aapl

So the big news on Thursday was CBS' (NYSE: CBS) hefty $1.8 billion purchase of CNET (NASDAQ: CNET). Douglas McIntyre already explained why this was such a "weird deal" in an excellent article that you can read here. I'd like to expand on that thinking a bit by asking if it should have been Viacom (NYSE: VIA), as opposed to CBS, in the buying seat.

Remember "old Viacom"? Old Viacom was composed of CBS and "new Viacom", the latter being the Viacom of today. I know, confusing, but that's how things are when a big media conglomerate splits in two. Anyway, there was a general mandate given to both companies, one that basically stated the logic of CBS being an entity that focuses on cash flows and dividend increases while new Viacom would focus on acquisitions to promote capital appreciation of the company's stock. Sure enough, the yield on CBS tells the tale perfectly.

So, I have to ask, what gives? I mean, a check of CBS' latest 10K shows that the broadcaster generated $2.2 billion in operational cash flow in 2007. I think paying $1.8 billion for anything, let alone a questionable asset vis a vis CBS' core media competencies, might be too much given CBS' mission to return a lot of value to shareholders over the long-term in the form of dividends.

Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI) announced first-quarter earnings on Thursday, and while it beat the market's expectations, I can't say I'm terribly excited. Revenues decreased a little over 5% to $1.4 billion. Net income from continuing operations came in at $0.21 per diluted share. Briefing.com says that this performance was $0.06 better than Wall Street's average call. Revenues, however, missed expectations.

Why am I not excited about the performance here? I mean, not only did the bottom line trounce the wizards of Wall Street, but domestic comps increased 2.9%. Well, for one thing, the cash flow was nonexistent. Both operational and free cash-flow were negative; granted, the company used a lot less cash this time for operations, and the deficit in terms of free cash was much better, but still, I don't see any positive green.

Plus, there's just the general idea of Blockbuster itself. My feelings haven't changed since I last wrote about the movie-rental business and its earnings. I still believe that Netflix (NASDAQ: NFLX) and video-on-demand limit the upside potential of the company's long-term prospects (perhaps I shouldn't just say limit; maybe threaten is better terminology, who knows).

Nuance Communications (NASDAQ: NUAN), a business devoted to speech recognition technologies and document solutions, reported Q2 earnings earlier this week. Those of you who own this stock know that the company oftentimes puts forth a complicated earnings release, full of GAAP and non-GAAP stats. This is due, in part, to the company's acquisition strategy (not long ago, I wrote about Nuance's purchase of eScription). So, on a GAAP basis, don't expect much. Net loss per diluted share expanded to $0.13 versus a net loss per diluted share of $0.01 in last year's second fiscal quarter (there was a significant non-cash-stock-based compensation charge included in the current quarter). Top-line revenue did well on a GAAP basis, however, rising 54%. Again, though, this growth was due to acquisitions.

On a non-GAAP basis, things look much brighter. Revenues rose 63%, and net income per diluted share increased 50% to $0.18. According to Reuters, this figure matched analyst expectations (I would have liked to have seen Nuance beat expectations, but it is what it is). Of course, Nuance stimulates a classic bull-bear discussion in terms of when GAAP profitability becomes more of an issue than non-GAAP success. As a Nuance shareholder, I definitely would like to see GAAP profits on a consistent basis, but I am well aware that management intends to gamble on acquisitions as a method for creating shareholder value, and for now, I am willing to be patient and watch how the company proceeds.

Nuance could be considered a risky, speculative stock in many ways, but I think it has a good chance of doing well over time with its technologies. You'd probably sleep better with competitors Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) and IBM (NYSE: IBM) in your portfolio, but since I own it from around $9 per share, I'm willing to wait and see how the share price moves from this point forward (admittedly, I was considering booking profits recently, but decided against such action). Anyone thinking of getting in now might want to perform a lot of due diligence and wait for the proverbial pullback.

Disclosure: I own shares in Nuance Communications; positions can change at any time.

Retailer Macy's (NYSE: M) first fiscal quarter wasn't that bad, at least in terms of the analyst game. The company, which competes with mall colleagues such as J.C. Penney (NYSE: JCP) and Sears (NASDAQ: SHLD), reported net income of 2 cents per diluted share from continuing operations. The denizens of Wall Street thought the company would lose 2 cents, so management came ahead in this regard by four pennies. Bravo!

