NCL stock down on mixed earnings results.

[NLH Arizona]

I don't follow stocks as a rule and have only been loosely following along with this thread (most stock market talk is way above my head:o), but as to the above it's not a matter of "room service doesn't matter to me" as much as charging for room service is a major shift in the way that the company perceives and treats its customers (and for the record I am neutral on room service, I have made use of it but not extensively and am just as happy to go to the buffet and get my own food).

 

The last time I looked at my poll about the onboard experience the majority felt that the onboard experience has declined since Del Rio took over and that more than anything is the most worrisome number to me because if NCL can't provide the same or better onboard experience they soon will be in trouble because they will have a hard time attracting new customers.

You might feel that charging for room service is a major shift in the way that the company perceives and treats its customers, but that doesn't mean that everyone feels the same. I don't see charging for room service as treating their customers badly, but that is my opinion and I would guess many others opinion as well, because we don't use room service, so it really doesn't change our perception and is a non-issue.

 

With regard to your poll, you are talking about 91 poster who voted that NCL has gotten worse since Mr. Del Rio, which is not even a good representation of passengers who cruise on NCL that are members of Cruise Critic. And being that only 166 of all the NCL posters on Cruise Critic voted, I don't see anything to be worrisome about, because the low numbers don't seem to be relevant.

 

I certainly understand your negative feelings toward NCL and accept that you have that opinion, but you have to realize that not everyone shares the same opinions.

Edited August 27, 2016 by NLH Arizona

[kathybelcher2433]

I don't follow stocks as a rule and have only been loosely following along with this thread (most stock market talk is way above my head:o), but as to the above it's not a matter of "room service doesn't matter to me" as much as charging for room service is a major shift in the way that the company perceives and treats its customers (and for the record I am neutral on room service, I have made use of it but not extensively and am just as happy to go to the buffet and get my own food).

 

 

 

The last time I looked at my poll about the onboard experience the majority felt that the onboard experience has declined since Del Rio took over and that more than anything is the most worrisome number to me because if NCL can't provide the same or better onboard experience they soon will be in trouble because they will have a hard time attracting new customers.

 

 

I simply was responding to a poster using room service as their example of what brings joy to their cruise experience. I wasn't given all the backstory in that post to respond to.

 

But I guess I feel the same about these "polls".

 

If you tell me the on board experience has worsened for you and then list the 3 reasons why, if those things do not matter to my cruise experience then honestly, that vote doesn't carry much weight with me. Even when you tell me it's not so much that thing (such as room service) but it's the major shift, I still can't get behind the poll.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[SteveH2508]

There is a danger in looking at NCL in isolation. A person may not care less about room service - but - you need to compare what NCL does with its direct competition. Do NCL's competitors charge for room service? How does NCL's drinks package and prices compare with the competitions? How do the itineraries compare? How do the fares compare? etc..

 

There are many metrics which customers will use to decide on which line they want to sail on. In my case, NCL are now coming up short on too many of my metrics compared with the competition.

 

I fear that NCL will also suffer from 'one and done' cruisers as loyalty to repeat customers seems to be low on the list IMHO.

Edited August 27, 2016 by SteveH2508

[NLH Arizona]

There is a danger in looking at NCL in isolation. A person may not care less about room service - but - you need to compare what NCL does with its direct competition. Do NCL's competitors charge for room service? How does NCL's drinks package and prices compare with the competitions? How do the itineraries compare? How do the fares compare? etc..

 

There are many metrics which customers will use to decide on which line they want to sail on. In my case, NCL are now coming up short on too many of my metrics compared with the competition.

 

I fear that NCL will also suffer from 'one and done' cruisers as loyalty to repeat customers seems to be low on the list IMHO.

Why would I need to compare what NCL does to what Carnival does (their biggest competitor, IMHO)? I would never cruise on Carnival, so I really don't care what they do. I cruise on Celebrity and Crystal and I don't compare NCL to either of them nor do I compare Celebrity to Crystal or to any other lines. I cruise a line because they give me the experience that I feel is of value to the money I spend with them and each of the three lines deliver a different experience within my value system. Your metrics comparing them to their competition works for you, but not everyone feels the same, as we all have different financial positions, different likes, different dislikes, different expectations, etc.

