Jump to content

sampr01

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    230

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by sampr01

    Filing a Claim or Compliant against a Financial Advisor

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Thanks. This is an individually managed account for past three years and managed by him through Integrated advisor solutions NOT through his fund. He terminated his relationship recently with Integrated advisor solution and received a letter stating that transfer account to another broker in 30 days.

     

    I will check my paper work and get back to you.

     

    Thanks

     

     

    From that, I'll just point out the following....

     

    100% of the outcome will be determined by these few things.

     

    1. What boxes are checked on your investment objective profile you filled out?

     

    2. How long did you hold the investments in question?

     

    3. What type of trading arrangements(if any) do you have for the account? Did you consent to purchasing those securities?

     

    If you've been with this advisor for a while, had lets say "speculation" as your IO, held the stocks in question for several months or more, and gave the OK to purchase them, Im sorry to say, but you're wasting your time pursuing this. If you have Income/preservation of capital checked for IO, bought the securities a few weeks/maybe months ago, had a discretionary arrangement, and no knowledge of the purchases, then you've got a pretty good case. Usually things are somewhere in between.

     

    I'd also add, go to the firms compliance first. Dont go to FINRA. The reason is simple. The firm is 1000% required to disclose any written customer complaint to FINRA. And you can always go to FINRA later. But should they rebuff you, and then later on it is disclosed that they never disclosed the complaint to FINRA, thats just another instance of wrongdoing and negotiating chip in your corner. Quanitify the amount of alleged damages as well. Anything over $5000 they must update on their BrokerCheck profiles.

    Filing a Claim or Compliant against a Financial Advisor

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Thanks for suggestions. Compliant is mainly for too concentrated portfolio in two distressed companies wiped out close to 2/3 rd of $$, when it should have been low risk and conservative. I am not going to disclose who the advisor is. I discussed with this with advisor already and he is okay with it.

     

    Thanks

     

    No I have never been a part of one, but as an advisor, I can tell you how to get it going.

     

    The easiest step would be to email compliance@ the firm with your complaint. They MUST document these when received in writing.

     

    What is the nature of your alleged complaint? In many cases, the firms will offer to settle if there is any wrong doing.

     

    If you can not agree to settle, then the arbitration process will be next. Although often arbitration is a pain and there s a lot of grey areas where you may think you were harmed but nothing happened that technically broke the rules. You also end up paying lawyers quite a bit of money.

     

    So it s important to make sure your case is valid, and that its worth pursuing from a time and money perspective. And like I said, often, the firms will just look to settle it. I know several dudes who own firms that describe paying fines as just another cost of being in the biz. Sad but true.

    Mystery investment by GW investor

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Hi Packer

     

    What are your thoughts on this company. Are you following this company before

    Thanks

    The 100m Euro cash flow is from the cash flow statement (150m euro) less cap-ex for the business (28m euro).  The cash/securities hoard on the balance sheet is almost 850m euro vs. a mkt cap of 316m Euro.  This looks like a bricks & mortar version of customer aggregation (from postal customers) from which to sell other products & services.

     

    Packer

    Mystery investment by GW investor

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I have been following Steven Wood (GW investors) from early days of FAITY research (he is the one indicated $RACE spin off long before everyone). In his blog he recently invested in an European company with same potential as Fiat. Hints are: 100 million FCF, he has Board seat, and New management.. I am curious... any way find out with clues for fun...

     

    ....

    Our largest position in Europe, where we have a board seat and are working with a new management team to transform the company, is most likely going to become a holding company. Around 30% of the revenue of this company is generated in a “shitty” industry that has no chance of becoming a growth business. But it is a local monopoly with substantial barriers to entry.

     

    Furthermore, it provides the platform upon which we can build its other businesses and launch a significant number of new growth initiatives. Excluding two assets which generate none of the cash flow today, we have obtained a €100 million cashflow stream for free. Free is a good price to pay, particularly when there is no bankruptcy risk nor debt.

