Palantir

Try a set of index funds, that seems to be the best bet for you.

Brouwerij Van Steenberge

That's the thing though, why would they not have access to Euros? To me it seems like the main risk here is political ramifications from other Euro countries, not economic ones as a consequence of default? I think their banking system would face insolvency and illiquidity on an enormous scale post-default - the country would likely face a choice between allowing its financial system to completely collapse or recapitalizing it. With no access to any Euros, recapitalization would presumably have to occur in a different currency. The alternative of financial system collapse just seems untenable.

Can somebody explain why Greece cannot stay in the EZ after default? The most common argument I have heard is that if this were to happen, then there would be nothing stopping the other PIIGS countries from doing so -aka no punishment for default. To me, this doesn't make any sense, when a country defaults, markets will punish them by raiding the cost of borrowing, so in that case, why not let this happen?

Z:SUNE - SUNEDISON INC Why is a $8B utility a multibagger spec idea? Elaborate if you can. Thx Because it will rise in price multiple times?

I don't check prices I check values....#winning

I don't follow, doc companies stop growing after 8B?

SUNE is one multibagger idea.

10% on the asset or 10% after the effect of leverage?

I propose that we stop proposing standards.

Roth is better if you expect to be in a higher tax bracket in the future....that's about it.

Full-time MBA is your best bet.

I think value investing is a limited framework that can make you miss out on great opportunities. Value investing isn't buying stocks below intrinsic value, but rather those looking for opportunities among low multiple stocks.Well, when high multiple stocks like AMZN keep rising in front of you for years with its 100 PE, value investors have no idea how to handle a stock like that. *ducks gunfire*

I think to those who have no wish to see their size increase beyond 10M, this discussion is moot. That said, I believe there are many out there who would love to have more to manage.

Indeed, I feel like I talk to a lot of guys out there who invest sub<10M, and seem to use the "I don't market" as a badge of honor. It could also be from a desire to "I'd rather focus on finding undervalued securities" rather than selling your service and building a business.

Point is, not everyone is hurt by larger asset bases. You guys are assuming that sub-10M managers are all killing it with 50% returns, investing in obscure, tiny securities, when in reality, a number of them are investing in things that bigger funds can. Anyways the article I linked only talks about being at about 1.6B, not 10B. Beyond 10B yes, your opportunity set shrinks.

That's interesting, I guess that is why all the great fund managers are running portfolios of sub 10M, you know, because size hurts returns. *sends David Einhorn/Seth Klarman/Ray Dalio angry emails* If you're managing more in assets, you can run multiple funds, for different client preferences, spend more resources on your work, you have access to deals small managers don't, etc. Bigger can be better.

Why would you assume it is bad for clients?

These guys were about $110M in 2010, now over a billion, all by getting the word out. Value investing: Alpine tops $1.6 billion by getting the word out http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/print-edition/2014/09/05/value-investing-alpine-tops-1-6-billion-by-getting.html

Maybe some enterprising CoBFers can borrow money for investing there? :D

Who's watching the game today? 2:45 ET

Why is Jamie Dimon a banking god?

As somebody who tries to bring down the level of each discussion. I say YAY!

Wear your seatbelts people.

Don't worry, I'm a girl. tee-hee