FFHWatcher

Itrade. It works smoothly. Transfers and new acct set up is slow.

Sanjeev, Quick! close this thread before it turns into another LVLT mess.

To my knowledge, Sedar.com and Sedi.ca are the only two sites that companies directly report too. Any other sites might have some sort of automated data gathering tool that you have to pay for such as CanadianInsider.com If you think Sedar.com is bad, try sedi.ca. Very painful.

My golf dues are more :'(

a quick look at Chou Europe's reports shows that he is not happy with the performance and has decided to waive his management fees until Jan 1, 2014. Just over 2 years with no management fees. But then again, a lot investment managers do this when they have poor performance. If you accept that he is a good investment manager, it could work out well. Remember, Chou also has a 2% early withdrawal fee should you redeem your investment within the first 24 months. The 2% is reinvested in the fund and split among the remaining unitholders. Again, not that uncommon within the mutual fund industry.

I am a happy MOI customer. Don't just look at it as investment ideas. Look at it as an educational tool. Cheaper than a University finance course. You will become a better investor reading their reports. Do some of their ideas fail? Of course, that is investing. Their analysis is extremely thorough and it is up to the investor/reader to continue with their own analysis and then decide if they invest and decide how to accumulate, how much weighting, etc. $1,200 subscription price...who's portfolio here doesn't move that much in a day or even an hour? The value is there, imo. If i were him, i wouldn't discount the service... :-) Extremely professional organization with a high level of customer service standards. I screwed up when i placed my order and their response to my error far exceeded my expectations. They absorbed my error = Expensive service but they aren't greedy.

This strategy works amazing for the financial advisor who has a client that has $500 per month to invest. Normally, the financial advisor would only make $25/mo (if a deferred sales charge is used) or a lot less if you do it no load for them. BUT, if you can convince them to borrow $100k on their house, their payments are about $500/mo in interest on a HELOC. In this scenario the advisor might get as much as $5,000 in commission and it still costs the client $500/mo. It looks great on paper at a 10% rate of return or even at 6% dividend yields. Unfortunately, reality and illustrations/spreadsheets aren't the same. No one last 5-10 years doing this. Just look at the S&P 10 year return. I liked the one poster that said to never invest money that can leave you homeless. I remember one investor doing this, buying Bombardier and Nortel shares in the year 2000 (they were tired of hearing of everyone else getting rich with these stocks) with their HELOC and then the investment going down a lot and then they doubled down. In less than 3 short years they blew something that took them 20 odd years to accumulate. Bottom line : Pretty good upside, devastating downside. If the money you end up wanting to invest is more than 10-20% of your net worth, likely way too risky. If you are worth $5M and you are borrowing $250k against your $1M mortgage free house, it is less risky.

Did you get the chance to hear Taubes' alternative hypothesis? He strongly disagrees with the simple calories in / calories out. His reasoning makes sense (to me anyway). http://videomedia2.swedish.org/mediasite/SilverlightPlayer/Default.aspx?peid=cd8c7aa15bc94a0486f4ee9b66ef8f8f The argument is basically this: A diet that raises your blood sugar too high will trigger an insulin spike, and this insulin will signal your fat cells to store the energy in fat. Thus you are left feeling low energy and you tend to want to eat more. So the diet will dictate whether or not you will be able to control your eating to a level where you maintain your weight. The more fiber you get with your carbs (whole foods), the more likely you are to maintain your weight. The more processed the food (less fiber), the more you risk getting fat. The fiber slows down the rate at which the carbs hit your blood stream, thus reducing the insulin spikes. And of course the energy is there on a steady, slow flow until the next meal (vs a short term flood of carbs). Ok, I tried to watch it, lasted a few minutes, skipped ahead but I was not going to spend 90 minutes watching the video so I will use your summary. I agree that different foods trigger different feelings and cravings. Foods trigger hormones which trigger feelings and cravings which causes us to eat. The types of foods you discuss are good foods that have positive characteristics such as slowing the rate that carbs hit your bloodstream, etc. The reality is, if you eat too much of this food and have a positive caloric balance at the end of each day than you will gain weight, insulin response or not. There is no need to watch long videos or to learn something new. Just eat good healthy whole foods (or twinky's if you must as shown in the link I included above) and make sure that expend more calories in a day than you take in...and you will lose fat. It is that simple (remember, it is simple, not easy). Ericopoly ; how does Taubes explain eating 1800 calories of twinky's/day and burning >1800 calories per day and losing weight? I certainly do not suggest this type of diet...it is idiotic but it explains a simple truth. Of course, I bet his insulin must have been on a huge roller coaster ride. I don't understand why this simple conventional wisdom as Taube says in his lecture, is unacceptable to so many? Why keep looking for an answer when it is right in front of you? I doubt that Taube is suggesting that even people who consume way less calories than they burn gain weight. Is he?

