FGE.to - Fortress Paper (formerly FTP.to)

[triedtestedand]

PS ->  If/when this LSQ mill deal closes, isn't there a $25M unsecured convertible debenture subscription that goes to corporate (Fortress Paper) without being tied to the cellulose (Fortress Global) subsidiary?

 

http://www.fortresspaper.com/images/pdfs/releases/NewsReleases_2012/NewsRelease_Jan31_2012.pdf

 

I ask ... as wouldn't this add to corporate liquidity that they could use without constraint? 

 

Of course (as someone else has already noted), whoever is signing up for it would be getting a much better priced deal than in January. As would IQ, who's supposed to get 715K of warrants.  Maybe they're the ones shorting this ... ;-)

[bathtime]

RBC Dominion Securities 5/15/12

 

Q112 results below expectations - Fortress reported adjusted EPS of ($0.64) in Q112 compared to our estimate of ($0.33) and consensus of ($0.26). Adjusted EBITDA of ($1.8MM) was worse than our ($1.1MM) forecast and consensus of $1.8MM. Strong performance from wallpapers was more than offset by continued cost pressure in the banknote operations and a slower-than-expected ramp-up of DP production at Thurso. Paper shipments of 15.3k mt were up 17% q/q but flat y/y.

 

Thurso (commodity dissolving pulp) - EBITDA was ($3.5MM) in Q112, down from ($1.3MM) in Q411 and below our forecast of ($1.2MM). Fortress included only the last two weeks of March in its Q1 operating results, so we will have to wait until Q2 to get a better idea of Thurso's cost position. Pulp shipments increased to 35.7k mt from 8.2k mt in Q4 as the mill ramped up production following conversion to DP (71% op. rate in Q1). Commodity DP prices have trended lower over the last two months to ~$1,120/mt and are down 30% since September as ~20% more nameplate capacity has been added globally. We believe pricing momentum stalls at ~$1,3000/mt as prices are then high enough to attract swing capacity into the market.

 

Dresden (wallpaper) - EBITDA was $9.4MM, up from $9.1MM in Q411 and above our estimate of $8.2MM due to strong margins. Shipments of 14.3k mt were 19% higher than Q4 due to record production. Management commented that the order book is "healthy."

 

Landqart (banknotes) - EBITDA generated in Q1 was ($5.2MM), slightly better than the ($7.2MM) in Q411 and our ($6.0MM) estimate. Results were impacted by high mill costs due to low utilization rates caused by a postponement of orders across the banknote industry while the mill faced continued challenges from high raw material costs, the strong Swiss franc, and production issues. Fortress believes operating rates will improve in H212. Following the sale in Q2 of a hydropower asset to a local utility for CHF18MM, Fortress is now "assessing strategic options" for this business that may result in further sales of non-core assets.

 

Balance sheet weakens with net-debt-to-cap of 44% - As of May 14, Fortress has spent $158MM so far on the $213MM Thurso conversion (incl. co-gen). The total project cost was revised upwards by $3MM (an improvement on the $30MM bump last quarter).

 

Paul Quinn, RBC Dominion Securities

[bathtime]

RBC Dominion Securities 5/16/12

 

Maintain Outperform but trimming target - While Fortress is trading at only 2.9x our trend EBITDA forecast of $172MM, the valuation is somewhat understandable considering that the company's ambitious targets have been consistently missed. Additionally, continued pricing uncertainty for commodity DP (in light of capacity additions) and persistent cost pressures in the banknote business continue to weigh down on the story.

 

Lowering EBITDA estimates - We have become even less confident in management's targeted cost position for Thurso/LSQ. Q212E from $21MM to $6MM. FY12E from $77MM to $44MM. FY13E from $116MM to $103MM.

 

Considerable upside potential if some of management's targets are met - While Fortress hasn't made it easy on itself with very high performance goals, we believe the company will eventually get close to its targeted cost position, but it will take some time. However, we suspect the market will not pay up for lower costs until they begin to show up in financial performance, especially considering how Thurso's conversion cost guidance has continued to increase over time. Fortress capitalized all DP revenue and costs for most of Q1 so the market will have to wait until Q2 to get a sense of real-world operating costs at Thurso. Commodity DP prices have trended lower over the last two months to ~$1,120/mt and are down 30% since September as ~20% more nameplate capacity has been added globally. We believe pricing momentum stalls at ~$1,300/mt as prices are then high enough to attract swing capacity into the market.

