DTEJD1997

hey all: One thing that I think is obvious now is that USA based manufacturers are going to be more valuable going forward. How much more valuable? Very hard to say, but it is going to be SOMETHING. There might be some small cap auto parts manufacturers that should be able to capture a bit more business in the near future. Those might be the companies that benefit the most?

Hey all: It seems that the media are now chattering about the UFO's. Here is an interesting article: https://www.stripes.com/news/us/the-navy-tracks-ufo-sightings-scientists-explain-what-s-really-going-on-1.584080 I found a few things very interesting about this article. The article claims that many UFO sightings can be explained by rather simple things. Such things as a pilot having fatigue, or that it is reflected lights, or perhaps it is a satellite launch. All of which are certainly valid and could be the explanation in certain cases. HOWEVER, I found it fascinating that the article tries to use these explanations for what has been encountered by the Navy pilots. Does the author think the readers are mentally deficient? NONE of the aforementioned explanations would be even remotely plausible in what has been encountered by the Navy. One possible explanation featured in the article was that it was a drone. I definitely think that is a possibility, but I don't think it is going to be Elon Musk's SpaceX drone(s)! Some of the sightings happened around 2004, SpaceX was founded May 6th 2002. So a little later than a year after it's founding, SpaceX came up with these crazy, futuristic drones? How are reflected lights going to be picked up by RADAR? How is a pilot's fatigue going to be picked up on camera? Are not highly trained pilots better observers than regular folk? The way the article was written, makes me wonder if the author even watched/read/contemplated what was shown in the Navy videos?

Hey all: One of the things I find fascinating in the discussion of extra-terrestial life is the discussion of the "great hurdles". For example, life may be relatively common, but a great hurdle is going from single celled life & very small organisms to larger, more complex organisms. This could be a "great hurdle" that most planets with life never overcomes. Another hurdle is intelligence. Another could be technology. For example, there appear to be lots of places with liquid water under protective sheets of ice. A complex, intelligent life form may find it next to impossible to accumulate much technology if they are living underwater. Very hard to smelt metal when you are in water. Another hurdle could be forming & maintaining complex societies. Another hurdle could be most cultures never progress into the "technological age". Another hurdle could be pandemics...or nuclear/biological war OR another hurdle could be that most cultures don't use radio communication more than 2-300 years. If so, they are only broadcasting for incredibly limited periods of time. Another hurdle could be that once MOST cultures get technology & industrialization, they destroy the environment. OR Maybe cultures make it past this, but AI does them in? OR Could it be that cultures eventually lose their edge and simply collapse? OR Could it be that there is something that we are not even contemplating that does most cultures in? I am going to guess that we as humans have passed some of these great hurdles, but that we also have looming in front of us.

Why dont we see more of this on like reddit or something given that at any moment theres 15k+ aircraft in the air at a given time? Most Im willing to venture have cell phone cameras in them. Cloaking Devices? If I recall correctly, the Navy was encountering these UFO's a few hundred miles off the coast. I presume those are not in heavily trafficked air corridors? If I also recall correctly, the UFO's that were encountered were staying/hovering usually in one area...they weren't traveling hither and yon. Finally, MOST (not all) of the UFO's were relatively small, the size of a small plane. So unless you were looking for them, OR had the upgraded radar, (or both), you probably would not see or notice them. There have been NUMEROUS reports of people spotting UFO's as passengers in airplanes, but I would discount those reports MUCH more than the Navy's reports. The thing about the Navy reports is that: A). UFO's were initially spotted by RADAR B). The were spotted by RADAR multiple times/days C). Trained/experienced pilots saw them and could not discern what they were D). Most importantly of all, a lot of the encounters had some video recording E). Navy admits something was there, but no idea what it was So in my opinion, these Navy encounters are vastly different and more credible than anything that has previously reported.

