JBird

At half of the value estimation. "I think if it’s cheap enough, you can afford more country risk or regulatory risk. It’s not complicated." CM We're all seeing the same thing here. Russia's Government is corrupt. But this doesn't mean their entire stock market is valueless. It's like investing in China where you have a Government sorely lacking in repute and virtue. There's this miasma of corruption and gross immorality in the markets. And in '04 there was PetroChina... selling at $36 billion. You could have said, the Government is a majority shareholder, this could all go wrong, and so many Chinese companies are frauds. And you'd have been right. There is a possibility of loss-- total loss. But estimate the odds for the possible outcomes. Are the odds in your favor? After you answer that I don't think you need to ask anymore questions.

Why does bitcoin belong in the same conversation as gold? Why is there a large margin of safety at current prices?

HBO's Real Sports did a segment on the Sochi games. The level of corruption is hard to believe, even for Russia. They built a ~30 mile road from the Olympic square to the Ski/Snowboarding mountain. For $9 billion USD. And of course the contractor is Government-owned Russian Railways. The program also mentioned that the total cost for the Olympics will be around $50 billion, which is roughly equal to the cost of all previous winter Olympics combined.

+1

Can you explain your point?

Racemize and I are looking for any boardmembers interested in getting some online bridge games going. Nothing serious-- just for fun. We're not pros by any stretch! If you're interested just PM one us. We're thinking we can join up on Google hangout and then dive into a game.

I contacted 10 brokers and the only one I found with access to the South Korean exchange is Fidelity. They charge an $80 commission buy/sell. Plus there's a 10bps commission for the Korean broker on the buy side and 20bps on the sell side.

The following Korean companies have a two-class share structure: Hyundai Motor. Common: KRX:005380. Preferred KRX:005385. Daelim Industrial. Common: KRX:000210. Preferred: KRX:000215. Nexen Tire. Common: KRX:002350. Preferred: KRX:002355. The common and preferred shares have equal rights to company profits. In each case, the preferred is entitled to an additional dividend above the common stock. The preferred shares do not have voting rights. The preferred shares of Hyundai trade at 4 times earnings, a 50% discount to the common. The preferred shares of Daelim trade at 2.8 times earnings, a 68% discount to the common. The preferred shares of Nexen Tire trade at 3.7 times earnings, a 74% discount to the common. These are large-cap companies. The common stock market cap of Hyundai is $50 billion USD. Daelim is $3 billion. Nexen is $1.4 billion.

Do you believe that given the right technology, the food supply is not finite? And do you believe that given the right drilling technology, the world's oil supply is not finite? Peak oil is the idea that the rate of oil production will one day reach a maximum. This a logical conclusion that stems from two premises a) that the world's oil supply is not infinite and b) that we're consuming oil faster than Nature can create it.

Why do you think that's their premise?

Attractiveness is a highly subjective term, right? Someone that's looking for 2% returns will find the general market very attractive today. Someone looking for 15% returns won't. Can you narrow your definition of attractive?

That's commendable-- I have a lot of respect for that. Same for you Parsad!

(B) A division of profits between the limited partners and general partner, with the first 6% per year to partners based upon beginning capital at market, and any excess divided one-fourth to the general partner and three-fourths to all partners proportional to their capital. Any deficiencies in earnings below the 6% would be carried forward against future earnings, but would not be carried back. Presently, there are three profit arrangements which have been optional to incoming partners: Interest Provision. Excess to Gen. Partner. Excess to Ltd. Partners (1) 6% 1/3 2/3 (2) 4% 1/4 3/4 (3) None 1/6 5/6 In the event of profits, the new division will obviously have to be better for limited partners than the first two arrangements. Regarding the third, the new arrangement will be superior up to 18% per year; but above this rate the limited partners would do better under the present agreement. About 80% of total partnership assets have selected the first two arrangements, and I am hopeful, should we average better than 18% yearly, partners presently under the third arrangement will not feel short-changed under the new agreement; © In the event of losses, there will be no carry back against amounts previously credited to me as general partner. Although there will be a carry-forward against future excess earnings. However, my wife and I will have the largest single investment in the new partnership, probably about one-sixth of total partnership assets, and thereby a greater dollar stake in losses than any other partner of family group, I am inserting a provision in the partnership agreement which will prohibit the purchase by me or my family of any marketable securities. In other words, the new partnership will represent my entire investment operation in marketable securities, so that my results will have to be directly proportional to yours, subject to the advantage I obtain if we do better than 6.

I haven't found an article or letter. I did find one quote that pre-dates a crash. "When good news about the market hits the front page of the New York Times, sell." http://books.google.com/books?id=r3TkyRiit2cC&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=bernard+baruch+stock+market+crash&source=bl&ots=kqsoyjPHa0&sig=jfkgUZvbu36tynSQCOdAXMyQpQA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ohGIUpW8KMaE2QXUm4F4&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=bernard%20baruch%20stock%20market%20crash&f=false According to that source, we're talking about a guy who made a fortune speculating on sugar prices. I am not certain whether Loomis is referring to a Baruch warning given pre- 1920-21 Depression or pre- 1929 Depression. Here's why: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/weekinreview/12word-ART.html?_r=0

I bet you could think of a lot of examples where the market didn't sniff out something imminent.

Clearly the effectiveness and reliability of the computer system matters a great deal in answering that question for any specific situation. But given a computer system with enough quality and reliability, there's very little I wouldn't let it do. I'd go so far as to say I'd let a computer-operated machine perform surgery on me. And I don't see any reason why a computer system can't be more safe and effective than a human driver.

I think it was an aberration. Columbia has webcast many presentations and that's the first one I've seen where the AV was shoddy. "These universities" is a bit of a stretch.

A permanent loss of capital occurs when an investor's aggregate after-tax receipts from an investment-- including those he receives upon sale-- give him less purchasing power than what he had to begin with. It's easy to measure and isn't subjective.

I think idea number 7 is unlikely to add more value than idea number 6. All in all, I think he'll do fine. Thanks for posting.

Why not?

I should've been more clear. I wasn't referring to the article. Clearly, even if all vehicles are autonomous, the probability of an accident is not zero. Therefore insurance, however limited, is still necessary.

The idea isn't that auto insurance will disappear-- even if all vehicles are autonomous. It's that premiums will fall dramatically because the probability of an accident has fallen so much.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chunkamui/2013/03/28/will-auto-insurers-survive-their-collision-with-driverless-cars-part-6/

If the debt load had a significant effect on my standard of living, then absolutely yes. There are a lot of fish in the sea. If I can choose between several girls who are very similar in character and quality to me, I wouldn't choose the one with debt that would materially affect my life. That being said, if my spouse went into debt chasing her dream job, basically I can live with that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/business/earnings-but-without-the-bad-stuff.html?hp&_r=0