muscleman

I was surprised that dividends already payed out will be subtracted from the par value of the preferred shares and that is considered acceptable. TIme value of money would suggest that after all these years par value shuld be at least HIGHER than the $25 figure That seems ridiculous to me. The preferred are not zero coupon bonds. Dividends previously paid out should be return on capital not return of capital. Damage should be at least par.

Recent polls put the “no” vote just ahead, with more than 20% undecided. http://www.wsj.com/articles/next-wild-card-for-markets-italys-constitutional-referendum-1479465701 December 4th. Could the recent market rally end here?

In contrast I think the courts are waiting for the election results to decide how to rule so it can side with the administration. If you followed the FBI investigation into Hillary's email scandal, you know there is no separation of power in the Obama administration.

I don't understand why the Biotech ETF gained so much in the recent days. Biotech seems to be the beneficiary of Obamacare, which forces everyone to carry an insurance, so they raised drug prices by 400-10000% and consumers don't know. Now if ObamaCare is voided and competition brought in, won't that be bad for these Biotech companies? ::)

+1 I fought hard in this thread earlier but decided not to waste more time. This is my last post in this thread.

Seriously, this is the legal system and separation of power that we are betting on? http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fbi-director-comey-congress-new-letter-hillary-clinton-emails-still-no-charges/

How long can the government drag this out? This is just the 56 documents. How about the 11000 documents? If Sweeney enters another order to release all of them later, will government appeal for that again?

I am sure they will say they need further review. Then what? Drag out another month?

Do you know if Sweeney will jump onto the emergency motion right away? Based on Fairholme's request of tomorrow noon's timeline, Sweeney has to rule today for this motion to make sense.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/wikileaks-hilary-clinton-progressives-230009 For you leftists who supported Hillary so strongly, here is what she thinks of you. "which swipe liberal heroes and causes as “puritanical,” “pompous”, “naive”, “radical” and “dumb,” calling some “freaks,” who need to “get a life.” I've long wondered how Hillary could unite the support from both Muslims AND liberals, who are completely incompatible. Now it seems like she is just using the leftists to vote for her. When she said Trump's supporters are deplorable, leftists say, yeah, they indeed are. When she said Sanders supporters are basement dwellers, Sanders said, yeah, they are. Now she says leftists are freaks who need to get a life, what would you say? Personally, despite our disagreements on political views, I've always respected leftists and never thought any of them as freaks who need to get a life. I think of leftists as decent people who just have a different view

I think Eric can provide you a great guidance. I remember one thing he said was that you can contribute "more" for Roth 401k, because the money you put in is already taxed. So choose Roth if you want to contribute more for retirement. Another factor is moving. If you want to save money when you are in a low or no tax state and retire in a high tax state, then Roth is the choice. I am using pre-tax because I think life is already hard now. ::)

Is this a standard procedure of that court?

I kinda feel like Trump resigning and Pence running for president would be better......... ::) Just curious, how would you guys compare Trump's latest comments on women with Hillary's comments of "Deplorables" and "Basement Dwellers"?

What do you guys think of this? http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2016/10/07/donald-trump-names-bob-corker-security-advisory-council/91745690/ "Corker with Trump ,Corker has hinted that he may be interested in a cabinet post within a Trump administration, either as U.S. Secretary of State or Secretary of the Treasury." The disgusting Corker always wanted power..........

Is this EV/EBITDA or P/EBITDA? P/EBITDA It's EV/EBITDA. Comparing price to EBITDA is like comparing apples to oranges. He uses both FCF to equity and EV/EBITDA as metrics. I've read his writeups on Sumzero. They're pretty good. Clear thinking. It is not even easy to find a lot of stocks trading at less than 7x EV/EBITDA these days. How are the PEs buying private companies at 7x EV/EBITDA or less? That seems very strange to me. In addition, he did not factor in growth. I think that's one of the most important things in this evaluation. I am much more willing to pay 10x EV/EBITDA if EBITDA grows at 10% a year. I am not willing to pay 7x EV/EBITDA if there is no growth. In addition, how about capital intensity? Some industries have real D&A and some industries have fake D&A. That makes a huge difference too. Especially the "A" element.

What if the preferred was issued in 2003 and paid for four years and then I bought in 2014?

http://gselinks.com/Court_Filings/Fairholme/17-1015-0001.pdf Michael Sommons appealed Sweeney's denial of motion to intervene. I wonder if this guy works for the government. merk and cherza, how likely do you think the appeals court will hear from him?

Clinton Holds 41-Point Lead Over Trump Among Asian-American Voters: Survey - NBC News this only proves the polls are rigged. I am Chinese and I have not seen a single Chinese nearby supporting Hillary.