 

Where you fear NCL will suffer from the "one and done" cruiser, I disagree based on the reviews that I've read on here where folks cruising on them the the first time were very pleased. If NCL loses some of their "loyal" cruisers because they don't accept the changes, then I think the new cruisers will more than make up for them, but then that is just my opinion and I'm sure you think differently.

[SteveH2508]

Why would I need to compare what NCL does to what Carnival does (their biggest competitor, IMHO)? I would never cruise on Carnival, so I really don't care what they do. I cruise on Celebrity and Crystal and I don't compare NCL to either of them nor do I compare Celebrity to Crystal or to any other lines. I cruise a line because they give me the experience that I feel is of value to the money I spend with them and each of the three lines deliver a different experience within my value system. Your metrics comparing them to their competition works for you, but not everyone feels the same, as we all have different financial positions, different likes, different dislikes, different expectations, etc.

 

Where you fear NCL will suffer from the "one and done" cruiser, I disagree based on the reviews that I've read on here where folks cruising on them the the first time were very pleased. If NCL loses some of their "loyal" cruisers because they don't accept the changes, then I think the new cruisers will more than make up for them, but then that is just my opinion and I'm sure you think differently.

 

Yes, clearly we think differently. We have found since looking elsewhere that NCL are no longer providing value for money for us.

 

For example, drinks prices are important to us (yes, our bar bills are quite spectacular!). NCL are charging ridiculous prices for drinks now (e.g. $17.95 for an espresso martini). On Princess all martinis were $8.95 + 15% last year. Princess's drinks package is 49$ pppd + 15% (note not 18%) and it includes more. Just one example (which is important to us) of where NCL are now poor value.

[kathybelcher2433]

I cruised NCL this year after a 20 year break from cruising. In the past, I had cruised NCL, RCCL and Princess. But then I moved to the west coast and frankly was tired of the same 12 ports in the Caribbean.

 

When I cruised again I picked the line based on itinerary, availability, and price. We had an amazing cruise. And guess what? We rebooked again for next year and again on NCL for exactly the same 3 reasons.

 

Btw, the cruise experience has changed in 20 years so much for the better at least for me.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[NLH Arizona]

Yes, clearly we think differently. We have found since looking elsewhere that NCL are no longer providing value for money for us.

 

For example, drinks prices are important to us (yes, our bar bills are quite spectacular!). NCL are charging ridiculous prices for drinks now (e.g. $17.95 for an espresso martini). On Princess all martinis were $8.95 + 15% last year. Princess's drinks package is 49$ pppd + 15% (note not 18%) and it includes more. Just one example (which is important to us) of where NCL are now poor value.

I think it is great that you found another line that best suits you and I wish you many great cruise to come, because we should all be happy with our choices.

 

To me, drinks are not important, as I drink very little on my cruises usually virgin daiquiris or sodas along with iced tea and water, so my value is not diminished by the prices of drinks like yours is.

Edited August 27, 2016 by NLH Arizona

[swedish weave]

Since the subject of this thread is stock prices, here is the latest I have found.

NCLH

35.80 -0.38 (1.05%)

Aug 26, 4:00 PM EDT - Disclaimer

35.88 +0.08 (0.22%) After hours

Open: 36.15

High: 36.37

Low: 35.68

Volume: 2,550,168

Avg Vol: 2,536,207

Mkt Cap: 7.98B

 

and for comparison, here is CCL

 

47.10 -0.09 (0.19%)

Aug 26, 4:00 PM EDT - Disclaimer

47.11 +0.01 (0.02%) After hours

Open: 47.30

High: 47.66

Low: 46.90

Volume: 5,077,004

Avg Vol: 3,884,445

Mkt Cap: 34.98B

 

It seems that if the company is operating at a profit, the stock price would reflect some of that success, but that is not the case with NCLH.

 

The market cap has dropped from over 10B in

February to less that 8B this month. That is a little over 20% loss in seven months.

 

I am certain many individuals are enjoying their cruises, but the company needs to take a look at their business model and plug up the leaks. I don't believe relating personal experiences has much impact on the decline of the stock price.

Edited August 27, 2016 by swedish weave

[Shawnino]

There are only two reasons to buy a stock:

 

1) Stream of future dividends (shareholder OBC is a dividend for these purposes)

2) A hope that someone else will buy it from you later for more than what you paid for it. This theory is somewhat pejoratively called the Greater Fool theory.