However, does this news excite me? Not necessarily. Macy's needs a little help in its sales department. First, the overall top line declined almost 3%, coming in at $5.7 billion. Second, and perhaps even more telling, same-store sales were weak during the quarter, decreasing by 2.6%. And then there's the issue of cash flow. Operational cash flow from continuing operations was excellent compared with last year's quarter since $21 million was generated this time around as opposed to $370 million being used last time around. Nevertheless, when you take into account capital spending, no free cash flow was left over in the first quarter. And cash has been decreasing on the balance sheet. Oh, and gross margin went down, too.

I wasn't too taken by Macy's current earnings report, and I'm not putting the company on my list of investment ideas right now, even though the stock closed up yesterday on the news (heck, the company didn't repurchase any shares last quarter and stated that it didn't see any more share repurchases coming for the rest of the year, so apparently the stock isn't on management's ideas list, either). I think there might be better retail investments out there, such as Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) or Target (NYSE: TGT). Yes, the retailer may have strong associations with Donald Trump and Martha Stewart, but I will not be blinded by such celebrity value.

Disclosure: I don't own shares in any company mentioned here; positions can change at any time.

According to an article on Reuters, Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) is feeling the pressures of the flat domestic marketplace. COO Muhtar Kent, who will soon become the CEO, said in comments at a speaking event in Japan that Coke will be evaluating an acquisition strategy to grow the long-term prospects of its beverage business.

Now, this doesn't mean that a large purchase or merger is on the horizon, but it does mean that shareholders can expect, according to Kent, small, targeted asset buys. He did, however, specifically state that the company isn't giving up on organic growth, either, in its quest to expand its presence in beverages and beat back the ongoing threat of enemy number one, PepsiCo (NYSE: PEP).

He better not be giving up on it. Coke's stock recently retreated from its 52-week high of $65.59 to a price, as of noon today, of $56.37. The stock has done well over the last year, and this could be considered a normal consolidation. However, there has been a lot of buzz lately about Coke's domestic weakness.

Electronic Arts (NASDAQ: ERTS) issued Q4 and full-year numbers on Tuesday. The competitor of Activision (NASDAQ: ATVI), THQ (NASDAQ: THQI) and Take-Two Interactive (NASDAQ: TTWO) reported adjusted fourth-quarter revenues of $919 million, which was good for a 50% increase. Earnings per diluted share were $0.09 on an adjusted basis, also representing a 50% jump. For the full year, adjusted revenues jumped 30% to $4 billion and earnings per diluted share rose 36% to $1.06. Not too bad.

EA, according to Briefing.com, also beat Wall Street's expectations by quite a bit. EA was forecast to only break-even on a non-GAAP basis, so the difference was a nice $0.09. In terms of operational cash flow, EA increased the metric by 33% during the fourth quarter, but for the full year, operational cash flow decreased 15%. Ah, such is life, I guess. Nevertheless, EA produced 27 titles that sold over a million units this year -- three more than in the previous year. Fifteen of its titles sold over 2 million units -- five more than the last fiscal period. Titles such as Army of Two and Rock Band, as well as various sports franchises, drove the results.

Things sound pretty good, don't they? EA is definitely a major force on the Sony (NYSE: SNE) PlayStation, Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) Xbox 360 and Nintendo (OTC: NTDOY) Wii platforms. But EA has had some challenges during this console cycle, and there is the perception that it needs a major merger to combat the threat posed by the Activision and Vivendi Games transaction. And let's not forget that Activision is on fire all on its own. That's what the whole attempted takeover of Take-Two is all about.

IMAX (NASDAQ: IMAX) really missed Wall Street's expectations. In its latest earnings release, issued on Monday, the company said that its net loss per share doubled to $0.25 for the first quarter compared to the 2007 quarter when the net loss was $0.12 per share. Revenues were $23.5 million, a 12% decline.

While that performance is bad enough in itself, it was also below expectations with the bottom line missing by $0.11. Yikes! Revenues were likewise a disappointment. Even with all the snazzy content from studios such as Time Warner (NYSE: TWX), Viacom (NYSE: VIA), Disney (NYSE: DIS) and DreamWorks Animation (NYSE: DWA), IMAX is having a tough time getting its stock out of the single digits. Management is hoping that a stronger slate for the rest of the year will have a positive impact.

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. IMAX is a stock I have no interest in buying. The company sports a negative book value at the moment, and the stock's past performance has been pretty terrible. I have to concede, however, that on a shorter-term period, the stock has been strong -- in fact, it is not too far from a 52-week high.