 

Breaking into specialty will not be easy - Fortress is targeting placing ~50% of its production into the high-alpha specialty market within 3-5 years. This market has very high barriers to entry from a technical, cost, and customer perspective, so success is by no means guaranteed. Fortress will be facing off against Sateri and Sappi which also have big plans to grow in specialty.

 

Q112 results below expectations - Fortress reported adjusted EBITDA of ($1.8MM), below our ($1.1MM) forecast and consensus of $1.8MM.

 

Valuation: Our price target is based on a blended 4.0x EV/EBITDA multiple of our trend EBITDA estimate of $172MM (85%) and our revised 2012 EBITDA estimate of $44MM (15%). We believe Fortress should trade at a multiple below the bottom of the typical Canadian Paper & Forest Products trading range (4.5x to 6.5x), reflecting the company's smaller size, uncertain outlook for commodity DP pricing, and risks associated with the LSQ mill conversion.

 

We are using a 2012 commodity DP price assumption of US$1,150/mt and a long-term dissolving pulp price of US$1,250/mt.

 

Price Target Impediments: New capacity additions in commodity dissolving pulp may have a significant negative impact on prices and materially affect Fortress' profitability. A reduction in banknote consumption driven by higher growth rates in non-cash payment systems, or a faster-than-expected transition to polymer vs. cotton-based paper banknotes would likely increase competition to secure cotton-based banknote paper contracts, negatively impacting margins. Slower-than-expected demand growth in non-woven wallpaper base, caused by a change from recent design trends in Europe or a slowdown in housing construction and renovation activity, may negatively impact margins. New capacity additions in security or wallpaper industries would have a negative impact on prices. Raw material costs, including pulp and synthetic fibers, are determined in large part by non-controllable factors, which can substantially impact operating results. A significant reduction of purchases by any of Fortress' largest customers could have a material adverse effect on Fortress' business, financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations.

 

Paul Quinn, RBC Dominion Securities

[roundball100]

There was a large trade today of  ~150K shares at ~ $17.70 ... which got me to thinking who owns/buying the stock (and believes the story), and conversely who's selling (and has soured, or capitulated).   

 

From Morningstar.ca (which shows top 10 holdings) and SEDAR (which shows >10% holdings) the following #'s are provided, based on reportings from past 6mo:

 

...

 

 

Was surprised not to see Liberty among the top 10 holders.  (Just kidding!)

 

Keep up the great commentary and technical insight on this thread!

 

[alertmeipp]

RBC Dominion Securities 5/16/12

 

Maintain Outperform but trimming target - While Fortress is trading at only 2.9x our trend EBITDA forecast of $172MM, the valuation is somewhat understandable considering that the company's ambitious targets have been consistently missed. Additionally, continued pricing uncertainty for commodity DP (in light of capacity additions) and persistent cost pressures in the banknote business continue to weigh down on the story.

 

Lowering EBITDA estimates - We have become even less confident in management's targeted cost position for Thurso/LSQ. Q212E from $21MM to $6MM. FY12E from $77MM to $44MM. FY13E from $116MM to $103MM.

 

Considerable upside potential if some of management's targets are met - While Fortress hasn't made it easy on itself with very high performance goals, we believe the company will eventually get close to its targeted cost position, but it will take some time. However, we suspect the market will not pay up for lower costs until they begin to show up in financial performance, especially considering how Thurso's conversion cost guidance has continued to increase over time. Fortress capitalized all DP revenue and costs for most of Q1 so the market will have to wait until Q2 to get a sense of real-world operating costs at Thurso. Commodity DP prices have trended lower over the last two months to ~$1,120/mt and are down 30% since September as ~20% more nameplate capacity has been added globally. We believe pricing momentum stalls at ~$1,300/mt as prices are then high enough to attract swing capacity into the market.

 

Breaking into specialty will not be easy - Fortress is targeting placing ~50% of its production into the high-alpha specialty market within 3-5 years. This market has very high barriers to entry from a technical, cost, and customer perspective, so success is by no means guaranteed. Fortress will be facing off against Sateri and Sappi which also have big plans to grow in specialty.

 

Q112 results below expectations - Fortress reported adjusted EBITDA of ($1.8MM), below our ($1.1MM) forecast and consensus of $1.8MM.

