fareastwarriors Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Anyone who ever had a job in general banking or insurance at a lower level will have the same experience. I work in life for one of the world's biggest insurers and we still use a ms-dos system that connects to all more modern platforms that we use. Everything is based on that system and wouldn't function without it. It's annoying to use, requires the knowledge of an endless list of codes and shortcuts to examine/adjust contracts, you can't give access to brokers by putting it in the cloud, ... There is not enough knowledge, budget and time and way to much carreer risk to change to something else so we keep building on the same old system. It's the same for most other bigger companies and one of the many reasons why companies like IBM will do just fine. Buffett is three years in without a profit. I think this is a great time to buy. IBM will likely outperform the S&P500 by a hefty margin over the next few years. No need to overanalyse these things. hah My company still uses IBM AS400 iSeries Systems. I think the system have been in place since I was born (1988). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spekulatius Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Anyone who ever had a job in general banking or insurance at a lower level will have the same experience. I work in life for one of the world's biggest insurers and we still use a ms-dos system that connects to all more modern platforms that we use. Everything is based on that system and wouldn't function without it. It's annoying to use, requires the knowledge of an endless list of codes and shortcuts to examine/adjust contracts, you can't give access to brokers by putting it in the cloud, ... There is not enough knowledge, budget and time and way to much carreer risk to change to something else so we keep building on the same old system. It's the same for most other bigger companies and one of the many reasons why companies like IBM will do just fine. Buffett is three years in without a profit. I think this is a great time to buy. IBM will likely outperform the S&P500 by a hefty margin over the next few years. No need to overanalyse these things. I think ORCL will continue to outperform IBM. ORCL ERP is more entrenched than IBM's software offerings, management is more driven, no accounting gimmicks, a better balance sheet and similar valuation. For me, ORCL is a clear choice over IBM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwy000 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I agree Spekulatius. Oracle better of the two. I'm long Oracle but boy am I tempted by IBM at these levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Ginni got about $16 million last year; Ellison $77, Mark Hurd $78. Pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwy000 Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Agree they are ridiculous numbers. But unfortunately, if I passed on every company with an overpaid management my portfolio would be empty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombgrt Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Yes compensation is heavy, no wonder management is driven. :p All top management is generally driven, that's why they are top management no? Non-argument? Also, it's not like IBM is highly leveraged so what is the comparison of balance sheets really worth if you look at the bigger picture? Anyway, they are each attractive and both are likely a good long term pick. I just like IBM a little more because it's a Buffett pick that has gone sideways for 3 years with a lot of negative press and a higher dividend to support the downside. Again, I like the simplicity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowIQinvestor Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 What's funny is that the stock going nowhere for years is exactly what Warren wants! IBM will just keep buying back shares at attractive prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCLarkin Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I think ORCL will continue to outperform IBM. ORCL ERP is more entrenched than IBM's software offerings, management is more driven, no accounting gimmicks, a better balance sheet and similar valuation. For me, ORCL is a clear choice over IBM. I assume (b/c IBM is probably 99th percentile) that IBM has significantly better capital allocation skills than ORCL. I also trust IBM management much more than ORCL. Maybe it's just me but I don't trust any CEO who can buy the America's Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palantir Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 ^Why do you trust IBM's management? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCLarkin Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 ^Why do you trust IBM's management? To be clear, I trust them as stewards of my capital. Whether they can navigate the current headwinds, is yet to be seen. - Well thought out capital allocation plan - Set and consistently met their capital allocation plans - Opportunistic buybacks - Voluntarily surrendered earned bonuses - Reasonable pay & bonus structure - Humble CEO who seems to have good character Of course, someone with sharp elbows like Ellison might outmanoeuvre Ginni so ORCL might outperform IBM. I just feel more comfortable with IBM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spekulatius Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 ^Why do you trust IBM's management? To be clear, I trust them as stewards of my capital. Whether they can navigate the current headwinds, is yet to be seen. - Well thought out capital allocation plan - Set and consistently met their capital allocation plans - Opportunistic buybacks - Voluntarily surrendered earned bonuses - Reasonable pay & bonus structure - Humble CEO who seems to have good character Of course, someone with sharp elbows like Ellison might outmanoeuvre Ginni so ORCL might outperform IBM. I just feel more comfortable with IBM. I see this differently. 1) IBM is using financial engineering to meet their EPS target 2) Ginni does not strike me as humble. Her future depends probably more on meeting their EPS target than on IBM LT competitive position. While Larry E is overpaid, ORCL is still an owner operator. I think in the end, he will do what's right for ORCL. ORCL has shown that they know how to do acquisitions. Their business more more geared towards software, while IBM still has to content with a significant but slowly dying hardware business. Despite the high quality business, ORCL almost trades at the same EV/EBIT ratio than IBM and I think FCF yield is comparable as well. Furthermore, ORCL has a clean balance sheet without pension issues like IBM. I like investments to be simple and straightforward, ORCL looks simple, but IBM has many question marks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCLarkin Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 I see this differently. 1) IBM is using financial engineering to meet their EPS target 2) Ginni does not strike me as humble. Her future depends probably more on meeting their EPS target than on IBM LT competitive position. While Larry E is overpaid, ORCL is still an owner operator. I think in the end, he will do what's right for ORCL. ORCL has shown that they know how to do acquisitions. Their business more more geared towards software, while IBM still has to content with a significant but slowly dying hardware business. Despite the high quality business, ORCL almost trades at the same EV/EBIT ratio than IBM and I think FCF yield is comparable as well. Furthermore, ORCL has a clean balance sheet without pension issues like IBM. I like investments to be simple and straightforward, ORCL looks simple, but IBM has many question marks. 1. "Financial Engineering" doesn't mean anything to me. Most of the "Outsiders" are "financial engineers". I think people focus too much on the EPS targets and not enough on the capital allocation targets. They have transparently laid out what they are going to spend on acquisitions, dividends, buybacks, etc. This builds trust. Doesn't mean it is the correct thing to do strategically. But as a shareholder, at least I get to make the judgement call. Re: Oracle vs IBM. I think most of Old Tech has been undervalued at different points in the past few years. I'm not sure ORCL is there now but it is certainly reasonably priced. But I don't think you can compare IBM vs ORCL just on EV/EBIT or FCF. Look at P/S and you will see they are very different businesses. I haven't looked at ORCL in any detail so I can't disagree with you. I know the business but not the stock. Superficially, I don't agree that ORCL is better than IBM at acquisitions though. I consider SUN a bad acquisition and Softlayer a brilliant acquisition. I think IBM gets exceptionally good returns on their acquisitions. I suspect ORCL does too. Neither of them is in the same league as HP though. "You pay a very high price for a cheery consensus." The reason I am attracted to IBM now is that there is so much pessimism around the stock. Not only is sentiment bad but the company is facing severe headwinds. I believe some of those headwinds are temporary and the permanent headwinds are priced into the stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAllen Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 I suggested people read the final AWS versus U.S./IBM opinion but didn't post a link: http://regmedia.co.uk/2013/11/08/amazon_v_ibm_cia_2013.pdf Anyways, it's surprisingly accessible for a large legal document. Some of my favorite parts are: "Amazon had a higher price, but the agency determined that Amazon’s technical proposal was sufficiently superior to IBM’s proposal to warrant a significant price premium." "IBM’s Scenario 5 ... was mis-priced. . . . Instead of following the directions which stated “Assume 100% duty cycle on all virtual machines associated with this scenario,” IBM calculated and proposed a cost for a single run through of a single 100TB data set. This resulted in a grossly under-priced dollar figure for scenario 5 of IBM’s proposal" "In sum, AWS’s offer was superior in virtually every way but price, and IBM’s advantage in that area was likely not as great as IBM attempted to make it appear." "AWS’s offer was superior, and the outcome of the competition was not even close." Out of every Buffett position ever, I wonder about this one the most! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liberty Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Out of every Buffett position ever, I wonder about this one the most! I guess Dexter Shoes doesn't count ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAllen Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Out of every Buffett position ever, I wonder about this one the most! I guess Dexter Shoes doesn't count ;) It's definitely not attractive in hindsight, but then: was it really so out of the ordinary and inexplicable as IBM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter1234 Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Superficially, I don't agree that ORCL is better than IBM at acquisitions though. I consider SUN a bad acquisition and Softlayer a brilliant acquisition. I think IBM gets exceptionally good returns on their acquisitions. I suspect ORCL does too. Neither of them is in the same league as HP though. Just to clarify, you think IBM and Oracle acquisitions are better than HP's? Many of HP's acquisitions were not great. So not being in the same league is a compliment here. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Pitch Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 I suggested people read the final AWS versus U.S./IBM opinion but didn't post a link: http://regmedia.co.uk/2013/11/08/amazon_v_ibm_cia_2013.pdf Anyways, it's surprisingly accessible for a large legal document. Some of my favorite parts are: "Amazon had a higher price, but the agency determined that Amazon’s technical proposal was sufficiently superior to IBM’s proposal to warrant a significant price premium." "IBM’s Scenario 5 ... was mis-priced. . . . Instead of following the directions which stated “Assume 100% duty cycle on all virtual machines associated with this scenario,” IBM calculated and proposed a cost for a single run through of a single 100TB data set. This resulted in a grossly under-priced dollar figure for scenario 5 of IBM’s proposal" "In sum, AWS’s offer was superior in virtually every way but price, and IBM’s advantage in that area was likely not as great as IBM attempted to make it appear." "AWS’s offer was superior, and the outcome of the competition was not even close." Out of every Buffett position ever, I wonder about this one the most! It's really easy to see why Buffett find IBM attractive. High margin and high ROIC for an extended period of time is difficult to ignore. Sure hardware is going away, but they are simply climbing up the value chain for their customers via software and business analytics. Unless software becomes so efficient and customizable that a chimpanzee (senior management) of corporations can run then I would be heading for the hills. What I see is technology becoming more complex and requiring a greater need for someone to hold your hands. There will always be a need for an integrator. Will IBM be one of them? There's a high probability and if you are unsure why not buy a basket of IBM,ORCL, ACN, MSFT and call it a day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palantir Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 But doesn't hardware drive sales of their software? In addition, as you say there will be need for integrators, but the other integrators can all do the same services as IBM... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCLarkin Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Just to clarify, you think IBM and Oracle acquisitions are better than HP's? Many of HP's acquisitions were not great. So not being in the same league is a compliment here. ;) Correct. HP is the current poster child for bad acquisitions. IBM focuses on small acquisitions that they can scale up with their sales force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCLarkin Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 I suggested people read the final AWS versus U.S./IBM opinion but didn't post a link: Well I typed a long reply and lost it so I will summarize as follows: 1. This bid was before IBM bought Softlayer. IBM has a very credible private/hybrid solution. The game is not yet over. 2. Even if AWS wins the entire IaaS game (public, private, and hybrid) that doesn't mean game over.. IBM has rewarded investors over the past several decades despite numerous "deathblows". 3. If IBM had maintained it's control over the computer industry, it would have a multi-trillion dollar market cap. It is possible for IBM to lose several battles and still thrive given the massive size and growth of the IT industry. 4. This entire AWS death star theory completely ignores that 20-25% of IBM revenue will be coming from data/analytics in the near future. Not sure how cloud is anything but an opportunity to this segment. 5. IBM is a cockroach. Even if all future growth for IBM is capped, it is so entrenched with customers that it would take decades before the profit engine was eroded. People underestimate how impossible/expensive it would be to switch everything over to the cloud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastwarriors Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-07-07/ibms-quest-to-make-selling-chocolate-seem-difficult#r=hpt-fs IBM's Quest to Make Selling Chocolate Seem Difficult Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCLarkin Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Y-Charts report on IBM attached.YCharts_Focus_Report-IBM_Corp.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fareastwarriors Posted July 15, 2014 Share Posted July 15, 2014 Apple, IBM in massive enterprise hardware, software partnership http://www.cnbc.com/id/101834316 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombgrt Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Apple, IBM in massive enterprise hardware, software partnership http://www.cnbc.com/id/101834316 Hm that can't be right? IBM is old tech, they are finished! CRM and co are the way of the future! Why is the stock up?! :o In all seriousness, this will give a nice boost to IBM's image and brand, regardless of extra revenue this will generate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Apple, IBM in massive enterprise hardware, software partnership http://www.cnbc.com/id/101834316 Hm that can't be right? IBM is old tech, they are finished! CRM and co are the way of the future! Why is the stock up?! :o In all seriousness, this will give a nice boost to IBM's image and brand, regardless of extra revenue this will generate. Totally agree. I really think it's interesting how IBM + AAPL are such a great combination to go up against both AMZN and GOOG. And I'm optimistic that IBM's cloud infrastructure / platform services will also be touted/marketed by AAPL in this partnership. Great deal all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now