Hey all: Has anyone else noticed that talk of UFO's are slowly percolating through the mainstream media? For example, even the NYT has now picked up on what was discussed earlier in this thread. Please see: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/wow-what-is-that-navy-pilots-report-unexplained-flying-objects/ar-AABXltD One new nugget of information that has been disclosed is that these sightings have started once new, advanced RADAR systems were brought online. These UFO's would show up for hours at a time on RADAR. At first, they were ignored and thought to be a flaw in the system. Then they actually went out to see with their eyes/cameras what was going on, and sure enough, there were UFO's. There is another part of the article that makes me scratch my head. Leon Golub is quoted as saying that the chance it is extraterrastials is exceedingly low and is probably swamp gas, reflected lights, or a glitch in the recording system, or neurological overload. I wonder if that is a generic quote OR if that is his quote in reaction to this story. If that is NOT a generic quote, I've got to question Mr. Golub's experience/intelligence. It is most clearly NOT neurological overload, the UFO's were first picked up on the new advanced RADAR. Then it was SIGHTED by the pilots eyes. Then it was recorded on video tape. How could that be reflected lights? To suggest otherwise is simply moronic. This is also NOT a 1 time event. While not happening frequently, it has been observed MULTIPLE times. What is VERY CLEAR, is that there is something out there. 99.99% chance. The one chance that there is NOT something out there is that this might be an elaborate government hoax? Assuming it is not a hoax, What is not clear is who made it, who is piloting/controlling it, what exactly it is (drone, fighter, experiment, amusement park ride?), what the technology is OR what it's intentions are. This should be getting more press and attention than what it is.

Hey all: I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I think there is more likely than not, NO VIABLE business model for Uber. They aren't currently making money, they aren't going to make money in the foreseeable future...meanwhile they've got BIGLY problems with their drivers. Here in Detroit, there was a strike or work slow down the day before the IPO. Local news casters were interviewing the agitated drivers, and they were universally complaining about the low pay. They were also upset with the way that Uber treats them. Lower wages over time, Uber keeping more of the revenue, not being responsive to operational problems, drivers perceiving their status as being mere cogs in the machine....and so on. I think it is HIGHLY LIKELY that those people who want to drive for Uber are already doing so. With all this negative publicity, what NEW people are going to consider being drivers for it? Then add on a DOWN DAY on the IPO, and voila, you've got a dumpster fire all the way around! Perhaps if Uber scaled back 90%, then maybe it would profitable and have viable business model? For example, back when I had a job, I would drive from one side of Detroit to the other. If I could find somebody who wanted to hitch a ride, that would have been great, even if I only got paid $5...$5 is better than nothing on a trip that is already being taken. Perhaps that is the best path for Uber, sell unused capacity in existing vehicles taking trips? People driving for Uber simply to make $$$, and as a job ain't going to cut it.

Hey all: I've watched this show...almost didn't finish it though. Technically, it is well done. However, the characters are almost always not likable. In the end, I watched it to see some of them get crushed. I will probably watch the 2nd season if I have nothing else to watch.

hey all: After what has transpired in the past few weeks with Mr. Musk...I've really got question his judgment and sanity. They are going to 1mm self driving taxis in the next year or so? They've pretty much got autonomous driving down? TSLA is going to raise capital because now they are doing so well? It is one thing to "puff" and promote...this is another whole level.

If AOC and the green new deal get any serious traction, then it will be more than just air travel that suffers. I also don't think it will be just air travel that suffers by itself. Other industries will also be tremendously affected, cars, trucks, food, shipping, power & energy, oil, plastics, mining, financials, utilities. I am sure I've left a lot off the list. AOC is starting to get some opposition and people are upset that she is not representing her district. Hopefully, she will be gone soon.

Hey all: I heard a podcast the other day where a entrepreneur was interviewed about his company. His company is a "subscription" coffee company. They sell high end coffee and put an interweb enabled scale with it. When your coffee gets down 75%, it automatically orders more coffee that is shipped to you. You never have to worry about the complexity and difficulty of getting more coffee from the grocery store! That is it, that is the business. It is a multi-million dollar company. Tech bubble?

Vinod: If prices for Uber/Lyft are raised 30% or so, then would they only be just a LITTLE cheaper than a regular cab? Perhaps even more importantly than that, IF they raise prices 30%, how much of that 30% do they get to keep? Do you not think that the drivers will notice prices are going up 30% and want SOME percentage of the increase? Many drivers are grousing that their share of the fees was reduced. If rates go up, I would suspect that Uber has to give SOME of increase to the drivers. So, if rates go up 30%, Uber maybe splits it with drivers, so Uber gets 15% more? Is that enough to achieve profitability?