     

    This setup is eerily similar to our purchase of Fiat whereby we got Ferrari at a deep value price of €4.5 billion, and got the rest of the business for free. Eventually, shareholders of both companies have and will end up owning multiple pieces of paper.

     

    ......

    FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Same applies to AIG and all banks... ;D

    I am just wondering, why do folks here think that recapitalizing FNM or FRE means that existing shareholders or preferred shareholders will get anything?

    I am also not sure that Mnuchin get's to decide what is going to happen with FNM/FRE. He may just get the guidelines from Trump and if that is the case, and Trump want the best deal to pay for projects, well that could mean that the current shareholders get screwed over.

     

    how is trump going to find new shareholders to put up serious capital if the old shareholders are screwed?

     

    Same as with any other recapitalization or bankruptcy.

     

    I think that's a much harder sell. This isn't a typical bankruptcy/insolvency where shareholders hold responsibility for the management they put in place.

     

    This is instance where the government, in a crisis, took over control of the company under false pretenses and then unilaterally re-wrote the terms of the agreement of ceding control to screw the shareholders to the maximum amount possible even though hindsight showed shareholders never needed the government to step in to begin with.

     

    If the gov't can simply take a company into conservatorship based on concerns of what COULD happen, and then unilaterally turn that conservatorship into a liquidation when that company is still solvent and incredibly profitable, and then keep all those proceeds for itself without ever compensating shareholders, then you have a recipe for there never being a private solution to a crisis/potential crisis again. 

     

    What shareholder is ever going to take the risk if the government can simply step in and renegotiate terms to sweep all profits to itself with no legal review whatsoever? What shareholder would step into such a politically polarizing company with the knowledge that the administration could simply steal it back at the next hint of any problems whatsoever.

     

    This really concerns me as a precedent for any future crisis, nationwide or company specific, where the gov't can simply absorb a company based on assumptions that never play out and never owe shareholders anything for it.

     

    I think the bulk of the global investor community would offer a very different account of events. The prevailing view, I think, is:

     

    FNMA/FMCC failed in about the most catastrophic way possible and were bailed out by the government (consistent with expectations that the government effectively guaranteed GSE debt). Economically, the equity and prefs were zeros. Had they simply been written off at the time, nobody would have blinked an eye (despite, according to your view, that being an even greater miscarriage of justice). But they weren't and a few hedge funds continue to fight a legal battle to recover a windfall gain.

    Should the GSEs get restructured into clean start capital structuers, there will be plenty of investors, same as there are in banks, insurance companies and so on - all of which exist with the understanding that the government has wide power to protect its guarantees. The risk of failing during a downturn widely applies to financial companies, and is accounted for in the required return on equity capital.

     

    ...except that isn't what happened.

     

    I also think your assumption that everyone would have bee ok had they wiped the equity out then isn't the case. I didn't start following until 2012, so I can't say for certain, BUT I imagine there would've been a MUCH higher bar needed for the gov't to actually wipe out 100% of equity interest than was needed for conservatorship.

     

    It's one thing to say "something really bad appears to be happening and we're going to take the reigns temporarily to ensure the companies survive" than it is to say "something really bad appears to be happening and we're going to wipe out your interest in the company based on assumptions we're making that we're not going to let play out."

     

    FNMA/FMCC were put into conservatorship when they failed to raise short-term funding necessary to continue operations from the private markets in 2008. They were temporarily illquid, which is the same as insolvent. Simple as that. At that point, the equity should have been worth $0 unless there were excess funds in bankruptcy. The government was the only willing lender to save FNMA/FMCC from default. Considering the likely effects on the MBS market if FNMA and/or FMCC defaulted, I sincerely doubt there would have been any residual value for the common, at that time. I don't think it's fair to expect the benefits of a GSE while decrying any and all consequences. That goes against the foundations of capitalism, which is the risk/reward trade-off. Any other companies, at any other time, would have failed.

