Jurgis

I marked "I plan to get whatever vaccine is available first". Basically though, the vaccine will not be made available to everyone immediately. I am not going to office and I am not an essential worker, so I will wait until people on the front lines and people who want/need to be vaccinated first get vaccinated. By that time likely there will be evidence which vaccine(s) are safe and effective. So I'd say I'm gonna get vaccine late late this year or next year.

If you want to analyze this, you perhaps should figure out who their customers would be: people comfortable with tech? people uncomfortable with tech? etc. You should realize that they are entering area where a lot of companies tried and are still trying. Oh look: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuro (But then you could argue that Nuro is valued at 2.7B by Sh1tBank and NowRx is raising at 65M pre money...) ::) If it's "idea is easy to come up with", then you are betting on execution. How good is the team and how well they can execute? "Nationwide" has the same issues Uber/Lyft have: there's really no benefit of offering service nationwide. Customer from LA does not care about service availability in NYC. And the cost issues are similar to what Uber/Lyft have: they have to have delivery transportation and drivers. They can outsource that to Uber/Lyft or whatever platform(s) other delivery services use, but that does not reduce costs. On the positive side Uber/Lyft could acquire them. ::) It is somewhat natural extension to UberEats. Anyway, yeah, if they manage to grow and they market themselves well, they could go to huge valuation. Yet OTOH if they raise a lot (even at higher valuations), then you gonna be diluted. And you cannot sell until they either IPO or are trading on "private" markets. So even if they raise at 2B or whatever, it's still not a real gain. Your exit is either a sale or IPO or active "private" market if you're not restricted to sell on such. Just ignore my thoughts though. You don't want to end up "I passed on 200x bagger next-Amazon because Jurgis was so negative". 8)

I took a look. It has a lot of data and it looks pretty good. Still, I won't pay for TIKR since M* for free is good enough for me. ::) Just MO though.

I have not used tikr.com. Morningstar is free (for me) and covers pretty much all companies I look at. ::)

I wouldn't invest in this. IMO there's very little novelty, there is no moat, there's not much benefit for customers, there's huge competition and they are unlikely to become profitable soon (or at all). That's not to say they cannot be acquired or get a huge follow up rounds from someone (Softbank, cough, cough). ::)

It might work out, but looking at financials, they haven't grown for last 5 years pretty much. Unless you know the area well, the counterargument is that it's not attractive for growth/momo crowd and the valuation differential will persist. (Growth/momo crowd is not completely stupid. They don't necessarily invest in companies that don't grow.)

I feel like its also the way its packaged (e.g. very short videos, plus some other stuff). Making algorithms that figure out what content you will like based on what other content you have liked, and what other users like you have liked, is very doable by companies not named ByteDance. I guess you could argue it's just that much better than the algorithms determining what to put in front of people on YouTube, Netflix, Spotify, Facebook, etc, but I really don't think that is the case. I don't use Tik Tok. Perhaps I should. CCP needs more info about me. I don't use Spotify. Netflix recommendations are mediocre. Youtube recommendations are so so. If you watch 2-3 videos from a single author/person, recommendations get stuck on tons of other videos from the same source. If you watch variety of music videos, it does a bit better IMO suggesting related ones. I mostly gave up on Facebook algorithm. When I go to FB, I just go to the friends&family pages and go through their posts. I only go to my "timeline" or whatever it's called last and don't really spend time on it. IMO it's quite mediocre too.

That's also my approach to active investing. +1

Winning in casino is simple: go to Vegas and put all your money on red. If it doesn't stop on red, don't put the money there.

Sam Zell should lead by example and go into a crowded office every day.

Dow is just f&*ked up index.