My 2 cents. Dieting, weight loss, fat loss, performance related nutrition, etc., has been a major interest of mine for just over 20 years. I studied it in University as well as continuing to study and research it for sport performance afterwards. I have seen diet after diet after fad after fad after book after gimmick, all come and go ... all eventually went away except for what is the basis for how the human body works. It is the only constant. When it comes right down to it, the one and only fundamental formula that you need to understand is quite simple. 1/ If calories in < calories out than you lose weight. 2/ If calories in = calories out than you maintain your weight. 3/ If calories in > calories out than you gain weight. As with many other things, people and society never want to accept the simple, obvious solution because while it is simple, it isn't easy and because it doesn't make anyone any money. I realize that posters will chime in to discuss the 'calorie in' side of the formula and tell me about this study and that study and about HDL and LDL and about heart disease and cancer and milk and animal products and about processed foods and about simple sugars and about low carb diets and about eating smaller more frequent meals and about zone diets and about Atkins and about <insert new study that they heard about in the news> ........ Then we can talk about the other side of the formula which is 'calories out' and they can go on and on about aerobic exercise vs. resistance exercise vs. walking vs. running vs. cycling vs. yoga vs. being active in the morning vs. being active in the evening, putting on muscle mass to burn calories all day long vs <insert new idea of how to make burning calories easy so people don't have to sweat or leave their computer here> (there may be truth to how various foods may cause cancer, health problems, etc. I am only talking about losing weight...fat specifically). Most of time when people are active and are somewhere close to an ideal weight, most health problems disappear. Summary : There are about 3500 calories in 1 pound. If you want to lose 1 pound than you must, through a combination of 'calories in' (aka Food) and 'calories out' (aka activity), have a deficit of 3500 calories. Repeat if necessary. I can virtually assure you that if you make this process complicated and fail to grasp the simple fundamentals of how the human body works, than your chances of success will be reduced significantly. Do not make it complicated. http://calorielab.com/news/2010/11/20/twinkie-diet-results/

Perhaps the lesson is that there are always risks and if given enough time and if enough effort and brain power is put into solving them, most risks to our systems (computer, financial, economic, social, political, etc.) can be overcome.

I think at this point, there is a better than 50/50 chance that Carson Block uncovered something significant. Perhaps he isn't 100% or even 50% correct but it is significant as senior executives are getting turfed based on preliminary report and OSC. At this point, I am willing to give CB credit as well. As Sanjeev said, if the Board can't uncover this stuff and some outsider can, it really makes you question what the heck is the point of having a Board to represent shareholders. Independent Directors William (Bill) E. Ardell Toronto Lead Director since 2010; nominated as Director since 2010; previously President & CEO and a director of Southam Inc. Bill was director for a number of public and private sectors, including not-for-profit organizations, serving in varying capacities as Chairman, Director, or member of the board committees. He began his career with Touche Ross in Montreal. James (Jamie) P. Bowland, CA Joined the Board in February 2011; former Managing Director at BMO Capital Markets, Investment & Banking Group; extensive experience in mergers & acquisitions, capital markets and corporate banking. Jamie is a Director of a number of TSX-listed companies and not-for-profit organizations. He is a Chartered Accountant and holds the Institute of Corporate Directors designation. James (Jamie) M.E. Hyde, CA, C.Dir Toronto Director since 2004; previously Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer, GSW Inc., Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Resolve Business Outsourcing Income Fund, Former Partner, Ernst & Young LLP, where he provided for 24 years a board range of professional services to public and private companies. Edmund Mak, MBA Vancouver Director since 1994; Associate Broker, Royal Pacific Realty Corporation; over thirty years with public, multi-national and private corporations in North America and Hong Kong, in the real estate, computer and high technology equipment, transportation, construction, oil & gas, textile and China trade industries. Simon Murray, CBE Hong Kong Director since 1999; Chairman, GEMS (General Enterprise Management Services (International) Limited); thirty-five years in Asia; previously Executive Chairman, Asia Pacific, Deutsche Bank Group, Independent non-executive director of a number of listed companies in HKG including Cheung Kong (Holdings) Ltd., Orient Overseas (Int’l) Ltd., Wing Tai Properties Ltd., and non-executive director of Greenheart Group Ltd. Peter Wang Hong Kong Director since 2007; Senior Commercial Consultant of Zijing Copper of Zijing Mining Group, a HKG-listed company; has over 30 years experience in Sino-foreign business affairs, predominantly related to petrochemical and mining industries, as well as wood-based panel industries. Garry J. West Toronto Joined the Board in February 2011; former Partner at Ernst & Young; With 35 years of extensive financial experience including auditing, corporate restructuring, public financings and strategic planning initiatives for a number of major organizations; Director and Chair of the Audit Committee for two other TSX-listed companies; Fellow of the Ontario Institute Chartered Accountants.