     

    There's articles surrounding the DTA write-off and write-up, that make it look like government theft. Those DTAs truly were worthless when written off. Maybe you could argue they were quick on the draw to write them down, but it was a reasonable decision. Without the explicit government funding starting in late-2008, they never would have been able to make it through the illquid period (to return to solvency) and the DTAs would have remained worthless. The government funding almost certainly improved the stability of the mortgage market, accounting changes allowed FNMA/FMCC to avoid MTM, FNMA/FMCC returned to some profitability, and the DTAs regained their value. Temporary illquidity is insolvency. No one complains about the accounting change to provide relief from MTM accounting when talking about FNMA/FMCC.

     

    The NWS is a whole other can of worms, but the common should have been a $0 in 2008. In my opinion, the circumstances of the times forced the government to save the equity as a consequence of saving the MBS market for the greater good (or as a favor to bankers and pension funds, or all of the above). I think the tax payers deserve FNMA/FMCC and all creditors should be made whole. Whether they legally deserve this is another question for smarter folks than myself. Most creditors helped contribute to the recovery and thus deserve the benefits of waiting out the illquid period. No one below the preferreds deserves a dime in my opinion. This is obviously a very simplistic view but I think FNMA/FMCC investors ignore all of the government actions that benefited them over the last 10 years and just focus on a few actions and call them theft. No one wants to repay the benefits but they demand restitution for any and all the negative actions. The government's actions have delivered fantastic underlying returns for most creditors, relative to the alternatives that almost certainly would have resulted in significant haircuts if FNMA/FMCC were immediately wound down.

     

    I actually think the government handled the FnF issue extremely well, considering the restrictions and criteria placed on them. Bush/Obama admins both did very well imo. The US should have had bread lines in 2008 and 2009. We should have had a severe depression. I think the prolonged low growth period was a consequence of absorbing those losses over a prolonged period.

    Berkowitz Wins

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Seriously, he almost completely blew up. Maybe you could argue it's OK to invest with him for a lumpy 15% but not in mutual fund format. He could have been forced to close the shop.

     

    Lucky for SHLD shareholders. If FNMA works for him and his investors will show patience for at least 2-3 years.

    Thoughts on Bill

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    It's quite apparent to anyone that has watched him over the years that he has always been about making money first and morality second. Him trying to rationalize Valeant's aggressive price increases by going after Coke is amusing and unsurprising.

     

    Companies raise prices for lots of reasons. Economists that are hired by BODs to come in and consult on setting prices. On everything from Ipods to cereal, Drugs to toothpaste. The list goes on and on.

     

    There's a lot of though put into it.

     

    It's legal for a firm to extract as much price as it's legally possible. Does that make it moral? Hardly.

     

    This is especially the case in a monopoly. While pricing discretion in monopolies like utilities are restrained by regulators, it is far less so in pharmaceutical companies with patented drugs that have virtually 0 viable substitutes.

     

    Here, you have a wide range of different choices. What Pearson et al likely missed is that egregious price hikes, while allowed under contemporary law, may not be so in the future.

     

     

     

    Do you work for minimum wages at biotech or pharma industry? Do know how much it cost do basic research to come up with one drug. Do you know how much it cost to run small in vivo preclinical study. Biotech companies are not small software start ups. These companies capital intensive and even making their GMP drug for preclinical studies cost like million dollars. We are not talking human trials. If they don't charge enough for the drugs, no company will survive

    Thoughts on Bill

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    ... Is it wrong for me to reserve my judgment on Bill Ackman?... .

     

    ... Quite honestly, it seems to me that a lot of the "boo-ing" is coming from the cheap seats....

     

    ... How can you say he's a snake oil sales man when you don't don't do the work or at least try and connect the dots that he's laid out. At least Citron has some valid arguments. ...

     

    ... 500 years ago, no one believed Copernicus when he said the world was not the center of the universe. I'm not saying this apply to Bill exactly, after all he may be wrong at least on this account, but still I gatta think that maybe just maybe Bill has done the work and seen the retrograde of the other planets in or solar system and realized that somethings not exactly right with popular opinion.