 

Valuation: Our price target is based on a blended 4.0x EV/EBITDA multiple of our trend EBITDA estimate of $172MM (85%) and our revised 2012 EBITDA estimate of $44MM (15%). We believe Fortress should trade at a multiple below the bottom of the typical Canadian Paper & Forest Products trading range (4.5x to 6.5x), reflecting the company's smaller size, uncertain outlook for commodity DP pricing, and risks associated with the LSQ mill conversion.

 

We are using a 2012 commodity DP price assumption of US$1,150/mt and a long-term dissolving pulp price of US$1,250/mt.

 

Price Target Impediments: New capacity additions in commodity dissolving pulp may have a significant negative impact on prices and materially affect Fortress' profitability. A reduction in banknote consumption driven by higher growth rates in non-cash payment systems, or a faster-than-expected transition to polymer vs. cotton-based paper banknotes would likely increase competition to secure cotton-based banknote paper contracts, negatively impacting margins. Slower-than-expected demand growth in non-woven wallpaper base, caused by a change from recent design trends in Europe or a slowdown in housing construction and renovation activity, may negatively impact margins. New capacity additions in security or wallpaper industries would have a negative impact on prices. Raw material costs, including pulp and synthetic fibers, are determined in large part by non-controllable factors, which can substantially impact operating results. A significant reduction of purchases by any of Fortress' largest customers could have a material adverse effect on Fortress' business, financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations.

 

Paul Quinn, RBC Dominion Securities

 

Target price is $31. Market has lost fate in management to deliver their promise.

[Liberty]

 

Was surprised not to see Liberty among the top 10 holders.  (Just kidding!)

 

Keep up the great commentary and technical insight on this thread!

 

Ha! Sadly, my few thousands of shares don't qualify. Maybe someday if price keeps going down...

[Liberty]

Analyst projections are pretty worthless. I sometimes find the reports useful for factual due diligence that I can't always do myself (ie. "we went to the plant and saw that it was running well...", construction is progressing well, etc). But other projections? Meh. Go back a year or two ago and see if they predicted what's happening now. So now they can predict what'll happen in a year?

 

I was reading some Howard Marks early memos today, and he's spot on on this. Analysts just predict more of the same, whatever that is. When things are going great, it'll keep going great, and when it's going badly, it'll keep going badly. Less risk to their jobs predicting like that. They pretty much miss all the inflections, reversals and changes of direction, which is what would be useful to know in advance...

 

Bottom line for me is, I believe these assets are worth a lot more than what I'm paying for, and I trust management to execute and keep adding value, and be a good stewart of capital. Doesn't mean it'll always move in a straight line without any setback, but I think the probability of permanent loss of capital is extremely low and the probability of a great outcome is very high.

 

But that's just my 2 ounces of dissolved cellulose...

[alertmeipp]

Analyst projections are pretty worthless. I sometimes find the reports useful for factual due diligence that I can't always do myself (ie. "we went to the plant and saw that it was running well...", construction is progressing well, etc). But other projections? Meh. Go back a year or two ago and see if they predicted what's happening now. So now they can predict what'll happen in a year?

 

I was reading some Howard Marks early memos today, and he's spot on on this. Analysts just predict more of the same, whatever that is. When things are going great, it'll keep going great, and when it's going badly, it'll keep going badly. Less risk to their jobs predicting like that. They pretty much miss all the inflections, reversals and changes of direction, which is what would be useful to know in advance...

 

Bottom line for me is, I believe these assets are worth a lot more than what I'm paying for, and I trust management to execute and keep adding value, and be a good stewart of capital. Doesn't mean it'll always move in a straight line without any setback, but I think the probability of permanent loss of capital is extremely low and the probability of a great outcome is very high.

 

But that's just my 2 ounces of dissolved cellulose...

 

are they running into possible liquidity issue or is the issue overblown? It's a bad time to have cash crunch.

[Liberty]

are they running into possible liquidity issue or is the issue overblown? It's a bad time to have cash crunch.

 

It's tighter than I would like, but as it is, I don't think it's that bad (and it's more than priced in anyway), and it's a problem that is eminently surmountable and temporary (it's not as if Thurso is years away from full production). Who knows, maybe other big problems could surface and compound it... But based on what is currently known, I don't think it'll be a big problem, and they have lots of ways to deal with it (with dillution as a last resort - but even that wouldn't be the end of the world since you are paying such a low price and have such a big margin of safety, IMO).

