KinAlberta

I hadn't seen this interview before and it contains some interesting 'macro' views by Buffett It's quite long but interesting. Just a small portion below so I'd suggest reading the whole interview.

I agree that the small cap end of the market remains generally inefficient and poorly followed. Proliferation of ETF's, brokers putting all of their clients money into WRAP accounts and other structured products, the decline in the number of small cap funds and assets under management (at least in Canada) have all seen money move away from this space. Also the overall mantra in the markets and investing nowadays is overwhelmingly "liquidity". How many times do I mention a stock to your mainstream investor and many other managers of money and the question or refrain is "is it liquid"? Buffett has been described as a learning machine, constantly reading and learning. He also got ideas through asking others what they were buying. Aka Scuttlebutt.

Anyone remember George? I once owned a bit of Source Capital because of his investing record. Id also read about him in one of Train's books. This one: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0887306373/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Anyway found this old article: http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/george-h-michaelis http://compoundmachine.blogspot.ca/2014/10/george-h-michaelis-learning-value.html

Interesting articles. I figure they tie in nicely with today's US politics, Brexit, etc. Your thoughts?

The article makes me think about our industry (investing). It is much harder these days to find lasting businesses. There are a few other examples of these disruptors. Casper in mattresses Blue Nile in diamond rings Warby Parker in glasses I just watched this documentary on Tower Records (see link below). Fascinating and very well done in my opinion. As a Canadian I had no idea of the history or 'societal' impact these young guys had on the music industry. The last bit offers a lot of lessons to companies facing disruptive technologies, considering that Tower Records didn't completely fail and in-fact, in one 'area', seems to have thrived. - I'm trying not to be a "spoiler". The comments about the bankers coming in to reorganize - are precious. That portion is "MUST WATCH" for investors. All Things Must Pass: The Rise and Fall of Tower Records (2015) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3272570/ http://www.towerrecordsmovie.com

John (Walter) Williams'wrigings on shadowstats might be of interest to the sceptics. I'm staying an agnostic due to my preferred ignorance of the calculations and issues. http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-438-public-comment-on-inflation-measurement

I think we need to approach it from at least two perspectives. The company, or more accurately the management of the company, might have some short term vested interests in seeing shares trade on another exchange. Should the sector be evidencing a "high multiple" on another exchange then bonuses may flow. An opportunity to option up and then bail out or whatever. Shareholders? Well, short term flippers vs long term holders have very different perspectives.

Thanks for a great reply. Yes, OTC to a regular exchange would be good for most I'd guess. (I have a couple OTC positions - and they have limitations. Can't hold in my Canadian RRSP, etc.) One exchange to another? I'm not sure about. Small company. You're finally seeing whatever developments come to fruition (likely having suffered past dilution). So a speculative position becomes more predictable. So, intrinsic value is more discernible. Thus its worthy of large proportions of your portfolio allocation. Now, say you feel that the 'promise' is great. The share prices starts to rise as investors come around to the same way of thinking. Then curiously those same people start wishing for an upgraded listing to a more prominent exchange. An investor with a good idea, seeing a company that is priced under it's intrinsic value, maybe vastly so, should want to continue to built a position in the company. A less prominent exchange choice would seem to me to be the logical wish. Now, if the investor is retired and lacks additional money, has built as large a position as they can afford or handle or feel comfortable with or some other limiting reasons, then it makes sense to want higher exposure asap and intrinsic or better valuations. However, investors in emerging companies, one would think, would want to invest long term and maximize their long term 'resk-adjusted' returns and not pump in order to dump - to then go on the hunt for another winner (possibly, actually - likely - a suboptimal choice compared to the one they just sold). A terse response I received included the comment that the other exchange included: "... much higher multiples " for that sector. To me that statement reflects a desire to attain higher pricing and then dump and not hold and/or accumulate. Getting on the, right higher-multiple, bandwagon though would be great for equity issuance though wouldn't it? The cost of debt / debt issuance I don't know enough about but wondered about. Why would the listing matter. The financials should matter hugely, but the exchange?

Question: Why wish for a stock's listing to be 'upgraded' to a bigger exchange? Why do people hope to see a small company they own tradable shares in, have the equity listed on a larger more prominent exchange?* (I'm not considering OTC here but a move from a venture exchange, etc.) I recently asked this question and have now come here for some expert education and opinion. My uneducated view - so far. - A more prominent exchange listing helps with retail investor exposure, helps with equity issues, sometimes required more stringent reporting (but at what cost in terms of listing/market data fees). - For those looking to sell, the announcement of a move to another more prominent exchange permits a selling opportunity (like a share split announcement). I guess the eventual addition to an index fund/etf. (There's also risk with being dropped from an index.) - The increased liquidity and equity issuance potential are both double edged swords to me. However, exposure and associated liquidity could be hugely important to some emerging tech and other companies that need to rapidly expand to grab market share and so, need to massively dilute existing shareholders to survive and grow. So, everyone: Why else? What's so great about moving "up to" a NASDAQ, NYSE, TSX listing? And why the blanket desire for this outcome among micro-cap investors no matter what the nature of their enterprise? * I recently asked this on a small forum in regards to a small, rather unknown, emerging technology company with strong patents, positive cash flows and of course, loads of 'promise'. I'm getting the typical; are you a moron like responses, a larger more liquid, more trustworthy exchange with the whole _{type of tech}__ sector listed there... Maybe I am a moron. :-)

