All Activity

We have no idea what crude will price at tomorrow, and the further out tomorrow is, the worse it gets. What somebody will pay today for a physical barrel X months out ... is not what the spot price will be X months out. The paper market also prices off of NYMEX, whereas the physical market prices off of specific grades (WTI, etc.) delivered at X (Cushing, etc.); ie: not all oil is the same. Most would argue that < USD 70 is temporary, and primarily for political consumption (US midterms). It assumes that nations do not use the trapped crude leaving the SOH to refill their SPR's, incremental Gulf production able to offset declining Russian exports (Ukraine related), and China not resuming 'normal' purchasing. To sustain it, a lot of stars have to align, and the VZ earthquakes will be disrupting heavy oil supply. At current prices, warrants are temporarily both cheap, and illiquid ...... opportunity. If you have the risk tolerance, and are comfortable with ambiguity, it may be worth your while. Disclosure: We have a February 'sell BTC/Buy o/g' pair trade, that we hope to unwind into Q2 earnings. The BTC leg highly likely to close out at a material gain; we hope to do similarly with the o/g position. All goes well, our o/g weighting goes down significantly, and is entirely funded via house money. Good luck. SD

Look at your president. I believe we are past the point of worrying about the outbursts of news anchors unfortunately.

He is not wrong. A 10 Deg C increase in temperature results in our world looking more like Mad Max.

I thought Joe's behavior in that interview was disgraceful. It's fine to ask a guest tough questions on TV but he should treat them with the respect. Grantham might have called more bubbles than there were actual ones but he has a very decent long term track record and seems like a good human being from what I know publicly.

Strong journalism makes an effort to eliminate bias in its reporting. If it's full of opinions, it ain't news. CNBC I think finds a good balance between its co-anchors. Cubs, I wish that you would find a way to consume better journalism. Read The Economist or the WSJ. It would be good for you.

I did a few queries in Gemini about gross margins for OpenAI and Anthropic and the answer is that it about 40% and may right answer is 42 . Thats pretty low and the reason is that unlike traditional software, their service is expensive to provide because of the compute cost for tokens. This may go up over time but it’s not a certainty because competition may eat into margins. So in any case, these companies will be valued lower than software cos (which can easily exceed 80% gross margins). My guess is that business models will have some attributes similar to chemical processors because in the end they process energy via silicon into tokens that get consumed with by their customers. So besides model quality which determines the value of the tokens, the cost to produce these tokens is of immense importance which is likely why OpenAI gets into producing their own chips.

Insecure aggression is the MAGA way.

We call that progress Blake! LOL

I watch the interview and the second part about crypto where it got heated, it seems to me that the only piece of a shit in that discussion is Joe and not Grantham. Joe behaviour is unacceptable. Almost as if he went out to the bar with the boys last night and still had a bit too much morning after and he just wanted to fuck up Andrew Ross interview. Grantham is a billionaire at his age and he didn’t do that by being wrong about the market more than he is right about them. And the business he build in GMO was not about being a doomsayer as some had suggested in this thread. Do I want him to be wrong absolutely. It gave me chills listening to him in 2021 but he was right, … up until ChatGPT came along and gave birth to the artificial intelligence boom.

The inventory drawdown wasn’t coordination. China has a large strategic oil reserve and they decided to use it in their own self interest. They avoided the shortages that have plagued counties without reserves like Phillipines and Thailand. The US drew sown their strategic oil reserve further at the same time but for different reasons. The problem is you can draw down reserves only once and than what? I personally like to get back into PBR.A. It has come down some since ai sold it but I like it lower. PBR is nice because the country does its own thing for the better or the worse which provides some diversity on its own.

As I recall, CME was your idea. You mentioned it a couple of years ago around $200. I issued it back the. But took note and decided I like it enough now that trades at a similar valuation again. It’s an easy stock to hold since pay out most r profits as a special dividend which is great in tax deferred accounts. On MSFT I give credit to @petec who made a good case to own it. https://www.buildingarks.co.uk/p/review-can-microsoft-compete-part ZTS has more question marks and is simply a turnaround play. They have quite a few product launches lined up that should move the needle and there have been a few encouraging insider buys. The valuation isn’t demanding any more.