Valid question at this point. It may have been a valid discussion on a regular North American corporation with somewhat verifiable financials but the OSC has largely confirmed that something significantly wrong has occurred and that the financial statements and the assets are completely unreliable. Advantage Block. I still can't believe he was able to uncover something so substantial. A similar situation occurred at Puda Coal with Arthur Little and he turned out to be right as well. Why North American investors ever give $1. more to a Chinese company before there is some sort of substantial investor protection system overhaul is beyond me.

Looks like dataroma is as of june 30. Sales were after june 30.

Cwericb, i agree with you on most of your points. However, i would say Sanjeev/our moderator, has been fair and open minded re: TRE. He has not pre- judged TRE but has raised some valid points in an intelligent objective respectful manner.

I have noticed that as the price of TRE has rebounded, it's opponents have become more irritated using emotional words such as 'It's disgusting...' and 'I'm pretty sick of...' I don't understand how people who say they have no vested interest get so emotional (the words 'disgusting' and 'pretty sick of' suggest pretty strong emotions) about a stock? I don't even get that emotional about things I own, let alone things I don't own. That does not make sense. Something isn't right here. I don't understand how you few posters are so absolutely certain that TRE is a fraud? You don't have any more information than anyone else. I understand that you obviously FEEL strongly that it is fraud and CWERICB is taking the brunt of your combined arrogance. There are many other experts looking at the same information and making completely different conclusions. Just because they are smart (perhaps smarter than many here) and have more resources (many more resources than most here) doesn't make them right either. CWERICB seems to be pretty clear that he is saying that it is his opinion that TRE is not a complete fraud and is worth more than $3-7/share, and he is willing to put his money where his mouth is. You few are basically saying that it is NOT your OPINION but it is a virtual FACT that TRE is a fraud. That seems like arrogance to me and I find it unusual. I am sure there isn't any collusion happening here but certainly unusual behavior. Maybe everyone is feeling philanthropic and are here to ensure CWERICB doesn't lose all his money? That was likely Blocks primary purpose too. If it is a Fraud, congrats to Block. If it is worth more than $3-7, than congrats to CWERICB. Let's shut up and wait for the PWC report but I certainly don't mind hearing that CWERICB is making money. Who minds hearing that another person is making money?

Hey, I'm not smart enough to determine that on my own. I called Patsie D. and spoke with her at FBK. She was quite helpful. Her answer did make sense to me which was to build up some extra inventory in the quarter and keep it for customer orders in the following quarter. Shareholders wanted to sell that extra inventory to pump up sales and cash flow in the quarter and FBK was looking ahead and looking at their customer demand in the following quarter. They did not want to be put in a position to not have product to sell a customer in the following quarter when they knew their production would be down due to maintenance. I think it would be different if they just sold all or a lot of their product as market pulp.