The genesis of this story comes from Peter Schweizer, author of the book Clinton Cash, and president of the Government Accountability Institute (GAI). GAI is funded by the Mercer Foundation which donated $1 million to GAI in 2013. Rebekah Mercer sat on the Board of GAI and has been a top donor to Ted Cruz in the primary campaign and later Donald Trump (http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/09/07/rebekah-mercer-takes-helm-of-pro-trump-pac-extending-familys-influence-in-campaign/). The other large contributors to the GAI include the Franklin Center, a Koch brother funded organization and Donors' Trust, headed by current Chief Executive of Donald Trump's campaign Stephen Bannon. Those two organizations donated $3.5 million to GAI in 2012/2013. GAI's total revenues were $2.2 million in 2012 and $2.6 million in 2013, so of the $4.8 million received for those years, $4.5 million came from three right wing funding sources. Your investigation of the Uranium One donations isn't like a critical examination by a short seller, it's analogous to someone touting research from a stock promoter that's been paid by the company to write a favorable analysis. If you think that Hillary Clinton exerted inappropriate influence in the approval of the transaction, then presumably she would be e-mailing her colleagues at the State Department, Treasury, Defense, Justice, Commerce, Energy, Homeland Security, etc. Yet, somehow, there is no evidence that any person on the receiving end of such an e-mail had any such conversation with Secretary Clinton. I bet the evidence is in the 33000 deleted emails, but without seeing those, there is no way to know. We see five of Clinton staffers getting immunity deals and claiming the 5th. Does anyone think that's not suspicious?

Yep, time to put it to rest. Colin Powell called Benghazi "a stupid witch hunt". Condoleezza Rice said that she "completely agreed". Powell and Rice are former Republican Secretary of States. https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/colin-powell-called-benghazi-a-stupid-witch-hunt-and-condi-r How about Hillary selling 20% of Uranium to Russia? Is that also "a stupid witch hunt"? I know I'm gonna regret getting involved in this because i have a feeling that facts don't matter in this case. But statements like this make it sound like Hillary was there with a shovel loading uranium on a freigher bound for Russia. Please explain to me how Hillary sold US's Uranium to Russia given the facts: The sale in question refers to the sale of Uranium One - an uranium miner to a Russian company controlled by the government. Uranium One was(is) a Canadian uranium miner with operations on 4 continents. Some are in the US. The US operations are a small fraction of the total production of Uranium one. Uranium one does not have now nor did it have at the time a license to export Uranium out of United States. The US is not a large producer of Uranium and actually imports a lot of the stuff. Given that Uranium One had operations in the US the state department had to approve the merger. There is no evidence that Hillary was involved with the approval process however State did approve it while she was Secretary of State. In addition to State the sale was approved by 8 other US government agencies. In addition the sale was approved by a whole bunch of other governments around the world where the bulk of Uranium operations are including Canada and Australia and a shitload of those governments' agencies. So how did Hillary sell US uranium to Russia given the facts? "There is no evidence that Hillary was involved with the approval process however State did approve it while she was Secretary of State." Of course there would be no evidence. If there would be any, the most likely place to be is in her 33000 deleted emails. But $140 million+ donations into Clinton Foundations later came from these related parties. This is an investing board. Usually we are not short sellers. We look for things that don't smell well and avoid taking long positions on these stocks. But in terms of Clinton, most people here don't apply this mentality. Instead people defend them just like company's IR department defending against a short seller. I don't understand.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/3/bill-clinton-bashes-obamacare-as-crazy-system-whil/ "Bill Clinton bashes Obamacare as ‘crazy system’ on campaign trail" I don't know why Hillary and Bill disagreed strongly on this. Hillary wanted to bring illegal immigrants to ObamaCare as well. The premium increase right now probably hasn't taken that into account yet.

Yep, time to put it to rest. Colin Powell called Benghazi "a stupid witch hunt". Condoleezza Rice said that she "completely agreed". Powell and Rice are former Republican Secretary of States. https://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/colin-powell-called-benghazi-a-stupid-witch-hunt-and-condi-r How about Hillary selling 20% of Uranium to Russia? Is that also "a stupid witch hunt"?

Digging up 'news' from 2015.. That's desperate. What matters more is whether this is true or false. NYT seems like a reliable source, no? Selling 20% of US Uranium to Russia for personal gain seems like a very alarming thing, and you are saying 2015 is "old news" so we shouldn't even talk about it. Then Benghzai happened in 2012 which is even further and even older news and we should also not talking about it right?

Or a Trump administration. If Obama has the average person's IQ, he would announce success as the 100 Bn worth of warrant. Why let Trump do it? Or if he does not even have this kind of IQ, Trump will likely do it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=4 "As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation." This seems really dangerous to me, guys. If she is willing to sell Uranium to Russia for money into her own foundation, that's a very bad sign.