ragnarisapirate
-
Posts
823 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by ragnarisapirate
-
-
speaking of settle dates, don't those seem a bit antiquated now? It seems as if this sort of thing could be instantaneous if the powers at be really wanted to...
-
I don't remember how I found this, but, it's a pretty good interview.
Check it out at 10:50 especially. I am really interested to hear what people here think about the possibility that a regulatory function actually triggered a panic.
-
Folks,
Let's not get carried away one way or the other. I don't think what he did was the brightest thing, but at the same time I think as the title originally said, it was done "unwittingly".
Jacob's site has gone from like two to three thousand unique users to something like 50 thousand plus in a little over a year. With that comes the guys who want you to "analyse" a stock for them through "paid coverage". A young guy, whose business is suddenly booming, and someone comes to you and says hey if you write a report on our stock, we'll pay you x dollars for your work, it's hard to say no.
I think he felt that the disclosure that it was "paid coverage" would indicate to any readers that it is buyer beware, but in my opinion, with that readership comes the responsibility of not putting your readers in that circumstance to begin with. I would not have done it, but I'm alot older than he is and I only have to feed myself.
With the vociferous outcry on here, I think he probably got the message, but I think everyone can tone it down again. Now it's up to him to decide how he deals with the attention he is sure to continue to get from these types of promoters as his site grows and grows over time.
Personally, I chalk it up to a learning experience and best of luck to him with his site. Has anyone thought about the fact that he could flip this completely around and do an expose on these guys instead? Maybe Jacob's site would do better and better if it investigated these types of shenanigans. I'm fed up of watching these types of guys feed on unwitting investors in Vancouver, let alone everywhere else.
So give the kid a break...I think he heard you all loud and clear! ;D Cheers!
+1
-
I get the feeling that these places are also becoming a little bit less taboo than they were 20 years ago. The Pub and English style restaurant with a similar theme that seems to do pretty well here (and is franchised). I think the real question is, how long until RICK transitions into the food services industry.
As a side note, how many of you all have looked at RICK? I think that there is a lot of potential for the stock, actually. For those of you that are married, I would think that the scuttlebutt might present a bit of an issue. ;)
-
I get the feeling that these places are also becoming a little bit less taboo than they were 20 years ago. The Pub and English style restaurant with a similar theme that seems to do pretty well here (and is franchised). I think the real question is, how long until RICK transitions into the food services industry.
-
First of all, I agree with other’s comments on the warming up of the housing market. In D.C./Maryland/Virginia, a good short sale can get multiple offers with a day on the market.
Regarding to investing in the rental property, I ‘d like to make comments based on my own experiences. A little more than 2 years ago, I decided to get my hands dirty and started to buy distressed properties for rental. So far, I have bought 3 properties with leverage (mortgage) and have a contract to buy another. My total invested capital is $130K (including down payments, closing costs and repairs). Total market value of the 3 properties is about $680K. My annual net cash flow is $15000-$17000 depending on maintenance costs and $10000+ pay down of principle. The cap rate is more than 10%. If I use the cash flow to pay extra principle, the mortgage can be paid off in 10 years. In DC market, the appreciation potential is pretty good in the next 10 years. I expect my initial investment of $130000 will become $1.3 mil in 10 years.
My first property has been rented for more than a year. I manage the properties myself. So far, I have enjoyed the process. The only repair was to replace the dryer in the unit. The tenants all have paid their rent on time. The key is to screen out potential bad tenants at first place.
I do not consider myself real estate investor. I am just a capital allocator. The numbers were too good to pass by when looked at it two years ago. It is a good opportunity and I have not regretted.
You bring a good point of screening out bad tenants. I would think that DC would be great for rentals, just because you have a lot of people that by definition, may only be there for 4 (or fewer) years...
Out of question, what are you renting those properties that you paid 630K for?
-
Don't believe me? Take one from our own book as value guys. How many of you crawl into annual reports and don't trust what a bunch of the WS analysts say for forward P/Es and such? How many times do you find that people freak out about things they shouldn't, but don't have an appreciation for dangers that are very apparent to you when dealing with stocks?
My guess is pretty often. By extension, that is the same thing that I see with houses in my hometown. I don't think that it is too different from different places in the US, but, could be wrong. All I am saying is that I think there is a significant number of people that don't know what they are doing, and that they will get burned at worst and at best, will pass along a house to a greater fool at some point in the future....
Thoughts?