Not sure how that will change anything. Just because this turns out to be a fraud or not a fraud, how will it make a difference next time as the situation won't be identical, no? If you ask a person what he learned and he responds that he will know in a couple of months, than I personally completely agree with him. There are only a handful of people out there that do know all the facts. All the facts are not yet out. You/given2invest and Hester are basically responding to every single post on this topic, it seems within 15-30 minutes of posting (what is that about, why are you two so passionate about TRE and telling everyone else they are fools? If you think everyone else are fools, than let them be fools...you two will not change them), that it is a foregone, virtually 100% conclusion that Sino-Forest is a bogus company and a lousy investment at any price AND that everyone else, except for you two, the shorts, and Muddy Waters, are absolute fools if they think otherwise. It is impossible to say that Sino-Forest is a complete fraud and it is impossible to say that Muddy Waters is mostly correct. The truth will come out one way or another...eventually. Therefore, in a few months or more, when the truth is much more certain, cwericb will know whether or not his personal analysis is correct or not. How can you confirm that you have actually learned anything without knowing the truth?

Sounds like Hester is trying his best to be a shiit disturber? Not the first time. The more you antagonize others (on purpose) the less others may regard your posts. And you wouldn't be posting as much as you are about this if others opinions did not matter to you. Just my opinion of course.

SD ; You are in the investment business and you spelled Porsche incorrectly? That is like spelling 'Warren Buffet'... almost. Actually, I suppose there is an inverse relationship between who can spell Warren Buffett and who can spell Porsche, correctly.

Whether it takes 2 yrs or 3 yrs to double your money, it is still an excellent rate of return (26% ROR). SD isn't referring to a one year 26% ROR, he is talking about doubling your money. In 24 or 36 months, either is great. Don't worry too much on how long it takes. 4 or 5 years is very good too! (I think SD would agree?). 1 yr returns and YTD mean nothing is perhaps a second message he is sending?

I am a new fortress shareholder but i have followed the history. On the surface it seems excessive but perhaps it isn't? If the $13.5m was all cash, i would say it was excessive, for sure. But it isn't. Most is stock. Most is very long term. He adds a tremendous amount of value to ftp. He is also down about $25M since comp was made public. A part of me also feels chad makes his return based on his existing ftp shares but should also earn a good salary. He is paid for his regular day to day efforts already and his exceptional work/value added shows up in share price appreciation/depreciation. The market has voted on his $13.5m, and it said "you can have the 13.5m, but it will cost you $25m.". Lots of other factors also going on but i also feel shareholders aren't that pleased. It would have been different if timing was different but ftp is now down by 50% or so...which is why i am starting to buy.

Suggestion: Link your credit card to your bank account and direct your credit card company to take the entire balance owing on the payment date. No more interest. If you don't have enough money in your bank account to cover the entire balance due on your credit card than you probably shouldn't have a credit card. IMO.

Not sure if it is relevant but I believe the banks that issue the credit cards (ie. Visa and Mastercard) are responsible for and take the credit risk, as well as collect the interest as well as take the losses when consumers don't pay. The credit companies generate revenue via transaction fees they charge retailers that accept the cards. Therefore, it is generally the banks that are the loan sharks charging the 20% interest rates, not the credit card companies.

If someone was a true nuisance, Sanj would just boot them off, hopefully. I thnk he would give a warning and then, goodbye. Lol on the lvlt thread ignore. I couldn't imagine needing it here but i understand wanting options. I would prefer to keep the board self policed with a reasonable moderator like Sanj. It is quite surprising that more Yahoo type posters haven't tried to participate. Off topic a bit...does anyone understand how the yahoo message boards got the way they are? How can so many idiots post so frequently in one spot? Do people who write such non-sense actually invest in the stock market? Is it all just pump and dump or short and distort? It is a shame really that those boards are so useless and i hope that the way Sanj has set this board up, that it can't happen here.

For the most part, FBK results have been unimpressive. FBK hasn't fully benefited from the huge NBSK price reversal from 2009. US $ has hurt them. US operations have hurt them, extended timeline for energy sales, etc. On the other hand, their debt reduction using free cash flow and share issuance has been excellent (aside from dilution). In my opinion, unfortunately management has done little to add value that I can tell, with the exception of paying down debt and not blowing the free cash flow, yet. While I wish other shareholders will push for a dividend, I just don't think that is where management's thoughts are at in 2011 (we need FFH on board). If they continue to buy shares, perhaps they will start to think MORE like shareholders and start paying us a portion of our income.