I won't name any but a few domestic seniors residences, funeral homes and age related health care services and treatments, plus some other demographic plays offer opportunity. Over the next 10+ years aging, ailing, and dying baby boomers offer a near guaranteed, and pretty dramatic, increase in customers for some companies. Such businesses may not be wonderful companies now, but for some you could expect to double a customer base if the services (like funerals, seniors housing, kidney treatments, etc) are near unavoidable. So your downside might be somewhat protected in what seems to be a rather pricy market today. As always, with 20/20 hindsight in those circumstances, people would declare such businesses as "wonderful" when in fact, you're just following the money.

This doesn't really belong in this thread but it is interesting... "We are seeing ‘for sale’ tags on airports, roads, ports, ..." (see below)

It's disheartening how much 'news' is being generated on every little company and every little price movement. Just clutters up the news streams.

And don't forget that he did somewhat retire when he was young, saying something to the effect that he wanted to do something more meaningful. If anyone can find the exact quote please post it. It was an interesting comment in light of his success to that point.

There's also the pension, endowments and other such funds route. Not too sure why AUM is important but it does sometimes allow for a wider breath of experience. As such AIMCo in Alberta has $80+ billion in AUM, so the OP might want to look west.

Just posting an older article about Apple's cash. I figure the cash actually is real. :-) Netting cash against liabilities is a rather useless point too, but the point about taxes may add a bit of value to the discussion. Why Apple's real cash pile is 99% smaller than you think By Brett Arends, Oct 7, 2015 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/apples-real-cash-pile-is-99-smaller-than-you-think-2015-10-07

Ilumina is currently down nearly 24% today, so when I saw what Zacks said yesterday, I just had to have some fun (at Zack's expense) and post it here. (earnings vs revenue outlook) Today's news: First Zacks:

The article below discusses the lack of justification for the current price to book value

Zacks reporting sounds like ValueLine's self promotion. Years ago I looked at ValueLine's reported performance and found it hard to believe. Then some funds started up mimicking their #1 rankings and they sure weren't stellar performers.

Interesting... Zacks sell news is always popping up on the companies I'm just getting interested in. How should their ratings performance be rated? I hope someone revisits this post in say 3, 5 maybe 10 years to compare their picks to BRK. :-)

Thats good isn't it? Like buying shares after a company cuts its dividend. The sellers often are selling based on their own cash flow needs and not on an assessment of the company's prospects.

I think that was Buffett's dry sense of humour. Maybe Schloss was the next scheduled speaker. (Buffett praised Schloss, his detachment from companies and his investment performance on several subsequent occasions.)

Run for the hills everyone, it may "Crash even more" !!! :-)

Just now read the RBS piece. I thought Hussman was prone to extremes. :-) Hussman though thinks in terms of hard numeric reality - whereas the RBS piece is very 'story' based. The big bad wolf kind of thinking. As such, I wouldn't put any more credence on such fearfulness than I do on my own fearfulness. We're all prone to manic depressive behaviour and it seems that RBS analysts are as well - but they have a bigger audience. I'd much rather follow Hussman's warnings and be conservative but with an eye towards opportunity than the knee-jerk panic behaviour RBS is proposing. (And note that I was 80%+ in cash going into the 2008/2009 collapse when none of the big money managers besides Jeremy Grantham, was proposing extreme safety.) Unlike the economy in 2007 with massive overbuilding and collapsing jobs, FASB157 and billions upon in exposed derivatives some significant amount without even collateral service agreements, today, the US economy is doing quite well, banks are well capitalized, cheapening oil will really pay off for the consumer and so many other things are reasonable. What's to fear? An imploding China will hit sales for some US companies but Chinese goods will become even cheaper. This could just be a repeat of the 1990s implosion in Japan which hardly affected the US. Bottom line, there just doesn't seem to be any big reason to panic regarding a slowing or moderating US economy. Now, in my home province of Alberta, Canada, things are different. Panic may be an appropriate response, though I'm buying into the local market ever so slowly. e.g.. TransAlta cut its dividend as was fully expected and the stock tanked 13% nonetheless. Interesting isn't it.

I don't know if this was ever posted here, somewhere, but it was quite a good read... Naked Short Put Options - Warren Buffett's Little Secret April 23, 2014 Grahamites http://www.gurufocus.com/news/256254/naked-short-put-options--warren-buffetts-little-secret

This site just spews out the articles and some just makes your blood boil. (Note the guy's holdings at the bottom. There should be far more disclosure and even some explanation that goes with such disclosure.) Don’t Overthink It. Just Buy Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd. http://www.fool.ca/2015/12/07/dont-overthink-it-just-buy-fairfax-financial-holdings-ltd/