rmitz
-
Posts
505 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by rmitz
-
-
It won't generate returns, but I don't expect it to lose money over time. There is still going to be value in local news reporting, boots on the ground as it were; just not as much as there once was.
A lot of people are up in arms about paywalls, and I do think that for the public good many news articles about world events and political watchdogging should be free (we already have this capability, in libraries--we need to be careful not to neuter this functionality electronically), however, I see no reason not to charge for the great variety of other local reporting.
-
Desirable areas of Pittsburgh are likewise hot. My impression is that areas that have decent economies are getting inflated prices due to the low interest rates.
-
Not only do I agree with every single thing Mr. Kovacevich said, I truly thank you for posting this interview as I can now direct my friends/colleagues/investors to it instead of trying to deliver the same message each time I am asked for my opinion!
I think mainly that he's irritated that he wasn't able to buy lots more super cheap assets...I predicted standardized unemployment rates at well over 20% without TARP, and at this point I think that may have been conservative.
-
The Dell I bought 7 years ago was top of the line and cost me $1600 then, and it lasted me 5.5 years while using it about 10-14 hours a day. But the Toshiba I bought a year and a half ago cost me $450 at a Boxing Day sale, and it works like a charm 10-14 hours a day. Not a single problem.
I can't justify...for my needs anyway, which may be completely different than someone else's...$2200 for a laptop anymore. While there is a difference in processor speed, memory, display, etc, there is much more parity between laptops than 5 years ago. Technology has gotten better and better, and what you pay a few hundred dollars for today, would have cost $2500-3000 5-7 years ago. I won't ever pay more than $600-700 for a laptop! Cheers!
This may fill your needs, but it's this kind of thinking that keeps developers in companies with short-sighted beancounters in 5+ year old crappy machines, with bad monitors. There *is* a difference in productivity for a lot of different people, and a lot of it depends on your workflow.
That said, it's certainly true that Apple has little interest in low-margin products. As an investor, that seems somewhat appealing...
-
Yes the new 15" MacBook Pro with Retina display is very nice, but $2,200?? I still say the rest of the mac line announcements were a yawn though, which is hard for a diehard mac guy to say.
Cheers
JEast
$2,200 is pretty much around the price point they've been going for, and they loaded in a ton more tech. Just to give a perspective on inflation, $2200 today is about $1000 in 1984 dollars. You can't buy significantly cheaper products with the same build quality and technical capabilities. I don't really like the direction they're going with totally integrated systems that you can't touch, but I can't argue with the results.
-
Maybe I'm not understanding the "wash trade" discussion correctly, but here is what I found.
A wash trade (not to be confused with a wash sale) is an illegal form of stock manipulation in which an investor simultaneously sells and buys shares in order to artificially increase trading volume and thus the stock price.
The United States Security and Exchange Commission defines a wash trade as "a securities transaction which involves no change in the beneficial ownership of the security."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wash_trade
If you guys ment wash sale, then:
Losses Only
The wash sale rule only applies to losses. You can't wipe out a gain from a sale by buying the same stock back within 30 days. http://www.fairmark.com/capgain/wash/ws101.htm
I'd rather be wrong on this though. :)
You are correct for wash sales in the US. Other countries have different rules. There are no wash gains in the US.
-
The real problem is that the US is taxing residents of other countries. He is just trying to cope with it.
I just find it mind boggling. All my life I've been a citizen of Australia residing in the US. I've never paid them a dime of tax on my earnings while living in the US.
I actually agree with you about being a resident of another country and having real, earned income taxed as if you lived in the US is excessive. It doesn't really make sense. However...why would this apply to an investment he made while here? Think also of people who build whole companies here on this system, working here all along and using the system to build their business. The logical conclusion of your argument is that if you have a significant amount of capital gains, and you head to another country for a full year (meeting the physical presence test), then you could cash out with whatever local capital gains are and not pay a dime. Then you could come back to the US. That doesn't really make sense, either.
-
I believe he did it solely for the money. Good for him. I would have done the exact same thing. I believe he owes the US the very minimum he can possibly pay. Facebook could have been invented and developed in any number of countries. Whats unique about Facebook are the inventors, of which Saverin is one. The US gov't did not supply the ingenuity to invent Facebook. In essence The US is a silent, passive partner, or in other words "dumb money". It should be thrilled with any crumbs it gets.
