Poor poor poor Jimmy

As soon as all the raw logs start being processed in Canfors new US mills, the losses will turn around for them

Who cares about Jimmy, I'd be more concerned for the employees affected by the curtailment and shutdowns. What new U.S. mills are you talking about?

If there's no market for lumber, it doesn't matter where the logs are being processed.

did they really lose 85 million
or did they make 85 million less then last year?

RUEZ... it has been in the news.
Canfor and Westfraser have spent multiple millions on purchasing sawmills in the states.

Swingline...Canfor pays large tariffs for lumber they ship to the USA.
They pay next to nothing for raw logs they ship to the USA. Thats a fact.

Somedude... you have it bang on.
They still made gazillions, just not as many.
In my view losing 85 million means... I started with 100 million and now I only have 15 million left. It does not mean, last year our profits were 10 billion but this year our profits are only 5 billion.
Stating their lower profits as loss's makes people think things are horrible. ICBC does the same thing, all corporations do it this way. Thats one of the tactics they use for keeping the sheep under control.
How do you grow mushrooms?
Keep them in the dark and feed them s..t

"They still made gazillions, just not as many. In my view losing 85 million means I started with 100 million and now I only have 15 million left. It does not mean, last year our profits were 10 billion but this year our profits are only 5 billion. Stating their lower profits as loss's makes people think things are horrible. "

Incorrect. Their published net loss for Q1 was in fact 85 million. The way you have described it is simply not accurate.

http://www.canfor.com/_resources/news/2008/N080502_Canfor_Corporation_Announces_First_Quarter_2008_Results.pdf

In fact, if you look at the financial statements from the link above, their published operating loss was actually $117 million in Q1 (Sales of $648M and expenses of $766M). This figure probably gives you a better idea of how the business operations went during that quarter. The difference between that and the 85 million is largely due to net sources of income that are likely not directly attributable to the "day to day" operations.

Lets get the facts straight- housing starts are down in the US- some where between 700,000 and 900,000 units- capacity is around 2.3 million in North America. Most of BC interior mills are competive, coastal mills are the highest cost producers in the world. Raw Logs only influence the south Vancouver Island Market (not aware of any raw logs from the PG area)( I know as I am a large exporter of logs from private lands- and at present you would be crazy to do large scale exports to Washington state- which has an ave wage of $ 17 hour verus $ 30 hour on the coast- the Asian market is still ok but difficult)- BC has a number of variables working against it- High Canadian dollar, little demand in the US (read the the latest RISI report), the the tariff on lumber (read " The Softwood Lumber War" by Daowei Zhang")- this post is about getting the facts straight and hopefully some though fully discussion.

Dogs has it right.

As for Jimmy Im sure he is quite content to continue buying stock, especially at the lower costs. His goal overtime I expect is to privatize the Company. Jimmy may be a lot of things, but **Stupid** is not one of them.

I remember raw logs being shipped from Prince Rupert and other West Coast ports back in 1962 to Japan. As far as I know it is still being done.

Last week's John Mauldin's newsletter provided some interesting information about what is currently going on in the United States new home market.

The following paragaphs are taken from this newsletter.

"Yesterday we found out that new home sales are running at an annual rate of 526,000, the lowest number in almost two decades. The supply of new homes, in terms of the amount of time it would take to work through the inventory available for sale was 8.4 months last October. It is now an even 11 months. (source for data: www.weldononline.com)

How many homes did the home building industry start building last month? Housing starts were running at an annual rate of 947,000. Permits for new homes was 927,000. That means the industry is building over 400,000 more homes than they are selling. Add in a million or so foreclosures. Kill the subprime market. Really make it hard to get a loan securitized for anything but government backed mortgages.

Home construction is going to drop precipitously before the inventory of new homes is worked through. Those who are predicting a rebound this quarter are simply not paying attention to the basic math. New home prices are down 13.3% year over year. They are going much lower. Margins are going to get squeezed. Now maybe the market is pricing all this in. But I think there are better places to gamble than the home builders."

We the middle class lost about 50% of our income to taxes so far this year. I don't see that in the newspaper.

I just read this week's issue of John Mauldin's newsletter. A million people subscribe to this (free) newsletter.

He says he made a major error when he wrote the piece in his last week's newsletter (about the state of the new home market in the U.S), which I quoted in my earlier post.

The following is what he wrote in this week's newsletter.

"Housing Numbers Are Better Than I Wrote

Sometimes I just flat out get things wrong. And last week I blew it. William Helman, among others, pointed out to me that the 974,000 new-home construction number I used includes multi-family dwellings as well. I knew that, and just forgot. So, let me let William give you the real story:

"I am a loyal reader and I enjoy your weekly letters. Now and then there is an interpretation of the data that I fail to agree with. The letter of April 26, 2008 is a case in point.

"In the section headed 'If You Are in a Hole, Stop Digging' you state that the building industry is building over 400,000 more homes than they are selling. You infer this by subtraction new home sales (single-family) for March of 526,000 from housing starts for the month of 947,000.

"First, you should note that single-family housing starts for March were 680,000 (annual rate) and 267,000 (annual rate) were multi-family, or apartments/condos, thus totaling 947,000. The comparison with home sales, which are single-family home sales, should be with single family home starts.

"Second, single-family home sales exclude the construction of single-family homes by owners - persons who buy a lot and contract to have a house built on the lot to live in and not to sell."

When you subtract out apparent construction of homes by owners and not builders, William presents data that suggests builders are building less than they are selling, which would make sense.

"... However, when we consider the apparent inventory of existing homes for sale along with newly constructed homes, there is a very large excess supply. That suggests that the excess supply of single-family homes on the market, relative to past norms, is between one and 1.5 million units. This is equal to about one year of 'trend' single-family home production. At the current rate of new single-family home construction (a 680,000 annual rate, or about 400,000 to 500,000 below 'trend demand'), it would take at least two years and possibly three years or more to work off the excess.

"Of course there is a lot of uncertainty in trying to estimate future home construction in this way. The demand and the supply are not necessarily, and probably not, at the same places. Thus some of the inventory may remain in excess for a much extended period, while in other places the excess may become exhausted quickly, thus spurring increased new construction more quickly.

"On balance it seems clear that housing starts are likely to remain subdued and well below trend for an extended period. But this is because of the large inventory of new and existing homes for sale. It is not, as you indicated, because builders are currently building more homes than they are selling. Builders are building less than they are selling. Still, this is not to say that sales will not decline further, causing an even further decline of starts before leveling or beginning a gradual recovery."

I stand corrected."