I would say you have either been a landlord or have very good intuitive skills because you have described very accurately what it means to be a rental property owner.
I would add that a structural problem with landlording is that you are trying to earn a return off an asset by renting the asset to someone who can't afford/qualify to buy it at these discounted prices either.
The tailwind for landlording right now is of course demographics. Many Boomers who have insufficient savings/pension will be renting in the near future and of course will greatly reduce turnover because that is a one way street under the circumstances.
A rental property is an investment, but it is also a part time job (per property). That's the part people fail to realize, they just look at the numbers.
Indeed, I am a landlord.
It may be what I am looking at here, but, it is almost always, across the board cheaper to buy than rent. I don't know tha tI buy the baby boomer talk for now. Unless they lose their house.
-
I was going to post about this on here, but decided to write it up.
http://ragnarisapirate.blogspot.com/2012/06/irrationality-in-residential-real.html
......Let's say that you turn it into a rental. I would think that it would take about $2K to do (mainly, wall repairs, paint, and minor things). The carpet and cabinets for example, still have a lot of life left in them, but it just isn't stuff that would help you in a sale situation. Say you bought it for $80K. You are looking at having $82K in a house that would probably generate $12K in revenue per year. If you are unlevered and have no expenses, that comes up to ~15% a year. Add in vacancy and repair allowances, plus, taxes, insurance and other items, and you are in the high single digits/low teens (but, do get the help of depreciation)... Granted, you could probably refinance out of it and pocket some money since appraisers generally don't know much when it comes to getting a good value on these things (I would generally trust Zillow over an appraiser, though, there are exceptions). But still, that reduces your margin of safety, and you will still have an asset that probably isn't worth what you owe against it. Inflation had better hit in a big way for you to do overly well. Even then, you may be left with no one that can afford to buy the house off of you since interest rates will likely be forced to rise to combat the very inflation that you are trying to protect against!
That said, the house still needs a fair bit of work at some point in the not so distant future... The new owners may not do it, but eventually, something will have to happen. Does anyone really want to move into a house that was recently a rental and still looks like it?
NO.
As such, it didn't do too much for me even at $80K. When I was going through it on the first day that it was listed, there were 2 other investors going through it... I decided that it really wasn't worth my while to even make an offer, as I probably would have come in at $70K for it, but still wasn't thrilled about it even at that price. I figured that it would end up going for something like $90K. As such, I didn't even bother making an offer.
So. What was the sale price of the house? $110K... That's right, it sold for more than 137% of it's list price.
Ok, Ragnar. But if we change the situation a bit. Let's say one buys with cash, no mortgage. And one is not looking for a flip, but a long term income producing asset, basically, a cash cow. Let's say something built in 2000s, so fairly new construction therefore less maintenance and something that is part of condo/townhome association (so exterior maintenance & repairs are covered). So, let's say this something is in the neighbourhood of $250K + let's say $10K in closing costs, inspections etc. So since it is a newer construction in a fairly decent condition, it'll need minimal work to prepare for a rental, but let's say another $10K to spruce it up. So, we have about $270K "out the door". And let's say this something could be rented easily for $2100 per month. So, further let's say monthly expenses will be $350 in homeowners association dues (which already includes insurance), plus let's say $400 in property taxes ($4,800 per year including melloroos (since it is a newer area with nice amenities), plus let's say $250 per month for things like home warranty and to fund unexpected expenses. So, we have $1,100 per month in cash. But if we want to be even more conservative, let's say $1,000. If rents rise over time, which they usually do, will be more than that. For the next 10, 20 years. I don't think it is that bad at all. A little supplement to salary or retirement income. A little bit of diversification away from the stock market, to which let's say you are already substantially exposed. Definitely much better than cash in an inflationary environment. And not to forget that these property prices which are at 2003 levels are paid in 2012 dollars, not in 2003 dollars, which is a different thing. $270K now is not the same as $270K then, which to me is a substantial plus. So, basically, a not such a bad alternative to keeping substantial amount of cash sitting in the bank waiting to be eaten up by inflation or increasing already a substantial exposure to stock/bond markets. Residential real estate today is still a distressed asset, maybe not as cheap as it was yesterday, but still cheap. And if it provides steady monthly income - great, plus if it makes the principal more or less to keep up with inflation - even better, and if the angels sing and some day it appreciates above the "keeping up with inflation" level - icing on the cake.