 

I'm also taking into account that this is a very big transition for the company, and because of the planning fallacy*, stuff is going to take longer and cost more. But if the end result is worth it, I can be patient, and it's not as if this was normal operations and liquidity was a bit tight. If they get to normal production, liquidity shouldn't be a problem at all (we're not talking about a business that has paper thin margins and lots of leverage during normal operations). They are more vulnerable now, but it's not the normal state of this animal.

 

Some people might want to wait for the vulnerable phase to end before investing, and that's understandable, but as Buffett says, you pay a high price for a rosy consensus, and by the time it's clear that the transition period is successfully over, price could be much higher.

 

 

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_fallacy

[alertmeipp]

are they running into possible liquidity issue or is the issue overblown? It's a bad time to have cash crunch.

 

It's tighter than I would like, but as it is I don't think it's that bad (and it's more than priced in anyway), and it's a problem that is eminently surmountable and temporary (it's not as if Thurso is years away from full production). Who knows, maybe other big problems could surface and compound this. But based on what is currently known, I don't think it'll be a big problem and they have lots of ways to deal with it (with dillution as a last resort - but even that wouldn't be the end of the world since you are paying such a low price and have such a big margin of safety, IMO).

 

I'm also taking into account that this is a very big transition for the company, and because of the planning fallacy*, stuff is going to take longer and cost more. But if the end result is worth it, I can be patient, and it's not as if this was normal operations and liquidity was a problem. If they get to normal production, liquidity shouldn't be a problem at all (we're not talking about a business that has paper thin margins and lots of leverage during normal operations).

 

 

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_fallacy

 

Thanks Liberty.

[tombgrt]

Lib, you are right but we can't deny that Chad has a serious case of 'planning falacy' with extreme overestimates of EBITDA projections, costs overruns, construction delays and the like. And all of them multiple times and some pretty badly. I've said in the past (december, january) that he was overly optimistic and now, as you said, the market is extrapolating the situation forever and gives him no credit. We know very well where this current share price is coming from. Still, I believe my MoS was sufficient at $30-32 and it should be a lot higher now at $18, although some delays and cost overruns made an impact on current liquidity and future profitability.

 

Let's just sit back and watch things unfold now! ;)

[Liberty]

Lib, you are right but we can't deny that Chad has a serious case of 'planning falacy' with extreme overestimates of EBITDA projections, costs overruns, construction delays and the like. And all of them multiple times and some pretty badly. I've said in the past (december, january) that he was overly optimistic and now, as you said, the market is extrapolating the situation forever and gives him no credit. We know very well where this current share price is coming from. Still, I believe my MoS was sufficient at $30-32 and it should be a lot higher now at $18, although some delays and cost overruns made an impact on current liquidity and future profitability.

 

Let's just sit back and watch things unfold now! ;)

 

Here's how I look at this, let me know if you think I'm off-base :)

 

Like investing, running a business is a lot about having a good process. It's dangerous to judge yourself or others only on outcome because in the short-term some people with bad process are lucky and some people with good process are unlucky. But over the long-term, those with good process usually come out on top (in the long-term, the market is a process-vetting machine?).

 

So while it's true that there were cost overruns and delays, let's look at the kinds we faced:

 

Out of mgmt's control

-Unfavorable currency changes (Canadian dollar, Swiss Franc... but currency doesn't move in the same direction forever, as we saw with the CAD this week, and this could eventually help FTP)

-Lower cotton/DP prices (not surprising considering the macro environment + the fact that after record highs, lots of farmers will plant more cotton, but the pendulum should swing back, and FTP never projected these high prices to continue, so not a surprise)

-Delayed security paper orders (I don't think there's much management can do about it. The good news is that it appears that once printing has begun, series can last for many years)

-Spontaneous province-wide strike for about a week (not much to do here)

-Change in the mood of the Canadian market from greed to fear (TSX down 15% in past year, TSX venture down 35%). Even with good news, FTP was bound to be dragged down at least some.

 

Maybe under mgmt's control

-Engineering firm's screw up for co-gen (maybe there was something they could do to avoid this one, hard to say)

-Used parts for cogen not available so they had to buy new, more expensive ones (maybe they could have locked those down better, but without knowing what happened exactly, it's hard to tell. Maybe they did things right and got screwed by a counter-party, who knows?)