 

If people would be cruising NCL regardless, maybe the OBC can offset any stock losses.

As for a hope that the share price will rise, we've seen nothing to indicate that will happen in the short-to-medium-term.

[RDC1]

Since the subject of this thread is stock prices, here is the latest I have found.

NCLH

35.80 -0.38 (1.05%)

Aug 26, 4:00 PM EDT - Disclaimer

35.88 +0.08 (0.22%) After hours

Open: 36.15

High: 36.37

Low: 35.68

Volume: 2,550,168

Avg Vol: 2,536,207

Mkt Cap: 7.98B

 

and for comparison, here is CCL

 

47.10 -0.09 (0.19%)

Aug 26, 4:00 PM EDT - Disclaimer

47.11 +0.01 (0.02%) After hours

Open: 47.30

High: 47.66

Low: 46.90

Volume: 5,077,004

Avg Vol: 3,884,445

Mkt Cap: 34.98B

 

It seems that if the company is operating at a profit, the stock price would reflect some of that success, but that is not the case with NCLH.

 

The market cap has dropped from over 10B in

February to less that 8B this month. That is a little over 20% loss in seven months.

 

I am certain many individuals are enjoying their cruises, but the company needs to take a look at their business model and plug up the leaks. I don't believe relating personal experiences has much impact on the decline of the stock price.

 

The company is very clearly making a profit.

 

All three of the companies have experienced a decline of varying amounts. NCLH dropping the most, RCL dropping the second most and CCL least. Of course during the run up NCLH and RCL ran up the most (2.5 and 2.6 times starting stock price three years ago).

 

Both CCL and NCLH are trading around 16 times earnings per share. RCL is trading at a premium around 19 times earnings. Short term swings are often heavily influenced by factors that are little related to fundamentals. That is why when evaluating a stock one needs to look at momentum, technical indicators, as well as fundamentals.

 

The stock is performing about as one would expect compared to its peers.

CCL is the largest, spending the least in capital investment compared to the size of its fleet, has little debt, fairly stable.

 

RCL is second in size, about half the size of CCL, is doing substantial capital investment in new ships, carries substantial debt and its stock is more unstable than CCL. More upward and downward movement.

 

NCLH is by far the smallest of the three. Half of the size of RCL, one fourth the size of CCL. It is investing the most capital in new ships compared to the size of its fleet. It also has a substantial debt load, higher then RCL, due to that investment, with some carry over due to the merger with Oceania and Regent. As a result of its far smaller size, debt load it is by far the volatile of the stocks. Even with that it is still trading near the same P/E as the far more stable CCL. It ran up more, and as a result dropped more then CCL. If you want to keep referencing the drops you should also take account of the increases.

 

Compared to the stock price at the NCLH IPO 3 years ago on Jan 18, 2013

 

CCL

+22%

RCL

+81.5%

NCLH

+44.4%

 

Lets look at when the current management took over at NCLH (Jan 9, 2015) and see how the three brands have performed since then

 

CCL

+1.7%

RCL

-17.5%

NCLH

-14.9%

 

Finally lets see how all three are doing year to date.

 

CCL

-14.6%

RCL

-32.2%

NCLH

-37%

 

So as one can see there is nothing unexpected in the stock behavior compared to other similar companies. When one considers relative size, growth, investment, they are all three moving within a reasonable range. Being the smallest with the largest debt load NCLH will be subject to the greatest drops anytime there is any kind of potential impact. Certainly in the last report with the fairly mild adjustment in performance, there was enough to cause a short term reduction compared to its competition. Will be interesting to see if RCL and CCL also report some issues. The is nothing that indicates any kind of major meltdown. Though the most recent report was enough for NCLH stock to give up is growth premium in the P/E ratio.

[RDC1]

There are only two reasons to buy a stock:

 

1) Stream of future dividends (shareholder OBC is a dividend for these purposes)

2) A hope that someone else will buy it from you later for more than what you paid for it. This theory is somewhat pejoratively called the Greater Fool theory.

 

If people would be cruising NCL regardless, maybe the OBC can offset any stock losses.

As for a hope that the share price will rise, we've seen nothing to indicate that will happen in the short-to-medium-term.

