LC

http://www.telafinance.com/blog/can-you-hold-for-forty-years.html Figured the board may enjoy this short read.

No I don't want to be the top of the top at my craft. Frankly in most cases I have seen, you need to be born with a generational talent to reach that level. It is not a developed skill. I'd wager the majority of those in the 0.1% were born there (or somewhere close) vs. developing skill to get there. But to me none of that matters - you play your cards as well as you can and hope for the best.

Who gives a $#*@? Something about jealousy being the most boring of the sins.

I consulted with auditors for specific issues. They are in a tight spot: limited information, and perverse incentives. Difficult to make change when the cards are stacked against you.

I've argued for something similar to this. The question I have is, what is a good timeframe to judge a long-term investment manager? 5 years? 10? Let's say it's 5 years. If I were to pay the "perfect" manager - i.e. someone to make all my investment decisions for me, I argue that the compensation should be a performance fee of X% for all gains over the 5 year treasury. No management fee. The treasury is truly risk-free. Allocating to S&P index entails risk (equities could be overpriced, you could buy a basket of bonds or real estate instead, for example, and this is part of the investment manager's job of allocating capital to risky assets). Which is not a huge hurdle. The 5-year is aprox 2.75% these days.

We are in a giant bull market. And the banks have benefitted greatly from this. I don't think the next five years will look similar to the last.

I agree with Shalab. You can tell yourself how you "should" react to a large MTM decline. You don't know how you will feel until you experience it. This is where youth helps. Losing 50% on a 2K investment is a lot different than losing 50% on a 200k position.

FWIW I feed them this stuff: https://www.tasteofthewildpetfood.com/cat-formulas/rocky-mountain-feline-formula-with-roasted-venison-smoked-salmon/ 42% protein, with 2 cats 1 bag lasts about a month, maybe more. At $30/bag you're looking at 50c/day per cat.

Yep. 2 cats...12+ years on both. Only dry food.

This is incredible: I have determined after careful anaylsis, that everything for a destroyed carcass at the time and carnage that is left over. "Oh man, the BABY LAMBs are crying for help, and the SLAUGHTER OF THEIR KNIFE!!!!! Everything will be the SAME except for the dates, and I will triple check, and probably still have errors. The ACCR shareholder's MOTTO during the ONSLAUGHT: PAIN! What the hell?? :o

Math status: successful! ;D

Honestly, screw that. I don't "hold back" just because you can track down my identity. Fuck it, I have free speech and I plan on using it. If my boss wants to fire me because of my opinions, so be it.

Question Cigar. What was the feeling like when pulling the LOC to fund the margin account? I would've been scared shitless, I guess depending on how large of a chunk of net worth. Never had the experience myself, wondering what you thought about it.

What about a business model like Uber or Lyft. WW gives landlords a branded platform to attract customers. Landlords provide certain standards of service (minimum sq. footage, internet access, desk space, coffee etc.). WW takes a cut when clients book.

Sure. Imagine someone acquiring any profitable company with a major contingent liability.

Absolutely counts as income Non-Cash Bonuses If the bonus is not cash, but a trip or goods, you have to report the fair market value. The employer should report this on the W-2. It will be included in that box with wages and other compensation and not reported separately. If the bonus is in the form of a stock option, for instance, the employer should show the fair market value of the stock at the time of the bonus.

No way google or facebook will enter banking. These guys couldnt maintain compliance with GDPR despite having 3? years of preparation. No way they can handle the labyrinth of banking regulations.

The word asparagus is funny. It sounds like an italian guy asking you to spare a guy named gus.

A husband, wife, and their nine children are waiting at a bus stop. A blind man joins them after a few minutes. When the bus arrives, they find it overloaded and only the wife and the nine kids are able to fit onto the bus. So the husband and the blind man decide to walk. After a while, the husband gets irritated by the ticking of the stick of the blind man as he taps it on the sidewalk, and says to him, "You know if you put a piece of rubber on the end of your stick I wouldn't have to listen to that tapping." The blind man replies, "If you would've put a rubber at the end of YOUR stick, we'd be riding the damn bus."

Or so says the below article https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-06/what-s-a-stock-worth-in-new-economy-accounting-has-its-critics Essentially the argument is for the capitalization of intangibles such as R&D expenses. This is silliness in my opinion. Whether you capitalize or expense these investments, the only difference it makes it to book value. It doesn't change the revenues and cash/owner's earnings of the company.

Fair point! Although for whatever moral reason it irks me more when it seems like insiders are colluding to fleece shareholders vs. when arms-length parties do it out of incompetence. Another point is: Even when you're HugeCo and you buy out SmallCo, there IS a culture clash. But HugeCo usually fixes all that by firing just about everyone from SmallCo and replacing them. Obviously that is easier to do when you're absorbing a SmallCo vs. merging with another company around your size.

Right but my question is more going towards...is Google/MSFT/etc. behaving appropriately? Or are they providing preferential treatment (or pricing) towards former Google executives who are helping finance a startup which they are shopping to Google. Honestly, given how incestuous that world is, I would not be surprised if shareholders are being fleeced by management through preferential acquisitions, consulting contracts given out to past management, etc. etc. etc.

Building it in house isn't going to get some ex-Unilever guys a fat paycheck, though. I wouldn't call it corporate bureaucracy - more like corporate captivism.

I always wondered about these corporate acquisitions. Just how judicious is the acquiring company? I mean, who exactly are they buying from? Hypothetical: Joe Schmoe founds Dollar Shave Company. After three, four, five rounds of financing, he is down to 20% ownership (hypothetical). The remainder is owned by a bunch of angel funds and other financing providers. And these guys are probably (or at least probably employ) ex-CPG insiders. Long story short is you have Unilever spending shareholder $$s to buyout a small competitor owned by a bunch of ex-Unilever executives.

The point is, if we accept the premise that we are going to have universal coverage, there must be compromises.