 

Mgmt is to blame

-Publicly announcing aggressive targets for conversion, rather than average or conservative targets (afaik, the thurso conversion is currently pretty on target compared to industry averages, though it is behind the aggressive timeline that was originally given. Maybe being aggressive lit a fire under them and helped them perform better because of the accountability of a public statement, or maybe they should have kept that target private and instead under-promised)

-When journalists ask for projections, it's best to say nothing (because even if all you give is your best estimate based on current information, people will interpret it as a promise and blame you if it doesn't happen exactly the way you said, leading to disappointment. When speaking to someone rational, you can make predictions with uncertain outcomes, but the general public looks at things in a binary way)

 

I'm probably forgetting something..

 

Anyway. My point is that if most of the bad stuff had happened because of the way management did things, I would be more critical. But as it is, I think they had mostly a good process and did things right, but they still had somewhat unfavorable outcomes. Since I'm not seeing any problems that aren't surmountable and/or temporary, I think we should be fine.

 

But as Geoff Gannon says, investing is ultimately a cash to cash transaction. And since you can't change just one thing (ceteris paribus is a nice construct in theory, but doesn't happen in practice), the question is, how much will these problems matter in the end all things considered? If FTP had hit every single aggressive milestone and currency had never moved against them and the macro environment was better-looking (higher cotton/DP prices) and central banks hadn't delayed currency series, etc.. Things would certainly look much better, but my average cost would probably be at least in the 40s, probably in the 50s or 60s, maybe higher, rather than in the 20s as it is now. So from a cash to cash perspective, would I actually have done better in the end in that rosier scenario? Maybe, but maybe not.

 

Bad stuff happened, but the price went down to more than compensate for it, IMO, and most of it didn't shake my confidence in management because a lot of times there wasn't much they could do about it. With hindsight, we can no doubt find things they could have done differently, but overall I feel they are being prudent enough (the way they structure their deals and the prices they pay for their assets provide them a good margin of safety, IMO. They aren't building from scratch billion-dollar plants that will end up high-cost producers) and their good process should lead to good outcomes over time.

 

I agree that at this point what this company needs is a bit of time to allow things to unfold. I've heard from a few people who sold their shares before the conversion of Thurso was completed and others who sold before the ramp up was complete. I understand that dropping share prices can be scary, but if shareholders lack the patience to wait for a company's biggest asset to be up and running, they may lack the patience required to do well as investors. It's not for nothing that Buffett and Munger say that the hardest thing is sitting on your ass and doing nothing.

[HJ]

Pretty new to the specialty paper sector, so please pardon my ignorance, but other than the presentation on Fortress website, how does one get comfortable that Thurso and LSQ will be competitive cost wise vs other potential capacity being planned?

[colinwalt]

@Liberty

 

Very well put together - pretty much how I'm thinking about this - I actually started to try and write up something along these lines, but in the end didn't have the time - I also don't think there was any chance it would have come out anything like as well as yours.

 

I just hope we're not all providing each other with some seriously false "positive reinforcement"

[gokou3]

I am trying to view the recent company presentation again but it has been removed from the company website.  Anyone has saved a copy himself?

[Liberty]

I just hope we're not all providing each other with some seriously false "positive reinforcement"

 

I'm always afraid of that, but I try to actively seek out contrary opinion and so far I haven't found much that was convincing (most of it is just chartists and technical people, and that's when they even give a reason for being bearish). But if anyone here has something, please post!

[Liberty]

I am trying to view the recent company presentation again but it has been removed from the company website.  Anyone has saved a copy himself?

 

Here's the one from March: http://depositfiles.com/files/huorxb4rw

[bonechip1]

Great post Liberty.  Thurso's 4 month delay and cost over-run by a factor of about 1/3 from initial estimates is disappointing to see as an FTP investor.  And granted, the recent slide probably isn't totally related to the cost over-run, but even the oilsands producers weren't punished this hard for cost over-runs on their big expansion projects in the last decade of multiples of initial estimates. 