 

In short to medium all three of the cruise lines will be under pressure. The conditions that have allowed increases in profitability over the last two years is ending. Mostly they will be impacted by increases in fuel prices. RCL and NCLH will be impacted by any increases in interest rates due to their capital investment rates and corresponding levels of debt. All three are also subject to world events. They are in a market of increasing competition, with increased capacity coming on line, so their ability to raise prices will be limited.

 

Success for any of the three will be determined by their ability to expand in markets outside of the US, primarily Asia, as the capacity serving the US and Europe is very high making those very competitive markets.

 

NCLH will be placing its first ship in China in 2017. They will have additional ships following in the years afterwards. I would expect them to place additional ships there as will from those builds following what CCL and RCL have been doing. You might see increased potential for growth and increased profitability at that point depending upon the behavior of the world economy (avoiding a another recession) and avoiding any new events such as Zika or expanded outbreaks of terrorism.

 

In many ways cruise lines are like airlines, they are capital intensive businesses in highly competitive markets, with limited ability to increase prices. They are subject to wide variations in profitability due to economic considerations outside of their control. Bottom line, in general not a good area for long term investment unless you are other reasons to do so, such as OBC. I used to own both CCL and RCL for OBC benefits. Sold my RCL when they changed their rules concerning such benefits, after deciding that the stock was topping. I still hold CCL and have more then paid for the acquisition cost over the years with OBC. It helps that I will spend 65 days on ships in various of the CCL lines this year I would not own stock in any of the three based just upon the anticipated stock performance.

 

I would disagree with you on your use of the greater fool theory. The greater fool theory is that someone will buy it from you at a greater price, when there is no evidence or reason why such an increase in value is warranted. It is largely based upon momentum, the view that something has gone up and therefore it will continue to do so. So if you expect to sell at a higher price due to improved fundamentals justifying an increased price that is not consistent with greater fool. Going out and buying tulip bulbs because they have run up 1000% and expecting them to keep running up, that would be an example of greater fool. So not all stock purchases would be consistent with the term greater fool, that is why one does analysis.

Edited August 27, 2016 by RDC1

[ColinIllinois]

Good posts, RDC1.

[triptolemus]

Good posts, RDC1.

 

No they're not. Those posts are missing bold text, obnoxious fonts, gratuitous punctuation, and an irrational emotional attachment required for posts here on Cruise Critic.

 

Get with it!

[fshagan]

And I am perfectly happy going there, but I do miss having another affordable option. Given the fares I've seen lately with NCL if I wanted to spend that much money on a cruise (not quite there, yet) then I'd be more inclined to give another line a try (one cruise I priced was $300 more than Celebrity, so if I wanted to spend that much that would be the cruise I would pick).

 

We've been pricing cruises among NCL and Celebrity, Disney, Princess, and RCI. Until recently NCL has been highest for some itineraries, but Celebrity recently had an almost across-the-board increase of 22 to 35% on all cruises out beyond the final payment date (while still maintaining the discounted pricing on those within the penalty phase). The Celebrity board has a huge thread on it with many of the same sentiments there as here in regards to declining service levels and whether the line "values it's customers". There is a suspicion there will be a "2nd guest half off" sale starting Sept. 1 that would make the fares the same as before.

 

I think we'll see more changes to the pricing model. Del Rio evidently is a fan of the technique that is used by the Premium lines where the list price of a cruise is always about double what anyone actually pays (Oceania is this way; I haven't checked Regal). You would think that customer base would be the most sophisticated price-wise, but evidently having fares at $10,000 a person and always discounting them to $5,000 works.

[SteveH2508]

The company is very clearly making a profit.

 

<snip>

 

Agreed, I am just querying whether they are making a sustainable profit. I have no dog in this race and I am not a financial analyst. I do recall Andy Stuart saying on that TV documentary a few years back, that drinks constituted one of the main revenue/profit streams. With many pax getting the UBP as a 'free' booking perk (leaving aside NCL's definition of the word free:rolleyes:), that must have an impact on the onboard revenues and therefore profits. How many of those pax have sailed and how many are still to come must have an effect on those on-board revenues. I know that the fares were jacked up to at least partially cover the 'free' perks but I bet it is still having an effect.

 

Just to add, if NCL's itinerary interested me and the price (factoring in UBP) was right, I would still book with them (even though my single malt scotches are outside the UBP:().

 

Interesting, adult discussion BTW.