     

    Wrong to reserve your judgement of Bill Ackman [i.e. in the VRX topic]: Certainly not as long it's based on conclusions [that might be subjective] based on facts. Such judgements are certainly of relevance related to the expected behavior of  the four major hedge funds positions.

     

    A lot of the "boo-ing" is coming from the cheap seats : I'm not sure at all if this is a fact. Not many board members have posted their postions in VRX.

     

    How can you say he's a snake oil sales man: In my opinion and to my judgement, few board members have done this in this VRX investment situation. Everybody knows he's a hedge fund manager with a material position in VRX for the fund.

     

    Yes. I totally agree your comments. Lot of members posting with comments with no insight on VRX (rephrasing same arguments by others) and

    ACKMAN bashing. Most of them don't even have a position (Long or Short).

    Someone Teach Me To Be Fu*king Greedy!

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Wow.. Sanjeev.. You killed the Overstock options trade.. i wish had your luck on short term options...they always stink for me...Please let us know your next options trade.. :-X

    In the last few days, I made one of the greatest trades of my life...perhaps one of the greatest trades on this board ever.  Five days ago, I bought Overstock May '13 $12.50 calls.  The stock was getting killed because of the markets, I thought they should make at least as much money as they did last year.  They killed the earnings instead!  I sold my options for five times the money in four days after buying them.  Today, the god-damn thing is up nearly another $3.50, and those options are now worth 15 times what I paid...I'm crying right now...really it hurts like a bitch!  :-X  I had bet reasonably big too...1.5% of the fund in the options!  Whhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!  Cheers!

    FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Thanks tw

    do you have timeframe?

    thanks. how much upside u r looking at?

    hi twacowfca

     

    are looking it as a trade or for long term investement. Which prefs did you buy FMCKJ or FNMAS or FNMAT.

     

    Thanks

     

    We got back in to the preferreds a few weeks ago because it became evident that F&F would post awesome earnings, despite the fact that there is no resolution to the ultimate standing of the holders of the public preferred.

     

     

    We generally buy the best bargains measured by discount to stated value.  These are not always the most traded.  We will buy the most liquid if they are not too pricey.  It's more of a trading opportunity with a call on possible future value because a reorganization that wipes out the public preferred seems unlikely.

     

    That's not the way we look at these.  The margin of safety lies in the assumption that the UST won't wipe out their own investment in their F&F preferreds by a bankruptcy or similar reorganization.  Therefore, it would be unfair to wipe out the rest of the capital structure and unnecessary because the UST's preferred is senior to the rest of the equity claims. 

     

    Eventually, F&F should be able to earn their way out of the hole in the sense of returning more to the UST than the UST put into them.  ( this is more or less the way our government spins accounting to prove they haven 't lost money on organizations they bailed out.)  If that 's the case, then something good may happen to the holders of the public preferred.  And possibly something less for the common.

    FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    thanks. how much upside u r looking at?

    hi twacowfca

     

    are looking it as a trade or for long term investement. Which prefs did you buy FMCKJ or FNMAS or FNMAT.

     

    Thanks

     

    We got back in to the preferreds a few weeks ago because it became evident that F&F would post awesome earnings, despite the fact that there is no resolution to the ultimate standing of the holders of the public preferred.

     

     

    We generally buy the best bargains measured by discount to stated value.  These are not always the most traded.  We will buy the most liquid if they are not too pricey.  It's more of a trading opportunity with a call on possible future value because a reorganization that wipes out the public preferred seems unlikely.

    FNMA and FMCC preferreds. In search of the elusive 10 bagger.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    hi twacowfca

     

    are looking it as a trade or for long term investement. Which prefs did you buy FMCKJ or FNMAS or FNMAT. if you don't mind can you share your entry price because they are up more than $1

     

    Thanks

     

    We got back in to the preferreds a few weeks ago because it became evident that F&F would post awesome earnings, despite the fact that there is no resolution to the ultimate standing of the holders of the public preferred.

×
×
  • Create New...