As one can imagine, many are speculating that IMAX has a great future ahead of it as the company transitions to digital platforms (this article at USATODAY.com provides an excellent summary of the bull argument, as well as issues IMAX has had with financing). Also, I'm sure many are speculating about a potential sale of the company at some point.

Hey, I'm not going to necessarily rain on the long-term thesis for IMAX, but I have to be honest and say that I'd have to see a breakout from here and some better numbers next quarter to even think about starting a position.

Disclosure: I own shares in Disney; positions can change at any time.

Is there any content company not interested in dealing with Apple's (NASDAQ: AAPL) iTunes platform? According to Portfolio.com, media conglomerate Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) would like to see its HBO programming distributed on Apple's best-of-breed digital service. An announcement of a deal could be forthcoming very soon.

While some many question the move since HBO is a premium subscription service and could conceivably lose some of its allure, I think it is smart strategy. Digital distribution isn't going away, and HBO needs to be part of every platform, even iTunes. Plus, imagine the possibilities to really cash in here. What if the finale of The Sopranos had been sold on iTunes before it aired? Little experiments like this would not only be valuable in terms of testing contemporary theories about distribution paradigms in the 21st century, but they might also be profitable.

Perhaps the key element of this story is that it seems as if Time Warner was able to convince Apple that its content is worth more than the typical iTunes price point of $1.99. This is important because price elasticity will ultimately determine the overall value of a content library. Apple would, of course, like to charge the bare minimum to the users of its hardware, but where does that leave an HBO? No, HBO would be smart in starting as high as possible in terms of price and then adjusting after a full analysis.

I look forward to seeing this agreement announced, and if it is, I think HBO will not only make some money with Apple, but it will find that the pay-cable channel's brand equity will be boosted in the bargain. Some iTune users might actually be prompted to subscribe. HBO is known as a home for quality programs -- I loved the old Tales From the Crypt series -- and it may soon be known as an iTunes top seller.

Disclosure: I don't own shares in any company mentioned here; positions can change at any time.

There's a great article over at The New York Times. It's about all the changes happening at the broadcast networks concerning the traditional upfront model -- the practice of presenting to advertisers around the month of May a new portfolio of programming to be commenced in the fall season and the subsequent booking of ad dollars for said programming. That's how the process has worked -- CBS (NYSE: CBS), General Electric's (NYSE: GE) NBC, Disney's (NYSE: DIS) ABC, News Corp.'s (NYSE: NWS) Fox, and Time Warner's (NYSE: TWX) and Viacom's (NYSE: VIA) CW show their wares now so that they can sell commercial inventory well ahead of the season premieres.

Well, according to the article, you can thank -- or blame -- the writer's strike for the dismantling of this quaint mechanism. I chose to thank the strike, because I think change is good in this case. You see, the broadcasters want to move to a 52-week season -- i.e., they want to debut new shows on a year-round basis instead of all at once, thus neutralizing the need for big upfront promotions. Actually, I should point out that there were probably other factors that helped this decision along -- most of them centering around costs and expenses. The expensive pilot-development process just isn't where it's at anymore. In fact, I wrote about this new paradigm back in April when NBC's co-chairman Ben Silverman was embracing it -- he's actually going for a 65-week season!

I honestly thought Time Warner's (NYSE: TWX) Speed Racer would take the top spot over the Mother's Day weekend at the domestic box-office marketplace. Thankfully, I was wrong, since I own shares in Marvel Entertainment (NYSE: MVL).

Instead, Marvel's blockbuster Iron Man, which is distributed by Viacom (NYSE: VIA), grabbed the honors. According to estimates at Boxofficemojo.com, Iron Man grossed more than $50 million while Speed Racer drove away with about $20 million, good for second place. Yes, these are estimates, but I'll tell you what, my friends any changes to them later on won't alter the tale of Marvel beating the bigger studio. News Corp.'s (NYSE: NWS) new film, What Happens in Vegas, took in a similar amount to Racer and is currently pegged in third place. While first place is a lock, it's possible that second and third positions will be changed. Sony's (NYSE: SNE) Made of Honor and General Electric's (NYSE: GE) NBC Universal comedy Baby Mama were fourth and fifth, respectively.

This was Iron Man's second weekend, and I couldn't be more pleased by its performance. Hopefully, the picture is on its way to grossing at least $250 million domestically; subsequent weekends will get tougher for Marvel as more summer flicks open and gobble up screens and mindshare. For now, though, the company is a superhero. I just hope that the new Hulk, which will be opening soon, is a lot better than the one put out a few years back. For coverage on Marvel's latest earnings report, check out Sheldon Liber's recent piece.

Disclosure: I own shares in General Electric and Marvel; positions can change at any time.

Disney (NYSE: DIS) reported earnings earlier in the week, and once again, Bob Iger pleased Wall Street with the media company's latest results (for a look at the numbers and an options-trading idea for Disney, see Brent Archer's recent piece about the Mouse). They more than beat expectations, but as a Disney shareholder, I'm somewhat blase about the whole affair. Sure, Iger is being feted as a CEO wunderkind who has successfully steered the S.S. Disney into prosperous financial seas after taking the wheel over from failed captain, Michael Eisner. But, you know, I've owned Disney for ten years now, and I just don't like the price action of the stock -- it hasn't gone anywhere since the last split back in 1998. And, I can't say that the stock performed spectacularly this week post the earnings win.

I think Iger needs to start worrying about the stock. Yeah, he'd probably tell me something like "I'm busy leveraging the Disney brand to differentiate its content from other media concerns to drive increases in returns on capital and earnings per share -- the stock will take care of itself." Ha! The stock has done nothing. Iger should pay attention to the sad long-term range that symbol DIS has been in for what seems like an eternity. Here's my suggestion -- double the dividend, Bob. You can do it.

A look at the company's most recent 10Q (for the quarter ended March 2008) shows an interesting cash-flow story. Okay, cash from operations for the last six months came in at $3.3 billion. Capital expenditures and acquisitions together equaled $759 million. Dividends were $664 million. Add $759 million and $664 million together and you get $1.4 billion. I think there's a lot of breathing room there, Bob. In fact, if you brought dividends up to an even $2 billion, you still would have covered cap-ex and acquisition costs. And remember, Disney pays an annual dividend, so that $664 million was for the whole year! Imagine if you spread $2 billion out over four quarters. You could easily double it, Bob. In fact, a check of the most recent 10K shows that cash flow has been excellent the last few years. Disney, by my calculations, could have supported a much higher dividend back in 2005!

McDonald's (NYSE: MCD) announced its same-store sales results for the month of April Thursday, and the data indicate a healthy fast-food business ("healthy fast food" -- isn't that an oxymoron?).

Global comps as a whole increased 5%. Comps for European locations increased 6.3%, and the Asia/Pacific/Middle East/Africa segment saw a 7.8% rise in same-store sales. McDonald's restaurants in the States increased an anemic 2%. The weak domestic sales really need to be addressed so that they can pull more weight and add to the cool story that is McDonald's.

The stock has been a pretty decent performer over the last several months, rising over 6% over the three-month timeframe, and over the one-month period, it is up over 7%. And the longer-period returns from the past are even more impressive. Imagine how McDonald's stock would perform if management figured out how to get people to visit the U.S.'s Golden Arches more often. I suppose April's performance should be praised since March saw a decline in U.S. comps, as this article makes plain, but that depreciation was the first one in five years, and that says to me that McDonald's needs to be careful.

It's all about the marketing, of course. There are a lot of choices out there -- Burger King (NYSE: BKC), Wendy's (NYSE: WEN) and Yum! Brands (NYSE: YUM) -- so I think promotion of the brand is key. Some will disagree and say that menus and pricing are the big drivers -- they are important, don't get me wrong, but perhaps McDonald's needs to take a cue from Burger King and its campaign with the creepy-king thing -- those commercials are clever. Still, if this comps reports says anything, it says that you shouldn't count the clown out -- McDonald's is a blue-chip stock that is near a 52-week high, and not only is it a great long-term/core holding, but it's also quite possibly an interesting shorter-term idea as well.

Disclosure: I don't own shares in any company mentioned here; positions can change at any time.

No matter how you slice it, whether you look at GAAP or non-GAAP statistics, Activision, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATVI) kicked it during the quarter. And I mean really kicked it.