 

http://noelmaurer.typepad.com/aab/2009/09/the-private-sector-is-bad-at-big-stuff-too.html

 

Attached is another presentation you might want to revisit again - the management presentation of the Thurso acquisition from April 15, 2010.  FTP management at the time of Thurso announcement was using a long term dissolving price of $900 per tonne in their models, and we are materially above that currently.  Also consider that 36% of Thurso production is being sold at VSF spot price less $1,000, which historically has been about a $200 premium to DP spot price.  If their Chinese customers honor their contracts with floors of $1,200, which I believe they will, thinking about it from a game theory point of view, management's estimates on the long term trend of dissolving pulp have been quite conservative which certainly gives them some credibility in estimates.  The proof will be in the delivered cash costs when the mill is fully ramped up.

 

Lastly, you know a stock is hated when an analyst downgrades his rating on FTP because FTP management now is estimating Thurso operating at full capacity "in the middle of 2012", compared to management previously saying "at the end of June".  Downgrading a stock for this reason is as stupid as if I gave my daughter sh*t for coming home at midnight when she said she'd be home at 12:00 am (hypothetical, she's not a teenager yet).  Ridiculous. 

FortressPaperSpecialtyCellulose_April_15_2010.pdf

[Liberty]

Hey Bonechip, nice to see you posting again. I think you were one of the people who initially made me check out FTP, so thanks (but if it doesn't work out in the end, I'll blame you  :P ;) ).

 

Also consider that 36% of Thurso production is being sold at VSF spot price less $1,000, which historically has been about a $200 premium to DP spot price.

 

That's a good point. Another thing that isn't mentioned often is that even within its price collar, FTP isn't selling DP at just the basic spot price that we often see quoted. They are selling it at the price of "comparable quality" DP.

 

So f.ex.  (hypothetical numbers), if DP spot price is 1200, but DP with an alpha of 96% (very high) sells for 1300 and that's what they have, they'll get the higher price. That's part of their contract. It's not quite as big a premium as if they got certified on the specialty market, but it can make a difference.

[alertmeipp]

So, why was Chad getting 16millions of compensation at 2010?

 

[Liberty]

So, why was Chad getting 16millions of compensation at 2010?

 

I'm not sure the number was exactly that, but it was high mostly because they got thurso, afaik, which was a great deal and game changer for the company. Iirc, some of that was part of a multi-year compensation plan. That's more money than I would strictly like, but if the deal turns out to be worth hundreds of millions over the long term,  it's worth rewarding the key man who made it happen. I do wish everybody was like Buffett on compensation, though.

 

He did give up all bonuses for 2011.

 

Edit: see here http://www.stockhouse.com/Bullboards/MessageDetailThread.aspx?sv=2&p=0&m=29845189&r=0&s=FTP&t=LIST

[lessthaniv]

So, why was Chad getting 16millions of compensation at 2010?

 

I'm not sure the number was exactly that, but it was high mostly because they got thurso, afaik, which was a great deal and game changer for the company. Iirc, some of that was part of a multi-year compensation plan. That's more money than I would strictly like, but if the deal turns out to be worth hundreds of millions over the long term,  it's worth rewarding the key man who made it happen. I do wish everybody was like Buffett on compensation, though.

 

He did give up all bonuses for 2011.

 

Edit: see here http://www.stockhouse.com/Bullboards/MessageDetailThread.aspx?sv=2&p=0&m=29845189&r=0&s=FTP&t=LIST

 

It was $16M in 2010.

It was also $1M in 2009 and $1.3M in 2011.

[Liberty]

Bought a few hundred more at 17.05 this morning. I thought it was cheap at 30, so this is just a gift. Any problems they're having right now are more than priced in at this level, IMHO, and a patient holder who can wait a few years should be amply rewarded.

[tombgrt]

Did the same Lib.  :) Average now $24. I am buying 3-4 times more shares a time now than I did at $28-32. Almost out of ammo tho! I'm either brave and stupid or just brave.  :D

[Liberty]

Did the same Lib.  :) Average now $24. I am buying 3-4 times more shares a time now than I did at $28-32. Almost out of ammo tho! I'm either brave and stupid or just brave.  :D

 

The frustrating thing is that there's something else that I really want to be buying right now, but I try to be rational about it and compare that opportunity to my other best ideas, and right now FTP is so cheap that it keeps coming on top. I wish I had come into this with 50% cash like Parsad.. :) Every time I resolve to start accumulating cash, stuff I like becomes too cheap to pass.. Oh well, it's not optimal, but it should turn out well in the end.