If it goes down blame the algo's. If it goes up your analysis is great :P . Could it be that MTY's business model is buying up smaller chains and "rolling up"? In the past, that worked reasonably well, and they got some decent chains. NOW, time has progressed and the easy fruit has been picked. What remains are problems like Papa Murphys? Thus MTY's long history of rolling up is coming to an end?

Hey all: I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm not sure there is a viable business model here. The possible exception would be that the business model is simply to go public and cash out on bag holders. If Uber can double their sales, do they make a profit? Probably not. What level of sales do they need to grow to get profitable? Hard to say...but it is incredibly higher than what it is today. Another factor is how do they increase profitability? Pay drivers less? Call me crazy, but I just don't think that is going to work. There are all sorts of problems now with drivers & reporters & studies saying that drivers make less than minimum wage. Do they get more efficient on the back end? Stop churn of drivers and new driver bonus? Sell the data? Maybe? They are losing so much $$$ as a percent of revenue, it is hard to see how they close the gap to profitability. As to self driving cars, why would Uber want them? They would have to buy them, and insure them, and maintain them. Why would you undercut a minimum wage driver who is providing their own vehicle? Bottom line is that I don't think there is much profit to be captured here, and thus no business model.

I'd expect a pretty sharp sell off if something like this were to go through: https://www.wsj.com/articles/top-democrat-proposes-annual-tax-on-unrealized-capital-gains-11554217383?mod=hp_lista_pos3 I was SERIOUSLY considering RADICALLY modifying my investment strategy going forward. I was considering switching over to income stocks, refraining from investing in long term projects, especially real estate, and generally raising cash. In order for investing to work, you've got to have trust between generations. You also have to have roughly the same set of rules. I was not so sure that things would look roughly the same 5, 10, 15 years from now. NOW, I am much more optimistic. I think politically, things will start to calm down.

MC: Welcome to the board! My advice is to get started as soon as you reasonably can...but only when you have researched things, understand it, and feel comfortable doing so. At all times, there are bargains to be had. At some points in time there plenty, other times, you've got do more scouting work. I would also recommend getting started with just a few thousand dollars...open a discount brokerage account, fund it, pick a stock, and get going. As time progresses, keep researching, put more money in, pick another stock...repeat, repeat, repeat, in a few decades you will have a few million in your portfolio!

I have not read the valuation book, but I am going to take an educated guess at a few things: A). Any fool can cut costs...use cheaper ingredients, cheaper suppliers, skimp on quality and so forth. This is relatively easy to do. B). If you can achieve a higher price for your product, you've likely got superior quality, branding, some other strategic advantage, or some combination of such. This is MUCH harder to do than cutting costs or squeezing suppliers. In my business, I am constantly struggling to achieve high sales points...but it is VERY hard to do. Not impossible, but difficult. C). In most cases, you can't cut your way to prosperity. I have some friends/associates who are cheap. I mean really damn CHEAP. It is good and important to be mindful and frugal with your $$$, but some people take it too far. One guy I know almost never eats out/pays for a meal, and he frequently eats oatmeal at home, even for lunch/dinner. That is fine & good, but even if he cut his food costs to nearly zero by hunting/eating roadkill/trash, that is still not going to make him rich. Cutting food costs from $5/day to $1/day is not going to make him rich. I try to impress upon them that they can't cut their way to prosperity. He has got to go out and EARN money. People and companies make the real returns when they can grow sales and grow profits, not so much cut costs. So that is what I think the book is discussing.

Hey all: Here is another concrete example of how my town is in trouble! I called on a very nice building for sale today. It has been vacant and for sale for a long time. It is for sale by owners. The building is a 1 story brick building built in the very late 90's. It is in very good condition, appearing to be VERY well built. All brick of course. Just over 6,000 sq. ft. It sits back a bit from the road and is on a wooded lot that is a bit more than 1 acre. It has 60 parking spots. Extensive security cameras. I think it is actually one of the nicer/newer buildings in my town. The ASKING price is $300k. Kind of expensive, but it is a newer and quality building. One of the problems (and I suspect why they can't sell), is that the summer taxes are about $28K. Summer taxes are the higher of the two taxes due per year. The assessed value of the building is just over $700k. The owner is contesting the taxes in a couple of weeks and he assured me that they would be lowered. So the owner is simply stuck with the property...at least for now. Very few people would buy a building and pay 10%+ property taxes (although I am one!). Up until now, taxes have been paid at the "silly" rate. In the future, they probably won't, at least not at the current rate! The town is going to lose a chunk of their commercial property taxes, as owners fight to get a realistic taxation rate. This will exacerbate the pension problem.