Say "hi" to Ayn Rand for me. Absolutely rediculous.
Allow me to elaborate--Facebook is hardly a particularly innovative application. This particular person didn't even have much to do with any of the actual incremental "innovation".
I do think that there is value in the *effort* to bring that innovation to reality, but the idea is hardly original in itself. And without the *society* of the US, this would have gone no where.
-
The book BillG has in the Omaha World-Herald photos is http://www.amazon.com/The-Man-Who-Stayed-Behind/dp/0822326671/ which looks interesting. Still trying to get a better understanding of China.
-
I have a 4.25% fixed rate mortgage, and now they are offering me a 7/1 ARM with 3.0%. On one hand, it's never a good idea to chase lower rate; but on the other hand, the rate is too good. So now I'm tempted to re-finance into a 7/1 ARM, knowing that i might have to pay a balloon payment in 7 years if the rate goes up dramatically. Am I too short-sighted?
If that is 30 year fixed, stick with that. 15 year makes that a trickier decision.
-
My comment was not meant to be read as sarcasm. So, please don't read it as such.
We are all trying to become better investors. That's why we're here. Go back and start from the very first post. Read through the 6 month progression. There is a valuable lesson to be learned within. In my opinion, this thread (for the most part) has been anchored to the idea that FBK would garner a much higher take out price. Clues pointing investors to an alternative outcome were present but largely ignored. Instead, new scenarios in favour of the highest bid were spun.
Anchoring.
Obviously, Mercer got it ...
There's a difference between Anchoring and "expecting not to be swindled". That is still a valuable lesson, though.
-
This thread may be used in future behavioural science classes as a case study in anchoring.
I disagree with this assessment. The only reason the price makes sense is if you already have a significant interest in ABH. That's the only way it makes sense.
-
Steelhead is in a position to buy millions of shares around 1.00 and flip them to Merc at 1.40 almost overnite if they elect to vote merc and merc is much better paper and future than abh imo
On the other hand, that's an argument that they should want to feed money to ABH to protect their investment there...
I thought they had an interest in Mercer also.
They do, but Mercer is, I think, the stronger company, so they don't need the help.
-
Steelhead is in a position to buy millions of shares around 1.00 and flip them to Merc at 1.40 almost overnite if they elect to vote merc and merc is much better paper and future than abh imo
On the other hand, that's an argument that they should want to feed money to ABH to protect their investment there...
-
You are probably right.
It goes to show how weak Facebook's network effect/moat really is, if a couple of guys in San Francisco can take $500K and in two years create a company that is such a danger to FB that they need to pay $1 billion to eliminate the threat.
Kind of a judo move, actually--Instagram wouldn't have gotten as big without Facebook and the other networks--but that leverage can then be reversed later.
-
Whoever going, please ask Prem about his thoughts on FBK.
Unfortunately, I doubt that he can legally comment at all.
-
why aren't shareholders simply putting annual reports online from those dark companies?
From what I've read and understand doing this is illegal, copyright infringement. A company's annual report and quarterly reports are copyrighted material. The figures inside are not, but the actual presentation and format are.
So this means if you took the figures in the annual report, transposed them and wrote up your own summary of the company it's fine. If you just posted what the company published it's not. This is how books can publish this information, it's the figures, and summary level info.
Yep, exactly. Though an interesting possibility would be to develop a format and start a small, hybrid wikipedia where the cost of membership is putting out data for a company currently not in the database. Of course, one could also pay a fee for access once there was enough momentum...
-
There have been all sorts of justifications and excuses given for Fairfax's actions. Some of those might be applicable in other takeovers involving less reputable companies. But when you have of "Fair and Friendly Acquisitions" and then back an "Unfair and Unfriendly Acquisition" it definitely changes one's perception of Fairfax - and for what??
I almost have to believe that Resolute has gone off the reservation with the direction of the takeover following the lockup. It's possible that FFH is regretting that lockup and doesn't like how this is being done.
-
There has always been something more to this as far as I'm concerned, and it has to do with FFH. The legal costs, and time wasted, at some point, maybe we are already there, will have drained more value from the company than just upping the bid.
