bennycx

Probably USB, BK, GS

just based on your numbers alone, 0.6 BV and 9x P/E implies a return on equity of about ¬6.7%. The valuation doesn't sound very cheap to me on a low yielding low growth company. On another note, real estate in HK is also highly overheated and asset/property based companies should all trade below book.

Asia has a lot more capital intensive companies and owner run companies who are not friendly to minority shareholders. For these reasons, they are not really cheap even if it seems so. For good companies who are shareholder friendly, most still trade at an expensive PE ratio. Currently I still find more opportunities in the US than HK/China/Singapore.

Looking at how Buffet decides on whether to keep holdings below 10% ownership e.g. PSX, WFC, etc, it seemed that Buffet really liked American Express a lot. For e.g. he seeks permission to own more AXP but gives up on PSX easily to keep below regulatory requirements. Also understand that WFC is a different situation altogether. Is there a different way of understand this, that AXP is one of his most fav stock?

AXP (largest position)

Can you give a short thesis on ADS?

How do I watch this outside of the US?

I have a large bill to pay in mid 2019. What investments will you do in this situation and why? 1) Merger arbitrage with planned date around 2019 2) BRK 3) Add on to regular stock picks that I have 4) Bonds I am leaning on 1. Any thoughts?

OMC

Video speaks for itself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wNAP5nF6lU

Previously I had 55% WFC 25% BAC and 20% AXP and I sold away my BAC.. I take comfort in the fact that I have an income which will probably add 10-20% extra cash to the portfolio each year. Certainly if I did not have a job, I would diversify more but don't think I'll go beyond 5-8 stocks. I feel that I know those stocks well enough to understand they're a low risk bet. If there is a decent probability of a stock having a permanent impairment of capital, I feel it makes sense to not even invest, rather than buy a lot of them to diversify.

Hi, Members on this board tend to say they hold a concentrated portfolio or position, but what do you mean by that? I hold a ~half a mil portfolio with 2 stocks making up 75% of it and the rest in cash and I think that is concentrated. However there are members also saying they have concentrated positions and subsequently reveal their top position to be ~10-15%. I understand if you have a 10 mil portfolio but is everyone a multi-millionaire here? I think this portfolio allocation is pretty diversified and many high net worth investors I know run 10-20 positions as a norm. WEB and Munger has said that if they were to run small amounts of capital, they would pick only 4-6 high conviction stocks and hold them for a period of time, and certainty DJCO is run that way.

SICK moves! Can't believe my luck..

55% WFC, 22% BAC, 22% AXP, rest cash (6 digit portfolio)

A whole world of NO! Don't steal from people better off than you because you're jealous! That's extremely petty and pathetic. Take a look at yourself :( Please don't tie the legs of the best swimmers. No one will try to be a good swimmer anymore. I'm a good example. I give about 60% because I don't think I'll be rewarded for doing more. Disagree. CEOs are types who would go for it even with less pay just because they're narcissistic and want control and power and show that they're in the lead. So they should be taxed since the demand there isn't elastic. If there is a high tax, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would still want to be a CEO.

Okay but, would dividend taxes at 60% be not considered high? After all, you can leverage stocks 3-5x just like you can with real estate, and you can still make a return in stocks even if it's negative carry. So like, when the dividend taxes are debated, how come topics like negative carry are not really ever discussed if that is seriously the rational for having high tax rates on rental real estate? How would a regular / poor guy leverage stocks 3-5x as easy as a property?

Sure, but it is not so simple like that. A company paying a consistent dividend vs one not paying a dividend when it can impacts the psyche of management. Management becomes overconfident of its ability to grow the company looking at the excess cash flow it has and proceeds to continue, overpaying finally for further acquisitions. Paying a dividend disciplines this management team. They could be good people or trying their best to reward shareholders, but they are still humans, affected by behavioural biases. This is akin to putting every month X% of your salary into an index fund vs accumulating a ton of money and trying to "time" the market. Also one more point: most management teams get there because they're good operators, not capital allocators. I'd rather them run the company efficiently or grow the company with some creative marketing ideas with LESS money to play around.

I'll definitely take my money in a dividend. Management are almost always 1) overconfident about their abilities to grow the company, 2) lousy at capital allocation or 3) don't really work for shareholders. At least when dividends are distributed it gives them cash flow discipline. Otherwise all that excess cash flow will go into overpaying a big acquisition or a "growth" initiative.

Mettler-Toledo

Then I just name my asset management firm as a "Fund" and there you go :)

Put it this way.. if a asset management firm makes 30% profit margin a year.. is it a fund that makes 30%? or is it a business?

If I am not wrong, what he is trying to say is that they're doing market making like trading in a bank. The appropriate returns calculated should include i.e. costs of the machines, hiring people, etc. It is like reporting revenue numbers and not "net earnings"? Traders in a bank also have very low down days like 1 out of 30 days anyway

His public funds are not known to be doing well. So there may be something fishy there.

Using the XIRR function, you get the compounded return while depositing and withdrawing cash in between. How would you compare against a benchmark return similarly, i.e. DCA / monthly payments into S&P, instead of point to point return?

Obviously he doesn't look at all or puts really little weight into the macro/commodity factors, otherwise he would have sold POSCO by now.