Hey all: Another factor of pension problems is that in the 70's and 80's, municipal jobs were kind of seen like "make work" to counter the massive lay offs from heavy industry. So local governments hired more workers than were actually needed in order to provide employment. Not sure how big that factor is, but it is something.

Yes, there are MANY factors that went into this pension problem. A lot of them are "greed" related, but not all of them. One of the problems is that people are living longer, ESPECIALLY if they have good health care. Another problem has been the lowering of interest rates. These pensions systems were set up in the 70's & 80's. Interest rates on highly rated bonds were in the high single digits, NOW? Not so much. Cash & short term investments also got some % return, a few percent. NOW? Less than 1%. With low interest rates, pensions start to get a LOT more difficult. Then you've got some structural problems where police & fire can retire after 20 years. So then you get retirees in their 40's. They may easily be "retired" for the next 40 years+ Then you've got borderline imbecile asset management firms managing the pensions and taking big kash money fees. Then you've got market volatility....that hasn't helped either. Then you've got the real estate problem...Houses in this particular little city STILL are not back to 2008 level prices. They are getting close, but still not quite there. Then you've got commercial real estate problems! I paid less for my office buildings in 2016 than when they sold in the late 60's! 50 years went by and they went DOWN in value! Finally, you've got a demographics problem. Over the last 50 years, this community has been "downwardly mobile". It went from pretty much solid middle class to lower middle class. I can't think of major trend that has helped this community, every thing went against it.

Strictly speaking, this is NOT Detroit, but a close in suburb. Detroit is getting wild & woolly. A section of the city that a few years ago had science fiction movies filming in (as the area looked like a dystopian nightmare) it, now has houses that are $300k or even $400k. 10 years ago, this neighborhood's property value truly would have been negligible. Now every neck bearded hipster wants in. Heck, Ford Motor Company is spending something like $700mm on the abandoned train station! As to why somebody would want to be here? With all the problems comes opportunity for somebody who is sharp & willing to hustle. Heck, I bought perfectly "functional" office buildings for $11-$12 a square foot. Property can be cheap here, along with the cost of living. Detroit & Michigan has electricity, interwebs, mail & package delivery, telephones (most of the time), partially paved roads, streets & highways, tasty food & such. If you can make $40k a year, you'll have a good lifestyle. If you make $100k a year, you are living large...If you are making $150k+ a year, it is "models & bottles". There are plenty of stupid people here too unfortunately!

Hey all: The other day I was flipping through the local free newspaper that gets delivered to every household once a week. Inside was a small article about how my town has a pension and retirement benefits shortfall. Those two combines liabilities is about $75mm. That comes to about $2,400 for every resident of the town. Most of that comes from Police & Fire, but also clerks & road workers & one other group. City government wanted to put together an advisory board to deal with this. The city manager was quoted as saying that the town ACTUALLY has an emergency, even though under MI law, it is not required to report it. He further went to say that if the city sold all it's buildings, equipment, parks, roads, etc. It could not even come close to closing the pension gap. He further went on to say that unless things change, every PENNY of city tax revenue would be going to pay pension obligations in about 10 years. I called up & spoke with the city manager for about 45 minutes. The situation is pretty bad. The city is going to try and negotiate with the unions on the pensions & benefits...but I don't see how things work out. Property taxes for residences are at OR close to the maximum allowed. Pensions are protected under the MI Constitution. Health & other benefits are NOT...so there is some room to renegotiate there. The expected rates of returns on the pension plans assets are 8%. The expected rates of return on healthcare is 6.75% I don't think those rates of returns will be realized in the long term. There is another problem! WHAT HAPPENS IF THE STOCK MARKET GOES DOWN? What if there is a 20%+ correction? Then the pensions & health care funds are that much further underwater. Instead of CH. 9 bankruptcy, the city will be looking at "super duper bankruptcy". The plan of the city is to try and trim a bit of workers & other expenses...rework some capital expenditures...but the city simply can't cut enough of the operating budget to shore up the shortfall. There is talk of starting a city income tax...but that is HIGHLY frowned upon by residents. MI is already a high tax environment. The crazy thing is that my city is not as bad off as some other cities in the area. In the end, the pensions & healthcare are going to HAVE be adjusted down. Services will get cut a bit, taxes will rise. The real problem though is if there is a market correction. Most people simply don't know/realize how much they depend on market returns. So the problem is pretty bad here in MI, but it is even worse in other states such as IL. In a few years, this is going to be a MASSIVE problem all across the USA.