Edited August 27, 2016 by SteveH2508

[newmexicoNita]

I think it is great that you found another line that best suits you and I wish you many great cruise to come, because we should all be happy with our choices.

 

To me, drinks are not important, as I drink very little on my cruises usually virgin daiquiris or sodas along with iced tea and water, so my value is not diminished by the prices of drinks like yours is.

 

I am glad so many people here have found cruise lines they prefer; maybe this will mean our cruises won't be so crowded. I just love it when someone says "last year we paid such and such" Last year was maybe 1 year or so ago; That has little to do with the price today.

 

As for the drink package: we do drink, we love the drink package being included in our price but I certainly could care less about something like an expresso Martini for example. We are more than satisfied with our drink options with the drink perk included. I guess for those who drink a lot on a ship maybe there are better options. Hubby is even very happy with the price of the scotch he likes. The UBP does include some single malts.

Edited August 27, 2016 by newmexicoNita

[SteveH2508]

I am glad so many people here have found cruise lines they prefer; maybe this will mean our cruises won't be so crowded. I just love it when someone says "last year we paid such and such" Last year was maybe 1 year or so ago; That has little to do with the price today.

 

As for the drink package: we do drink, we love the drink package being included in our price but I certainly could care less about something like an expresso Martini for example. We are more than satisfied with our drink options with the drink perk included. I guess for those who drink a lot on a ship maybe there are better options. Hubby is even very happy with the price of the scotch he likes. The UBP does include some single malts.

 

Since July 2016 (according to the photos of price lists posted recently), the single malt scotches are all classified as ultra premium and are outside the scope of the UBP. Before July 2016, Glenfiddich was below $15 and was not 'ultra premium'.

[Shawnino]

I am glad so many people here have found cruise lines they prefer; maybe this will mean our cruises won't be so crowded. I just love it when someone says "last year we paid such and such" Last year was maybe 1 year or so ago; That has little to do with the price today.

 

As for the drink package: we do drink, we love the drink package being included in our price but I certainly could care less about something like an expresso Martini for example. We are more than satisfied with our drink options with the drink perk included. I guess for those who drink a lot on a ship maybe there are better options. Hubby is even very happy with the price of the scotch he likes. The UBP does include some single malts.

 

What does this have to do with the thread topic?

[SteveH2508]

What does this have to do with the thread topic?

Tangentially, it shows that NCL's direction of movement is not to everyone's taste. If you were trying to move a product up-market, would you make the availability of premium brands less?

 

Some people's breaking point is Coke/Pepsi - mine is Scotch.

Edited August 27, 2016 by SteveH2508

[DGP1111]

? . . Where you fear NCL will suffer from the "one and done" cruiser, I disagree based on the reviews that I've read on here where folks cruising on them the the first time were very pleased. If NCL loses some of their "loyal" cruisers because they don't accept the changes, then I think the new cruisers will more than make up for them, but then that is just my opinion and I'm sure you think differently.

 

 

I'm not the "you" being quoted, but hope it's OK to still respond.

 

In post 176 there seemed to be a discounting of opinion results based on small sample of a greater whole. Couldn't the same be felt here regarding a small percentage of NCL first-timers who post reviews compared to all those out there?

 

I'm concerned about the recent stock numbers, but also realize they don't offer a complete picture.

I am a stockholder who does definitely believe that the current onboard NCL experience is of lesser quality for both long-time loyals and newcomers.

I am personally less pleased now than in the past, yet I know that's not a universal opinion.

 

There is another cruise company that does a rather extensive collection of review/opinion of its clientele (passengers), and gets a much better quality sample for internal review. They are also savvy enough to inquire about the competition to assist with compare and contrast. They know more about SOME of the past NCL passengers than NCL itself ever will. Perhaps if NCL really cared about what is of most/least importance, then figured out a way to better balance revenue and disappointment, bookings would show even larger increases with happy loyals and newbies, all of whom would offer the least expensive (free) marketing known : Positive Word Of Mouth.

I'd hope that all of that would increase my stock numbers, as well as offer a more positive (for me) onboard experience. A definite Win-Win in my books.

 

I look forward to my upcoming sailings, and will have a good, or great, time being on vacation. I have also lowered some of my expectations.

 

[composed on a phone in airport lobby, so apologies for typos]

 

 

 

 

not a

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Edited August 27, 2016 by DGP1111

[NLH Arizona]

I'm concerned about the recent stock numbers, but also realize they don't offer a complete picture.