Average price received in Q1 CVX sales at National Indemnity was $197.51 with a 3/17 approximate trade date +33% gain on this tranche plus dividends received ------ On DAL, National Indemnity (Ted Weschler) bought $2.48 Billion of Delta stock at $62.277 / share average cost (currently $91.88)

Not to justify this, but the lower floors are much cooler than the upper floors of a building. My mom for example lives in the lowest floor of an older building and her apartment has remained reasonably cool in the current heat. Now if you have an apartment under the roof, you are cooked.

I'm nowhere near an expert in AI, but from my understanding, there are various ways malicious behavior can be embedded in these models, even if they're "open source". One of them is by training it to behave in an undesirable fashion. One such possible attack is essentially an embedded Manchurian Candidate with trigger word. Those behavior would be embedded in the weight themselves during training, and not through the policy code, so it would be not be easily visible by examination. Not saying the same thing can't be done with closed source frontier models provided by the US companies, but given the choices, IMHO, Chinese companies would prefer to use Chinese-based models whereas democratic countries would prefer to use models that originates from democratic countries. If anything, it would provide a cover for when the SHTF. This new AI world opens a whole new universe in the vector of attacks that we have not yet focused our attention to. That's how security normally evolves... first comes the race to add capabilities without little/few thoughts to security. Then as the capabilities mature and become more widespread, new attacks will force the attention to security. Also, it seems like those censorship are enforced in the policy code as well as in the weights. People have started modifying the weights to remove censorship... all black magic to me.

I much appreciate your posts on this topic Spek. I use them primarily for ideas for the two trusts I manage.

Not sure I would call someone that had donated already half on his net worth toward environmental causes (and has in program to donate something like 95%) a piece of $hit... And I would stop blaming people giving bad advice...and start accounting people for their own decision in their own finance... And if you think about it...for the people that do not get that is bad advice...it is actually good advice ...it is not that everybody should invest...

We've only discussed politics In detail with one man and then his family as we've formed a friendship. He has spent time in the US, he's an OBE designation rear admiral in the British military who deals in high level nuclear issues. Our bond was concerns about DJT and it went from there. We met him on a train in Switzerland. For whatever reason he found us to be interesting and it was his motivation that's energized the friendship, but we completely enjoy the connection.

I’d love to know when they started selling. You think it was after the conflict started? I was kind of thinking it was before the conflict started. If we see more sales in the next 13f then I will change my opinion.

From my childhood: “Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades” ”wish in one hand and shit in the other, see which one fills up faster”

Take your cues from the strongest hand in the game - Berkshire sat on a large position in Chevron, earning T-bill like dividends at a lower tax rate (15.75% effective tax rate vs 21% for t-bill interest income) than bond interest, while maintaining optionality and a natural hedge should oil prices spike on any exogenous event. Oil spikes. Berkshire trims CVX and buys DAL. Oil falls, CVX yield increases... Don't be surprised if Berkshire repurchases some of that CVX it sold on the spike.

Yea…CNBC, I remember when I first started investing

Does anyone in their right think the Parisians are going to stop drinking? Good luck with that. Paris restricts alcohol consumption and sales as Europe's heatwave shifts east French authorities have announced public alcohol consumption and sales bans in Paris, in a bid to ease pressure on the capital's hospitals during the heatwave. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy0pdq89zno

The bigger thing here, the lesson, is again, so what? if we have another conflict and maybe again oil prices temporarily surge to $100-120? What? Then we ll still have the divas whom are ALWAYS screaming about an incoming commodity super cycle keep screaming and telling everyone that we re still “going way higher”? It’s a total joke and as an investor, there’s so many better places to look for real investments…what’s with the obsession with fuckin oil? It seems like a cool thing for the Twitter divas and podcasters, but generally speaking, a horrible place to actually try to compound capital. Commodity speculation is gambling; if you’re good at it, you can make a fortune, problem is everyone thinks they’re @SharperDingaan but results wise maybe only 3-5% are.

watching CNBC is bad for you as an aspiring investor sort of trying to learn the craft. But I know you aren’t interested in taking any advice on how to learn the craft from older investors not named Warren and Charlie…. Just remember- you never get these years back. Your track record started the minute you started investing

One final point I’d also like to make is that markets are defined at the margin: You can have 99.9% of owners sitting soundly with their holdings, but if that 0.1% of people trading in the markets start getting real erratic, the price for a security can start going all over the place. I was trading a stock a while ago where my single purchases would be the only volume in a whole trading day. I could literally set the price if I could only find a seller on the other side. I caused the price of the security one day to go down 15% or so, and since the family owned like 3/4ths of the company in a trust, they lost a lot of money that day, that is if you valued their holdings at market.