InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

RealDutch

02/07/13 1:56 PM

#29152 RE: treit2002 #29151

The company is way better off admitting this, and signalling that they are pursuing alternatives.



I agree 100% with this.

2013 earnings will be $100M, not $40M or $43M. Simple as that.



I agree 100% with this.

Chad's arguments are worthless, imo.



I agree 100% with this.
icon url

ccsykes

02/07/13 1:57 PM

#29153 RE: treit2002 #29151

Chad's arguments are worthless, imo.



I have not made any arguments. I'm simply repeating managements communications. Has that not been your biggest complaint of me? That I don't infer and embellish enough in my communications?

icon url

slyestjester

02/07/13 2:23 PM

#29158 RE: treit2002 #29151

Yes, the company will still earn good money and grow. But that is because of the NTA infrastructure already in place plus on-going total cap ex, not because of marginal funds from new share issuance.
___________________

Of course part of current NTA infrastructure is composed of elements derived from share issuance in a previous year, and I'm quite sure those elements plus their derivatives in the form of subsequent earnings invested are currently accretive. So we are being well-served today from issuance in previous yrs not only on a total earnings basis but on an eps basis. Had there been no issuance this year, eps today are higher than they would have been had there been no financing share issuance in previous yrs. Since issuance is in effect an 'inlation' in share count, the only critical question is the availability of extremely high return investment possibilities--just as inflation in a monetary system is harmful only if there are constraints on supply, i.e., if productive capacity does not grow along with and in proportion to the inflation in currency.

But probably we have discussed this enough. I know I am repeating myself.