At the numbers you cite, it seems to me that one is paying a lot for inflationary growth... A good business that is already under valued and makes sugar water or candied fruit seems a lot more attractive to me... Better yet, buy stock in a company that invests in real estate, and do so below book value. You get the same protections that you cite, hopefully get a competent manager, and do ZERO work of your own other than occasionally log into your brokerage account from a beach somewhere. I can't say enough that there are a ton of people that think they know what a nice house is, but have no clue (and end up investing in them). You can't really get a full appreciation for this stuff unless you yourself are willing to actually crawl under the house to find out for yourself. Inspectors are generally idiots that just want to be called back to put their stamp of approval on the next sale.
I had one that tried to say that I was selling a house 3 months ago, with a receptacle that didn't work... Well, he was too dumb to stand up and flip the switch that the thing was on... that setup was something that was original to the house in 1970, and, was actually required by code! Alone, not a big deal, but, there were like 5 other items that he got totally wrong (for example, he didn't know how to test GFCIs, said my gutters were loose, etc). I literally fixed none of the problems that he cited, as they didn't exist. Even if wrong, those are cheap things to fix. There are other problems that are much bigger, often surrounding foundations and such.
Even new houses have issues that can be bad; contractors here are notorious for cutting corners on new construction.
Don't believe me? Take one from our own book as value guys. How many of you crawl into annual reports and don't trust what a bunch of the WS analysts say for forward P/Es and such? How many times do you find that people freak out about things they shouldn't, but don't have an appreciation for dangers that are very apparent to you when dealing with stocks?
My guess is pretty often. By extension, that is the same thing that I see with houses in my hometown. I don't think that it is too different from different places in the US, but, could be wrong. All I am saying is that I think there is a significant number of people that don't know what they are doing, and that they will get burned at worst and at best, will pass along a house to a greater fool at some point in the future....
Thoughts?
-
I was going to post about this on here, but decided to write it up.
http://ragnarisapirate.blogspot.com/2012/06/irrationality-in-residential-real.html
-
http://www.npr.org/2012/06/21/155359393/bidders-get-feisty-over-foreclosed-homes
BTW... It really seems that people are doing really stupid things now. I won't be one bit shocked if there is another wave. In my hometown, there are too many people that are dealing with too small of margins.
-
It's interesting (but not surprising) that none on this board has talked about paying up for a TV? I guess the crowd here reads more than watching TV. I don't have a TV yet (not in a hurry to buy one either).
or, uses a computer to watch it...
-
A mouthwash that selectively kills only the cavity-causing bacteria -- leaves the other bacteria alone:
Dental caries, commonly known as tooth decay or cavities, is one of the most common and costly infectious diseases in the United States, affecting more than 50 percent of children and the vast majority of adults aged 18 and older. Americans spend more than $70 billion each year on dental services, with the majority of that amount going toward the treatment of dental caries.
Dentists will also have a strong reason to discredit this product... After all, they could lose a great source of revenue (cavities). It's kind of like how Valvoline and other oil change places try to get you to change your oil every 3K miles, despite not really needing to- not only are oils much better today than they were a while back, but, cars also are made so that the manufacture tells you to often wait for longer periods of time.
Hopefully P&G will not buy the patents...
BeerBaron
I don't get it? Why would it be bad if P&G bought the patents? They certainly have the production, distribution and marketing capacity to profitably deliver such a product to consumers....
-
General principle, although there are exceptions to it: pay more for what you use most, and pay less for what you use least.
For example, say you use our computer and cell phone more than almost anything else (I think this is the case for most of us on this board). Get the best of the best when it comes to these items, because you will derive a lot of satisfaction from it and really benefit from the extras that you're paying up for.
On the other hand, say you rarely use your car, then maybe it's not something you should spend much money on - especially as it depreciates quickly.
VERY well put.
-
Tools- there is something to be said for quality hand and power tools.
Having a Macbook and a good phone are also invaluable.
Any suggestions with a particular brand with tools? Use to be strictly Craftsman (hand tools), with them using cheaper metal might look around a little if I ever need a new socket set. For power tools really like Makita. Cordless drill bought almost 20 years ago still works like a charm.
My uncle has a Makita drill that he has used almost daily for about 20 years as well. That said, I am a fan of Dewalt for power tools. Hand tools really vary based on what it is; I generally really like craftsman as a rule of thumb, but, have been impressed by select Kobalt stuff. Snap-on is really well made as well. I am a big fan of stihl for chainsaws and such.
These new sockets from Craftsman look really neat, actually (and I think that there is a 51 piece set).
-
Tools- there is something to be said for quality hand and power tools.
Having a Macbook and a good phone are also invaluable.
-
what kind of value are u expecting?
I have no idea what they will bring. I do own some shares and find the whole situation very intriguing. At the prices where I bought, it seemed like there was a decent call option on the sale.
-
On today's conference call, PRXI said that they were trying to sell the assets of the Titanic in a tax efficient manner. They also essentially said that they would be giving the bulk of proceeds back to shareholders.
Now... while giving the proceeds back to shareholders is pretty straightforward, I am curious as to how they can get out of paying a ton in taxes on the sale.
Does anyone have any insight as to what kind of tax rate they may get this down to? What about things they could do to reduce the taxes?
-
I'd say it depends on the company and location. Obvious (or not) the further from a big city the less dressed up a place is going to be. So if you're in a small town in Kansas for a small company a suit is overkill. Here is a random guide I made up but I think is appropriate:
Manufacturing - Business casual, or dress pants + dress shirt, tie optional (suits are for bankers and lawyers at the meeting, they'll be readily identifiable.)
A tech company - You'd probably be fine wearing jeans and a dress shirt.
Insurance/Bank/Finance - Suit, unless this is a community bank annual meeting, and if it's in a small town maybe lose the coat.
A major company - Are you also a major shareholder, then see below, otherwise; doesn't matter, they don't care about you or your input, maybe wear a body suit, at least they'd remember you.
You're under 23 - Wear anything, you're young and people will underestimate you no matter what you wear. Really young and a suit, looks like you're ready to sell an annuity.
You work for a bank - Are you allowed to wear anything but a suit? Better check with compliance
You work for a small fund - Dress up, you want to impress this holding and hopefully work with them in the future.
You work for a major fund - Wear whatever, you own enough shares that you've got the execs by the balls anyways, dress doesn't matter.
You're a retiree and long time shareholder - Anything from a Hawaiian shirt and shorts to a dressy outfit works, the reverse of the 23 year old, no matter what you wear you'll be respected (unless you're wearing one of those goofy safari hats too.)
genius
-
http://brontecapital.blogspot.com/2012/05/thoughts-on-berkshire-meeting-and.html
Long term care insurance is the worst business I have ever seen.Warren of course never told us that - but somehow he wound up re-insuring it.
I guess he did not want to explain his stupidity.
Very harsh but interesting nonetheless.
Harsh, but right...
-
I would love to know what the whole thing rents for.
-
[amazonsearch]Storage and Stability[/amazonsearch]
Has anyone ever read this book? It's about backing a currency with all the things that make an economy run (corn, wheat, iron, silver, ect) and talks about it in a way where we could feasibly have competing currencies and faze out the greenback. There are all sorts of other advantages, such as what would happen with a war and such.
I read it while hopping plans to get to and from Houston a 8 or so months ago and thought that it was one of the most brilliant pieces of writing ever. As with all the other stuff that I have read from Graham, I couldn't put it down and kept thinking "WOW! This is what I have always thought/believed, but, was never smart enough to extrapolate on, put into words or so much as have a cohesive thought on!"
I always love it when that happens and the thought was a really old one (The book is something like 80 years old).
-
Because it would be very interesting to see if the appraisal went into how it assessed the items. For example, with real estate, you often have comparable sales, as well as a cash flow analysis.
That would be really valuable in determining what may happen with this stock... It's a devil is in the details sort of thing.
-
Is the 2007 appraisal of artifacts available?
-
In one quote from NC, they said servers are responsible for dine and dashers. How is it their fault? Ridiculous. Is this the norm at other restaurants? I can't imagine it is.
I think in most restaurants, the wait staff is responsible. I do not know if they are financially responsible though.
That sucks. I've never worked as a waiter, so I had no clue.
In my state, it is illegal for employers to force employees to pay for a dine and dash or anything along those lines. They can fire a person, but not dock them pay. Most people don't know this, or are simply too scared to call their employers out on it.
Samsung Galaxy S III
in General Discussion
Posted
I have had it for about a week and love it. I highly suggest it, actually. The voice recognition technology from Google has vastly improved despite the Samsung version of Siri sucking. Other than that, it is a great phone. The bad reviews of the battery life were way over hyped.
Anything that can detect when I am looking at it and as a result, not have the screen time out, is freaking cool in my book. :)