If the "Green New Deal" is implemented, I think that we will have unemployment in the hundreds of millions... OR Virtually full employment but most new jobs will simply be scrounging for your daily food. Of course, the financial markets will collapse. Our way of life will be gone forever.

Believe it or not Detroit still has TWO major newspapers. They are the Detroit News and Detroit Free Press. The Detroit News was the 1st paper to run a radio station back in 1920! They publish Monday through Sat. and on Sunday share the editorial page with the Free Press. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Detroit_News

Hey all: I get the printed copy of Barron's. Inside the plastic bag was also a copy of the Saturday "Detroit News". I just got done reading it. My question is, "IS THIS A JOKE"? Business section is literally 1 page. Classified section is 1/2 of 1 page. There were 6 obituaries. The main section had more ads than articles. Lots of AP reprints. Editorial section was found to be weak & lacking. There were a few articles of local interest...but they were largely cursory reviews of what was going on. If you had good/proficient reporters, a handful could EASILY write the entire newspaper. This paper is simply going through the motions at this point. They are done. I knew that the situation with newspapers was bad...really bad...but I had no idea that it was as bad as what I just saw. The NYT & WSJ are different beasts...but major city papers appear to be done. If the Detroit News were a free paper, I would not even pick it up. Probably no value here at all, both as a paper AND as a business.

Oh, that is such a brilliant comment, and hits at the crux of the problem in America. So many people, (gov workers, etc) - want something for NOTHING. With government - cutting spending has to happen - I live in Illinois - and there is going to be a tax revolt here one of this days. Real estate taxes are out of control, Chicago city taxes are out of control and city workers don't actually work. I have no doubt that real estate taxes are bad in IL....but I VERY MUCH DOUBT they are ANYWHERE near as bad as what they are in the metro Detroit area. There are two problems with commercial property taxation in the Detroit area. 1). Properties tend to be "over assessed". I started a thread here a couple of years describing my experiences buying a couple of office buildings in a nearby suburb of Detroit. I took a BIG GAMBLE with the taxes when I bought them. They were indeed over assessed. Had I not contested the taxes, I would have been paying about 30% of the property's value a year in taxes. I contested the assessment and am now only paying about 17% of the property value a year in taxes. My situation is a bit odd, but it still shows that there is some EXTREME over assessment of property. 2). The actual and "correct" tax rates are very high to begin with. A neighboring city has an effective tax rate of just over 5% of true market value on commercial property. That is like a mortgage that can NEVER be paid off. It is crushing property values AND reducing the market. Needless to say, this is a bad situation. Obviously property taxes need to be paid, but the spending by local government is WILDLY out of control. In my little suburb of 32,000 people, there are 14 property inspector/code enforcement vehicles parked at city hall! I would assume that there are about an equal amount of inspectors? What does a city of my size need with so many inspectors? The city is largely built out. It is mainly residential, but there is some commercial and maybe a touch of industrial? We have no odd geography (built on side of mountain) and no bodies of water to create an extra hazard for buildings or builders. There is almost NO new construction going on...all the houses and buildings are already built out. I would think 2-3 full time inspectors could easily get the job done if they were efficient. Residential property taxes are high, but no where near as bad as commercial. Another problem that we are grappling with is the high rate of water/sewage. It is actually a stealth tax. In my two little office buildings, there is effectively NO water/sewage usage in one, and little in the other. The only water usage in the one building is "normal" usage of 1-2 office workers. The toilet gets flushed a couple times a day, the sink is turned on, sometimes water is used for coffee/tea. No water is used in commercial production...just normal office functions. The water/sewer bill is AT LEAST $120/month, sometimes close to $150. So we don't need any higher taxes...we need the government to do MORE work, that is HIGHER QUALITY, with LESS MONEY. Just like the private sector has done!