ragnarisapirate

YAY! We in the US are closer to fiscal insolvency! WOO HOO!

In regard to pawn shops: It really depends on the shop that you sell to. At one of the pawn shops I used to work at, we generally gave 40-50% of scrap, whereas at the other one I worked at, we would give up to 60%... It really depends on the situation though; there are about a billion different variables that would go into it, mainly, at the discretion of who you were talking to (stones in the piece, if we thought it was stolen, if it was a sale or pawn, weight, demand for the piece, if we were going to scrap it or keep it for sale, etc.) Additionally, some places will sell jewelry at scrap, or for 150% of scrap. Others, will sell far above scrap at highly inflated prices. Sometimes, jewelry can be a great investment, other times, not so much; it depends on the piece, value, and price (a common theme on this board, eh?) With all this said, I will extend an offer to buy gold or jewelry off anyone on this board. It doesn't matter what the piece is. Shoot me an email and we can work something out.

Additionally, if one is reading the 10Ks of a small cap, you can get through them faster. I think that the last one I read was ~25 pages?

I agree with just about everything that has been said. As has been said, you should read the proxies... ESPECIALLY the part that includes transactions with related parties. This is generally a good way to see how management does things; not to say that there is anything wrong with related party transactions, there isn't- they just need to be fair to shareholders! This is probably most true if you deal in nano-caps as a bunch of us do. Additionally, actually talking to management to learn about the business/industry can do wonders for your understanding.

This might make for some interesting put option exposure...

Probably when Biglari is elected to the BOD.

One of my friends just gave me (what I will refer sarcastically to) as a "hot stock tip" in the coal industry. Having never looked at a coal company before, I was curious what fellow board members have to say about it. I would imagine that there would be a few things to think of in favor of the industry. 1) you are not subject to new ways of getting coal coming about (as is the case with horizontal drilling natural gas) 2) if inflation comes, as a raw material, you might have some of the protection of a commodity 3) if the economy is actually getting better, then, more energy will be used, which will also increase the price of coal.

to stir up the pot a bit more: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Insidertrading-probe-wades-apf-155934174.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

Buying W Holding Company at close to the peak of the real estate bubble. Just about completely impaired that capital allocation by not understanding the bank, Puerto Rico, or the significance of the housing crisis. Is still kick myself over that.

Here is the thing.... I really wonder how any insider can ever buy, without insider information that isn't public. If anyone can present me an argument that says that a CEO generally doesn't know the company better than one of us (who, I assume know companies better than95% of the investing public), I will be impressed. What if a CEO was waiting to buy stock until he had some cash, then, when he had the cash, they were ready to announce something big? I also don't understand where the line is drawn for keeping the playing field level... a book called the Slueth Investor only blurred the lines for me. For example, if I sit in front of the distribution center of a company and count what all they ship out, and trade accordingly, is that legal (probably) or moral (maybe)? Certainly, it isn't public info to anyone that doesn't sit there and count... but, if the CEO trades on that info, he could get toasted. I am sorry, but, I just don't see how we can truly enforce insider trading laws without making the whole thing messy. Even Prem and the guys at fairfax have bought their stock right before the end of their blackout period... Is that OK? and they are some of the most respected guys out there. I vividly remember a couple of people on here talking about their purchases (maybe from the summer a year ago?) and how they felt that the reason they bought was due to some good results coming. As is the case with Watsa, I am generally a libertarian nut job (hell, both of our usernames come from Ayn Rand). However, this is one of those issues that is hard for me to digest. I hope that there is a good and long discussion over this issue. :)

Bronco, In the event that you are serious, I have some cash I'll throw down (especially if we can lever the hell out of the company and raise cash with some toxic debt or something ;P). In the event that you are not (which, I am 99% sure is the case) I want to thank you for the humor that you bring to the board.

I am curious, to add to what bronco said, if there will eventually be a pandora or last.fm for movies (basically, a souped up hulu or youtube) which gives away movies for free, as long as you put up with an advertisement. Additionally, Amazon is getting into online rentals, which are essentially blocks of time that you can stream movies on... I just don't see there being a super moat for Netflix. I recently switched to Netflix from blockbuster's service, because it is presently better, but, If you gave someone a billion dollars, could they put a dent in Netflix? There is a possibility. For comparison's sake, Many people have chemical additions that make them gamble, buy booze, cigarettes, Coca-Cola, and McDonalds. While entertainment is very important to people, I know of nothing that can force you to buy movies from netflix. Conversely, screaming kids force you to take them to McDonald's. All said, they will probably be able to grow significantly over time. I dunno guys, I am pretty sure that I see arguments on both sides here, I sure as hell wouldn't want to be long or short Netflix.

If an investing philosophy works for me then I don't understand why that would be a problem for someone else. It's my money, right? Conversely, if another person has a certain strategy for wealth creation that works for them I have no business interfering with that person's decisions. Some wish to be fully invested in equities at all times. Personally, I don't feel comfortable risking that with my cash. I have no qualms about "missing rallies". I am mostly trying to miss crashes. The upside will take care of itself by investing SOME of my capital with solid, well-run companies. Cheers! :) I don't think that anyone here has a problem with what you are doing or is trying to interfere, but rather, put out some stuff for discussion. Obviously, the dissenters here (myself included) don't feel comfortable sitting on too much cash, but, we may also have jobs or other assets that we can raise cash rather quickly with, if need be. Truly, it is whatever works for you! Certainly, my investment style isn't for everyone, and, it won't even be for me in 50 years! When I am old a feeble, I will sit on a hell of a lot more cash than I do now. I will also probably move into things that pay me while I wait for them to go up in price (presently, I collect no dividends or interest, other than on my savings and money market accounts). Regardless, it does anyone good to occasionally go into the archives and look at what people were doing in March 08. My biggest mistake in that period was not buying 2 20+ baggers!

beerbarron, you have one of those charts handy? Additionally, what about the cash that is on the balance sheets of the equities that we hold? should that (at least in part) be accounted for in this poll? My theory on the matter is this. If you have a company, which didn't do badly in the great re-pression, and they have net cash on their balance sheet that is over 1/3 of their market cap, that has to do something for your risk exposure. At that point, I would say you would be hard pressed to argue that the cash wouldn't be able to get deployed, as, in the recessions, they can put their cash to use (so long as they have managers that are willing to deploy it). Additionally, historically, why would you hold 50% cash until the PE of the S&P falls to below 10. The only 2 times in history in which you would of been able to deploy for any length of time ultimately led to bubbles, which would have forced you to sell out way to early... Why not just find some cheap/reasonably priced quality companies and sit on them? If you need downside protection, why not just buy some out of the money puts on a company that seems to be crazily overvalued (because, it should get hammered anyway, regardless of if there is a huge correction)?

perhaps one might wonder what happened to the pound as a result of being dropped as a reserve currency. I can't imagine that not being the reserve currency would help much in the demand for dollars, which, would decrease their relative value, no?

I was curious if anybody had any videos or audio recordings of stuff that Graham lectured on... If it already exists, it would be the sort of thing that would be great to listen to while running or driving. I have an audio book of the Intelligent Investor, but, it is so cut up since you can't really read numbers and charts, that it became more of a 'don't do stupid things' book.

There are a lot of factors that the chart doesn't show, which, in my mind, makes it unreliable to gather anything from. 1) we not only have different demographics than japan did, but, also vastly different economies. 2) virtually the whole world is replicating our monetary policy right now, whereas that wasn't the case for Japan back in the day. 3) We still have no idea what the fed is going to do in the effort of 'keeping unemployment low and prices stable' What about adding in interest rates, the monetary base, AND the velocity of money? That might make for a more interesting chart, but, not really one that I would want to make predictions based on (seems too much like trend watching, to me). and btw, scorpioncapital, the Fischer book that you mention is one of my favorites; I never really hear people talk about it though.

you would prolly want to talk to investor relations or the CFO of the company. Maybe check in the appropriate governmental office in the state where the shares were registered.

Drybulk shippers a few years ago. Railways and air freight were things talked about in the zweig ed of the intelligent investor. POGs, various game systems (like PS2 and Wii), and tickle me elmo's (along the line of beanie babies) would $150 dollar oil from a few years back be a bubble?

This is great. To me, the whole thing is like me setting your house on fire, then, calling the fire department and helping them put it out... After this, you would thank me for doing such a good job in keeping the fire from spreading to other houses, because I am an arsonist and don't have much experience in putting out fires. Bottom line, you still don't have a house and I should be in jail.

Does anyone know of a site to get the price of cardboard?

What about buying Jan 2010 calls on TBT? They don't exactly look cheap, but, it seems like if you were willing to keep on buying them over a long enough period, you could do exceptionally well. By this, I mean, it seems reasonably that TBT should double in the next 5 years. Right now, the jan 2010 $75 calls are going for 75 cents. If it doubles in the next year, you would do quite well. Heck, if you keep buying the year out $75 dollar calls, over the next 5 years, you would probably end up still doing incredibly well. I will say that this generally relys on the price of treasuries falling off a cliff quickly, rather than slowly. With bubbles, which, it seems that government debt is in (at least in real dollars), things generally go to hell quickly... but, there is always the possibility that it might not work.

For the sake of discussion: Would it be worthwhile to hedge via buying another currency, metal, or something? It is getting more apparent that the Fed is willing to be the only buyer of treasuries, which (in my mind) means that there is the chance that the prices of our government bonds could stay where they are at, with the principle just losing a ton of purchasing power.

That's a lovely combined ratio, there...

With insurers that have strong regional ties, how do they price in the risk of black swans? For example, what if there was a 1812 style New-Madrid earthquake? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1812_New_Madrid_earthquake