Trucking Bandit
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
David G. Ross, an analyst at Stifel Nicolaus & Co., lowered his earnings estimates outlook on Con-Way into 2007 and lowered his target price to $58 from $70.
He said the decline in tonnage is attributable to several factors, which include tough comparisons to last year and pricing. "Customers are not shipping as much now with Con-Way mainly due to price (not service)," he wrote.
However, Ross maintained a "Buy" rating on the company. "Con-Way remains one of the best run less-than-truckload carriers in the U.S. and should be one of the long-term winners in a consolidating industry," Ross said in a research note.
Justin B. Yagerman, an analyst at Wachovia Capital Markets, likewise lowered estimates, but struck a less optimistic tone about the company's long-term fortunes. He maintained his "Market Perform" rating.
"We believe CNW's sluggish tonnage growth and general economic uncertainty will continue to place downward pressure on shares," he said in a research note.
He noted that while operations remain strong, competition is increasing. "Our channel checks indicate that while (Con-Way) is highly regarded by customers due to its premium LTL (less-than-truckload) service and well-tuned operations, many customers are seeking more cost-efficient solutions with comparable service levels," he wrote.
Edward Wolfe, an analyst at Bear, Stearns & Co., lowered his forecasts, cut his target price to $41 from $43, and retained his "Underperform" rating.
"We do not find CNW's near-term miss all that surprising," he said in a research note, citing the company's willingness to sacrifice volume for price.
Wolfe added that Con-Way's inability to execute that strategy does not bode well for the rest of the less-then-truckload sector.
"If the industry's service leader loses tonnage when it attempts to enforce rate increases, we don't believe that is a positive sign for the LTL market in general," Wolfe said.
Shares of Con-Way fell 87 cents to $44.93 in early afternoon trading on the Nasdaq. Earlier Tuesday, shares fell to new 52-week low of $44.23, compared to the prior low of $44.94 which came on Sept. 11. The 52-week high of $61.87 occurred on June 2.
He said the decline in tonnage is attributable to several factors, which include tough comparisons to last year and pricing. "Customers are not shipping as much now with Con-Way mainly due to price (not service)," he wrote.
However, Ross maintained a "Buy" rating on the company. "Con-Way remains one of the best run less-than-truckload carriers in the U.S. and should be one of the long-term winners in a consolidating industry," Ross said in a research note.
Justin B. Yagerman, an analyst at Wachovia Capital Markets, likewise lowered estimates, but struck a less optimistic tone about the company's long-term fortunes. He maintained his "Market Perform" rating.
"We believe CNW's sluggish tonnage growth and general economic uncertainty will continue to place downward pressure on shares," he said in a research note.
He noted that while operations remain strong, competition is increasing. "Our channel checks indicate that while (Con-Way) is highly regarded by customers due to its premium LTL (less-than-truckload) service and well-tuned operations, many customers are seeking more cost-efficient solutions with comparable service levels," he wrote.
Edward Wolfe, an analyst at Bear, Stearns & Co., lowered his forecasts, cut his target price to $41 from $43, and retained his "Underperform" rating.
"We do not find CNW's near-term miss all that surprising," he said in a research note, citing the company's willingness to sacrifice volume for price.
Wolfe added that Con-Way's inability to execute that strategy does not bode well for the rest of the less-then-truckload sector.
"If the industry's service leader loses tonnage when it attempts to enforce rate increases, we don't believe that is a positive sign for the LTL market in general," Wolfe said.
Shares of Con-Way fell 87 cents to $44.93 in early afternoon trading on the Nasdaq. Earlier Tuesday, shares fell to new 52-week low of $44.23, compared to the prior low of $44.94 which came on Sept. 11. The 52-week high of $61.87 occurred on June 2.
:sleep: :sleep: :sleep: