of .79c. Well below most peoples expectations one would think. Hope thy get it right here on in.
the float moves in cycles ... spooky
52 week high is 80 cents
That’ll be taken out tomorrow
Heaps of Arvida money still to come OCA way
Once they have enough OCA...the left over money will go to HGH and RYM
Not a bad couple of weeks to have a concentrated position in OCA.
I wonder if Maverick will return soon?
Yep iits turning out to be a great exercise. It has even piqued the interest of my acquaintances at LSE who might provide this thread as raw data to the students as part of their Behavioural Economics / Finance studies …. If so be interesting what conclusions they come to about fandom and investing
Especially when you have a lot of them. :t_up:
Well let's put it this way. Ideally things go up very quickly, and go down very quickly as to be able to benefit from the fluctuations by adjusting your portfolio accordingly.
My pockets are bursting at the seams with OCA after months of accumulating at rock bottom prices, so to see OCA finally start to see some share price appreciation isn't the worst thing.
I said ideally.
A trader makes financial decisions based on the belief that they think they know the direction the market will be headed in the short run.
An intelligent investor makes his decisions based on the current market price, and what he thinks the business is worth. He doesn't pretend like he knows what might happen in the short-term regarding the stock price, but he may stand to benefit from the folly of Mr Market. The greater the volatility, the greater the potential to transact at advantageous prices hence why I said ideally.
Speaking on aspects of fandom, I was thinking about words and adjectives describing ppl who always support the winning team and set about to truncheoning the losing team, in relation to investing it would be positive or negative on a particular stock based on the ebb and flow of the stock price.
So far I have:
Flip flopping bandwagon fan, a fair weather friend, a warm water warrior (runs at the posibilty of cold icy water), a fickle fashion follower, a Sunshine supporter, a hype follower, a front runner fan, and a wagon jumper.
Any how, my contribution to the fandom.....
Up the wahs!!! 😁
Disclaimer: meant with the best of comedic intention, in no way designed to offend any person, sports fan or investor.
Meanwhile Tina "you're simply the best" Turner never flags or changes her tune
Big chunk (500k @ $0.8) for sale. Say this will put the brakes on the gains we have seen over the past few days. Been fun tho!
$0.80 would be a great place to take pause and try to cement some of these gains.
You get the feeling a lot of ARV funds are being dumped into OCA without much thought for the price. I think $0.80 is still good long term value but you have to expect a large pullback at some point.
But you keep saying you don't know what the business is worth, in your words, nobody does.
Consistency seems to be an issue for you as your thesis changes with the wind.
That's not trading, it's churn. 🤣
You don't think traders look at value?
Some do, some don't and just trade technically.
Best not put things in boxes, especially when your own carton seems to be elastic, which personally I don't think is a bad thing, as being adaptable to conditions is what the 'intelligent' investor would do. (I loved the self adoration by the way).
There is no shame in that, particularly if you are buying dividend yield stocks. In the six months to June 2023 the SP500 rose 10%. That is for 500 companies. However if you strip out 7 of those companies - Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Nvida, Amazon, Meta and Tesla - the return was actually negative.
I do wonder if the worm will turn. Former stock market behomeths like the oil companies (7 sisters), IBM, Nokia, the telephone operators, Brierley in NZ etc all came back down to earth.
The low-ball offer for ARV has certainly given a fillip to OCA. My least successful holding is actually now in the blue. Yay. I hope it is not temporary, but who knows in this market.