I am a stockholder who does definitely believe that the current onboard NCL experience is of lesser quality for both long-time loyals and newcomers.

I am personally less pleased now than in the past, yet I know that's not a universal opinion.

If you are concerned with the recent stock numbers, you should really read all of RDC1's posts, as he explains them very well and it doesn't seem like there is any reason to overly worried.

 

My experience has been the same prior to Mr. Del Rio and after Mr. Del Rio. Have there been some changes, yes just like on Celebrity and all the other lines; it just depends on if we feel those changes are an issue that devalues our experience or not and so far they have not devalued mine.

[sparkmaster]

Agreed, I am just querying whether they are making a sustainable profit. I have no dog in this race and I am not a financial analyst. I do recall Andy Stuart saying on that TV documentary a few years back, that drinks constituted one of the main revenue/profit streams. With many pax getting the UBP as a 'free' booking perk (leaving aside NCL's definition of the word free:rolleyes:), that must have an impact on the onboard revenues and therefore profits. How many of those pax have sailed and how many are still to come must have an effect on those on-board revenues. I know that the fares were jacked up to at least partially cover the 'free' perks but I bet it is still having an effect.

 

Just to add, if NCL's itinerary interested me and the price (factoring in UBP) was right, I would still book with them (even though my single malt scotches are outside the UBP:().

 

Interesting, adult discussion BTW.

 

Interesting you say that, as, digging through NCLH (holding company of NCL, Prestige, and Regent) onboard revenues as a portion of total revenue has fallen 2.4% since last year. From 30.4% to 28%. Compare to Carnival Plc (all the Carnival owned brands) who's portion of onboard revenues is only 24.7%. This may be partially because of what Carnival Plc actually owns. Some brands may not lend themselves to onboard revenue as well as the flagship carnival brand (Cunard, Seaborne, Holland America).

 

So lets compare to Royal Caribbean Internation, which is more like NCLH in terms of structure and business. Their onboard revenues as a percentage of total revenues is still at 27%. It seems like even with the "giveaways" NCLH onboard revenue is still on par with RCI, who doesn't do drink and dining perks.

[RDC1]

Interesting you say that, as, digging through NCLH (holding company of NCL, Prestige, and Regent) onboard revenues as a portion of total revenue has fallen 2.4% since last year. From 30.4% to 28%. Compare to Carnival Plc (all the Carnival owned brands) who's portion of onboard revenues is only 24.7%. This may be partially because of what Carnival Plc actually owns. Some brands may not lend themselves to onboard revenue as well as the flagship carnival brand (Cunard, Seaborne, Holland America).

 

So lets compare to Royal Caribbean Internation, which is more like NCLH in terms of structure and business. Their onboard revenues as a percentage of total revenues is still at 27%. It seems like even with the "giveaways" NCLH onboard revenue is still on par with RCI, who doesn't do drink and dining perks.

 

That information must be from the 10k which is comparing 2015 to FY2014.

 

Now for those two years your have

 

2014 tickets 69.6 On Board 30.4%

2015 tickets 72% On Board 28%

 

If you look at the most recent 10Q filings for Q1 and Q2 you see that they have returned to the 2014 range

 

2016 Q1 Tickets 68.7 On Board 31.3

2015 Q1 Tickets 71.5 On Board 28.5

 

2016 Q2 Tickets 69 On Board 31.0%

2015 Q2 Tickets 72.6 On Board 27.4%

 

So the more recent 10Q data shows that they have returned to the 2014 range in their ratio of revenue from on board sales vs ticket sales.

 

I have not gone through and looked to see if the special deals including drink packages or other on board spend reductions have increased or decreased in 2016 vs 2015 vs 2014. I do not cruise on NCL very often, but someone that checks fares frequently might have an opinion on the rate of those offers.

[fstuff1]

From the chart I expect support around 32 with stronger support around 30. Unless some new crisis hits the cruise industry I would expect it to hold somewhere around that level before coming back up to around the current price.

hm.. i have my buy order at $29.

so my wishful thinking is too wishful? :p

[RDC1]

hm.. i have my buy order at $29.

so my wishful thinking is too wishful? :p

 

$29 would require it to break through technical support at $30. It could happen.