Yeah, it seems like it might be personal somewhere along the way.
-
"I have also had the opportunity to listen to Alice speak and she intimated that a great deal of Warrens investment prowress was a result of inside information and that she would reveal all in her next book the great wizard would be revealed to be just a mortal."
Pretty serious allegations to be making. Conveniently ignores the fact that Buffett had his best years when he didn't really know anyone. Am amazed that she's made a public claim on something like this without showing definitive proof. If true, she should be writing the SEC, not making speeches.
That sort of inside information wasn't illegal at that time.
-
I also think the parts about his wife upset him a bit. The long-held theory was that Buffett was the womanizer and cheated on Susan, when in fact Susan had drifted apart and left Buffett. From what I heard, he did not want that to come out and his children were upset with it as well.
The thing that gets me, is why do people even think that was a bad thing? It's life! I thought the Buffetts actually dealt with it in an incredibly touching and mature way. There was nothing insulting to me about it. I know, it has to do with people's obsession with things like monogamy and forever...the world usually doesn't work that way.
-
Listen to Parsad. I am doing the same, with that said I will acquire AIG once I get my head around it, and after I have raised more cash. I am waiting for a pullback though. Also keep in mind that you sound like everyone who missed the boat, they will likely get in while the smart money continues raising cash.
So one last little bounce, then a move down on any decent bad news. You want to be the smart money, not the guy inching to get in. I would only get in if you see something cheap. I would probably buy AIG, ATSG, FTP, and POOSF with new capital. POOSF was the last thing I bought, and right now I am looking to raise cash. Those listed are cheap, but if things pull back, they will all move down.
While one can make money in anything, I would say that for a new investor getting their feet wet it's easier (and usually far more profitable) to investigate the smaller companies. ATSG is a good example--there was one small twist back in the dark days of trading under 20 cents, that if you understood, you'd know that in bankruptcy, the company should have been worth at least a dollar. Everything since then has been gravy. I would say ATSG is easier to understand now. There are certainly many tiny companies even easier to understand. Even if you don't end up investing in them, it's a good way to get started without sinking into trying to figure out behemoths like BAC and AIG.
-
I honestly don't think I've seen 1 bad/lackluster review of it so far. Mossberg is is highly regarded as one of the most reputable technology writers/reviewers on the planet, which is why I posted his review.
Would what matter? You sound like you were expecting more from the iPad, so I'm just curious what you were looking for.
Oddly enough, this conversation makes me think that Apple actually has a wider moat than I thought. The thing is, for every product Apple has come out with for *years*, many people have always been "meh" in the reviews. Heck, I thought the original ipod was crap. How quickly people forget, but a whole lot of people thought that the iPad was a bust...an oversized iPod Touch. A remarkable percentage of those products have ended up making Apple a whole lot of money. I think at this point I'm adjusting my personal estimate to another 10 good years for Apple.
-
I thought I would just see what expectations were like and how people reacted to the first product presentation apres the Steve Jobs era. I thought they made standard improvements, but nothing gamechanging, and this is unfortunately what I think life will be like after Jobs. Just no one to dream and push the team to almost unimagineable levels. Cheers!
Honestly, it was exactly what I expected. I was disappointed that the 2 didn't have the higher res (though since I had skipped the 1, I bought the 2 anyway--a year is a long time to wait). I've already got a couple on order, the screen is *absolutely* want I wanted. In fact, I don't know what could come out to make me want the next one...
Regarding the earlier two...I don't think there was really anything unexpected about *them* either...so I don't get people who say that this isn't "revolutionary". Apple's entire bit is about taking the current evolution and just pushing things a bit, and refining them. It's not about huge researchy breakthroughs, and anyone expecting that is kind of deluding themselves. Apple isn't that kind of company, which does lend a bit more stability.
What if it is 1982 all over again?
in Fairfax Financial
Posted
You are correct. But I also agree there is some value to that public statement--he does have some incentive to keep the price not absurdly low for his donation, and he will now use his gusher of a capital stream to buy opportunistically over time. I wouldn't expect there to ever be much of a purchase, but it will be a factor over time.
Anything can happen on a particular day.