Net sales for Q4 set off at warp factor 11, rising 93% to $602.5 million. Earnings per diluted share on a reported basis came in at $0.14, reversing a year-ago loss of $0.05 per share. For the full fiscal year, Activision grew revenues by 92% -- again, sales growth in the 90's! -- to $2.9 billion. Earnings per diluted share were $1.10 in 2008 versus a measly $0.28 in 2007. Take that, Electronic Arts Inc. (NASDAQ: ERTS) and THQ Inc. (NASDAQ: THQI)! Activision is truly taking advantage of consoles from Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT), Sony Corporation (NYSE: SNE), and Nintendo Co. Ltd. (OTC: NTDOY). Titles such as Call of Duty 4, Guitar Hero, and Transformers drove the results -- like I always say, it's always about the quality of the slate. On an adjusted basis, earnings beat expectations by a whopping $0.12, according to Briefing.com.

I bet EA is really wishing its deal went through for Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. (NASDAQ: TTWO) right about now! I believe Activision will continue to do well the rest of the year, and I love its fundamentals, but what about the stock? As of this writing, it's up about 3%. If you are looking to trade Activision, I'd probably wait until all the earnings excitement is over and be patient for pullbacks as the market may perceive that everything is priced in at the moment now that the news is out.

Disclosure: I own shares in Activision; positions can change at any time.

News Corp. (NYSE: NWS), a media conglomerate that competes with Time Warner (NYSE: TWX), Disney (NYSE: DIS), Viacom (NYSE: VIA), CBS (NYSE: CBS) and Sony (NYSE: SNE), reported third-quarter earnings Wednesday, and they were pretty interesting, to say the least.

I mean, revenues increased 16% to about $8.8 billion, but earnings per share went up like crazy, coming in at $0.91 per diluted share versus $0.27 per diluted share a year ago -- that's more than three times as much as the comparable period's results! As you can imagine, there's a little catch. The stellar appreciation is due to a gain in a transaction with Liberty Media. According to a piece at CNBC, News Corp. earned $0.30 per share after adjustments, which was a penny shy of Wall Street's expectations.

So, News Corp. kind of had a so-so quarter. I think the top-line growth was pretty good even if bottom-line performance wasn't as nice as that special gain made it seem on the surface. Plus, News Corp. is working with some cool assets. Cable programming continues to score thanks to the strength of Fox News Channel, an important platform for the conglomerate which contains valuable brand name pundits such as Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity. News Corp. leverages the channel to drive growth in its other cable properties; in fact, Fox Business Channel is trying to make a name for itself and it definitely benefits from synergy with Fox News.

Overall, the cable programming segment delivered a 17% increase in operating income while Fox News saw its operating profit go up by 11%. The television segment increased its profits by over 50%, and the Fox network just about doubled its bottom-line base. Other parts of News Corp. didn't do as well, such as filmed entertainment -- this segment's profit took a dive to the tune of 36%. However, don't blame one of my favorite shows, Family Guy -- DVD sales of this hot property was a positive driver.

Those are the highlights that stuck out at me. As for the stock, I don't see a compelling reason to buy at the moment. News Corp. should do well over time, but it wasn't like these were blowout numbers or anything. I'll wait and see how the company is doing when it reports its fiscal-year stats.

Disclosure: I own shares in Disney; positions can change at any time.

THQ's (NASDAQ: THQI) Q4 results were not good at all. Revenues were up over 8% to $187 million, but the software publisher lost an adjusted $0.37 per diluted share from continuing operations. Last year at this time, THQ generated positive adjusted net income of $0.13 per diluted share from continuing operations. The full fiscal year was no better -- revenues were basically flat at $1 billion. The company lost an adjusted $0.23 per diluted share from continuing operations during the year compared to an adjusted profit of $1.20 per diluted share from continuing operations in 2007.

This publisher is no Activision (NASDAQ: ATVI) or Electronic Arts (NASDAQ: ERTS) right now. Its slate is performing poorly, and the company's stock is likewise in the dumps. But what about the future? A few years back, THQ wasn't a bad investment decision. I have a feeling that THQ will rebound as the current console cycle continues its forward path, especially when further price cuts in hardware make their way to market.

THQ, however, needs to get its slate back on track, and to really go after the Sony (NYSE: SNE) PlayStation 3 and Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) Xbox 360 players. It seems to be doing OK with the Nintendo (OTC: NTDOY) Wii platform in terms of revenue mix. Perhaps the deal struck with DreamWorks Animation (NYSE: DWA) for a video game based on the animation company's 2010 feature Master Mind will help.

Nevertheless, there is nothing exciting in the earnings release, nothing that makes me think that THQ is out of the dark woods yet. Again, though, I would expect the publisher's stock to rebound in the future. Question is, how patient will investors be?

Disclosure: I own shares in Activision; positions can change at any time.