Hielko

Total, geometric, average?

Your average costs is irrelevant and your focus on it is only creating an anchoring bias.

Currently up ~25%. Pretty amazing given all the bad things that happened and the mistakes I made this year. Mistakes? * WH merger arb (down 60% before I sold, now at -100%). * Long Clear Leisure (down 60%) Unclassified? * Short CYNK (up ~150% before I exited, went up a lot higher after that...) Unlucky? * Awilco (down 60% from peak) Combine that with some smaller declines in other positions such as my biggest position (>25%) losing 30% from peak, getting screwed by Magix management in a delisting (also down ~30%) and it's a miracle I made any money at all this year. And that is kids why you want diversification. And a sizable BRK stake also didn't hurt this year.

Lol

Why should the SEC give preferential treatment to Warren? Because you're a fan? Rich people always get special treatment.... having to report your holdings to the SEC isn't exactly a preferential treatment...

I guess you will be able to see some kind of correction transaction in your account statement. I see it relative often at IB for corporate actions, although it is usually for very small amounts (stuff like a $0.01/share difference in withholding tax)

International trading is the biggest issue for me, by far more important than getting used to some UI. In that case fidelity can do 25 markets online plus several others by phone.... Does IB do all that? They do have access to decent number of foreign markets, but probably a bit less than Fidelity. See: https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/?f=1323&ib_entity=uk But it cannot be repeated enough how awesome IB is compared to other brokers in almost every other aspect. Better trade execution, extremely low cost trades (you can even get paid if you provide liquidity), very low margin interest rates, good with corporate actions and other special events (and no related fees). Easy to short and borrow stocks. Good performance reporting tools. FX conversions can be done very cheap. I do most of my trading/investing at IB, but do use some other brokers as well. Mostly to get access to markets that IB doesn't support. And every time I use another broker I realize how far behind they are compared to IB.

It will probably rebound at some point, but it could go a lot lower as well before that happens. TSX Venture shares some similarities with the AIM All Share Index in the UK: both are markets with limited regulations and a lot of crap for stupid retail investors. Doesn't have a pretty track record.

I think the amount of efficient market stuff is reasonable, and it's certainly not being represented as being the only truth. And I actually think a lot of it it useful to know. Some just as background knowledge/being able to understand what other people are thinking, but often it also gives you tools on how to think about certain questions. You just have to realize what the limitations are. Ps. Fwiw have finished lvl I and II, going for III next summer. Especially lvl II is pretty worthwhile with a big focus on accounting and valuation IMO.

For some people, yes. Not for everybody. As a Dutch citizen I don't pay any capital gains taxes* so it doesn't matter how often securities are traded. And I bet plenty of institutions can trade tax free, and as Nate points out: even US individuals can do that inside an IRA. * That's technically not 100% true since we pay a 30% tax on a 4% hypothetical annual capital gain (so it's absolutely irrelevant what you exactly own and how much you trade). Think it's a pretty decent system since it's so much easier w.r.t. reporting and calculating taxes.

Google Translate works pretty good.

I think a bunch of them have been discussed on this forum. I used to own Emeco, but think that more or less everything that I have to say has been said in the Emeco thread on this forum and my blog.

Schloss was a full-time professional investor. If the OP was just buying a basket of cheap stuff, that might be okay. But based on his portfolio, I am assuming he has put substantial effort into the selection each stock. My recommendation is based on the time/benefit tradeoff, especially for a relatively small portfolio. What makes you think that OP has put a 'substantial effort into the selection each stock'? It is just a more or less random selection of large cap names... and OP's questions doesn't directly scream brilliance IMO.

@ItsAValueTrap: 1. Historically sellers of volatility have had an 'edge', but I doubt that this says anything about insider trading. It's a risk can be priced if necessary. Option sellers always have to worry that the counter party has some insight that they don't have. 2. I don't think that needs to be the case, but calling it an edge might also be the wrong word. Selling volatility is profitable in the long run - and prices adjusted after '87 to account for freak events - but it is not a risk-less profit. So depending on your assumptions you could argue that volatility sellers only make a fair risk adjusted return which means that there is no real reason to flood into that trade.

There is however a set of data that does answer the question that TS is looking for: the difference between realized volatility and implied volatility.

Meson Capital

Please elaborate on what you mean here. Because you know, they build solar PV farms in deserts, so it's not like it's a dealbreaker... Also, concentrating solar uses lenses to focus the sun tens if not hundreds of times on a small high-efficiency solar cells, generating temperatures that are way higher than anything on a rooftop would ever see. This one is a bit extreme, but it concentrates the sun 2000x: http://www.dailytech.com/IBM+Tries+Its+Hand+at+Concentrated+Solar+With+5000x+Collector/article30391.htm It's literally true that above certain temperatures you lose some conversion efficiency, but at these high temps you also tend to have much more sun, so it can be a tradeoff worth making. I don't think you read the article you linked in your own post, because it actually talks about cooling the chips that receive all the light: it's what the whole article is about!

I think you should always adjust for a minority interest, doesn't matter if the sub is contributing to earnings or not. Especially if it is meaningfully contributing to earnings you should make an adjustment since not all earnings would be attributed to equity holders. For a P/B ratio the adjustment is easy since you can simply take the book value of the minority interest.

Almost every stock I own is cheaper than 7x EV/FCF... without checking the math: Conduril Conrad PD-Rx Awilco Ming Fai Argo Beximco Pharma

Based on your beliefs a rational person should live as though god exists, at least according to Blaise Pascal: the guy who invented probability theory. His famous wager: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager

Your source is wrong. Vigintillion is a number though, so how long before we reach that? Or duotrigintillion dollars/share?

Also got a push message from Bloomberg. Apparently an important event...

Sorry! I understand your goal, but trying to create an incentive can very easily have many unwanted side effects. My tip: never tell them/anyone else how much money you have, and tell them that you intent to spend it all before you die anyway. You control what the peer group is anyway. Put them in some high-end private school and showering them with riches might be perfectly normal in that kind of enviroment. Might not result in kids you like... Absolutely not, I think he would only get worse. That's why you don't want to create an incentive that is purely based on how much they earn.

So you want to measure what your kids achieve and how you value them based on how much money they earn? Really? You prefer to have the next Sadar Biglari as a son as opposed to the next mother Theresa as a daughter? Or just to pay a son more than a daughter because women earn statistically speaking less than men?

Just because companies issue debt/equity at discrete intervals doesn't mean that the WACC isn't changing continuously. Debt and equity prices do change (almost) continuously. If their debt is for example trading above par they would presumably be able to issue debt at lower rates and visa versa.