Carol Loomis Quotes

Warren Buffett is famous for talking about the 'intrinsic value' of stocks. But while many people parrot this phrase, few know what it really means.

Of course, the discounting of future earnings should hurt all stocks. But it should hurt technology stocks more than others, because so many of them are valued at extremely high levels relative to their current earnings.

When it comes to valuation, there's only one thing stock investors really care about, which is earnings.

To know whether stocks are cheap or pricey, we typically look at price-to-earnings ratio. Valuation is a tougher question than many folks realize.

Everyone has the idea of owning good companies. The problem is that they have high prices in relations to assets and earnings, and that takes all of the fun out of the game.

All intelligent investing is value investing - acquiring more that you are paying for. You must value the business in order to value the stock.

I think you have to learn that there's a company behind every stock, and that there's only one real reason why stocks go up. Companies go from doing poorly to doing well or small companies grow to large companies.

The stock prices of networking equipment companies like Cisco Systems and Nortel Networks sometimes seem as if they are priced for perpetual success.

There is no sense in getting excited by market cap because it is a tool.

Control of a company does not carry with it the ability to control the price of its stock.

I think most CEOs think their stock is undervalued, probably.

Of all the big Internet companies, Yahoo is the most highly valued on a price-earnings and price-sales basis.

It's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price.

In my business investing, you are buying a stock, and someone else is selling the stock. Right there, that's like a debate. Is the stock going up, or is it going to go down?

Who cares if companies are overvalued or not?

If you can follow only one bit of data, follow the earnings - assuming the company in question has earnings. I subscribe to the crusty notion that sooner or later earnings make or break an investment in equities. What the stock price does today, tomorrow, or next week is only a distraction.

I believe that the mutual fund industry's biggest shortcoming is too much focus on the momentary price of a stock - an illusion - and too little focus on the intrinsic value of the corporation - the ultimate reality. I'm comforted by the fact that Warren Buffett feels the same way.

A great company is not a great investment if you pay too much for the stock.

If I taught a class, on my final exam I would take an Internet company and ask, 'How much is this company worth?' Anyone who would answer, I would flunk.

An investor calculates what a stock is worth, based on the value of its businesses.

You'll get nowhere buying stocks just because they have a great story.

Traders can cause short-term volatility. In the long run, the market must revert to a sensible price/earnings multiple.

My wealth is reflected in the price of Severstal, and the number of shares I have in my possession doesn't have any impact on the company.

It's one of the fundamental principles of the stock market: When interest rates go up, stocks go down. And along with financial companies and cyclicals, technology companies - with their sky-high price-to-earnings multiples - should be among the biggest losers in an environment of rising rates.

It's nice to do an IPO where your investors get value straightaway and the share price pops up; it proves you left something on the table for them.