Jurgis, That's micro-aggression and discriminatory towards those of us ESL speakers. #quit_your_privilege :) Sorry, it's just my OCD & spectrum showing up. ::) Sorry, it's just my OCD & spectrum showing up. ::) Sorry, it's just my OCD & spectrum showing up. ::)

If investment manager misspells Buffett as Buffet, be very skeptical. ::)

I don't know details about Spain, but IMO a bunch of Europe reopened too much with no checks. In particular, there is a lot of vacation travel, which was pushed by vacation destination countries for their economy, but which was IMO foolhardy. Plus there was quite a lot of de-mask-ization and social distancing reduction going on - maybe not in all countries, but in some. IMO even in Massachusetts people have relaxed the attitudes way too much. But hey, I'm probably the only person who still pretty much has not met my friends or traveled anywhere. ::)

Yes, you should have used "people are leaving" argument in the first place. IMO that's much better argument for your position - although "people are leaving" is also tinged with economic and opportunities-based emigration. But you made different argument. And that's how we ended up here. ::) Yes, they would choose America. And I would claim that large factor driving that preference is the relative wealth of America. Plus America's higher openness for immigration and immigrants. Which does not fully equate with civil liberties: there's a number of countries that have civil liberties on par with US and yet are much more closed to immigration. A number of European countries are like that.

If you're going to be cheeky, at least be correct. Over the last 20 years, China's net migration rate has decreased from -0.157 in year 2000 to -0.247 per 1000 in year 2019. Since 1950, China has never had a positive migration rate. For context, the net migration rate for U.S. in 2019 was 2.893 per 1000, also down over the same timeframe (but still decidedly positive). The rest I won't comment on at length as it is better suited for a soon-to-be-deceased sub forum. But I will stand by my original point: A free society and civil liberties are a competitive advantage. You just changed the subject. "nobody is clamoring at the gates of China" is very different claim from net immigration statistics. China has hugely restrictive immigration policy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_China : So if someone is clamoring at the gates of China, China won't let them in. The other parts of that same Wikipedia article cover the existing examples of "clamoring" including illegal immigration and overstayed visas: Edit: BTW, this does not mean that China is great country. It's just an attractive country for some. And IMO your world understanding would improve if you acknowledged that purely economic migration (that does not much care whether target country is free or liberal) exists. But yeah, this thread should be pretty much moved to "Politics".

You missed last 20+ years? There have been tons of people going to China for jobs/money/etc. Part of is the culture/history/mystique. But part of it has been opportunities. Not that it's trivial to get in and get job visa.

Got a text message and filled out https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/household-pulse-survey.html today. Just FYI, it looks legit and data may help to make informed decisions.

@ReadtheFootnotes: you've got a sweet thread going on here. Unfortunately, there are not that many attractive finger licking opportunities around nowadays. ::) Maybe I just don't know where to look. :-\

FYI: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/usps-states-delayed-mail-in-ballots/2020/08/14/64bf3c3c-dcc7-11ea-8051-d5f887d73381_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_uspsstates-230pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans Though this should be moved into "Politics" section.

I shit on US? Oh no, brother, you have completely misunderstood. I am here in the hope that the glorious rays of wisdom of The Greatest President Trumph and his disciples could delighten us all. A single word of this genius and the country will stand still in amazement and awe as you surely do. How could I miss the opportunity to be present in such momentous times and places and hear from such devoted followers of the Most Beautiful Leader? All Hail El Presidente! I can understand why you didnt answer the question. I actually answered the question. But don't worry. I realize that you don't want to acknowledge a brother in public forum. We'll exchange the secret handshake and a kiss when we meet at the rally. Don't be a stranger. MAGA forever!

I shit on US? Oh no, brother, you have completely misunderstood. I am here in the hope that the glorious rays of wisdom of The Greatest President Trumph and his disciples could delighten us all. A single word of this genius and the country will stand still in amazement and awe as you surely do. How could I miss the opportunity to be present in such momentous times and places and hear from such devoted followers of the Most Beautiful Leader? All Hail El Presidente!

And this is why I deeply hesitate to own RE 3-6-12 hours away.

Hold on there just a minute. You make accusations of cherry picking the data then you do exactly that. Instead of comparing population density of the U.S., you use NYC. And you do that because the comparison between the two countries doesn’t support your argument. NZ population density: 15 people /sqK US population density: 36 people /sqK NOT 38,424 / sqK Pretty dishonest trying to compare the country to NYC. How about sticking to the facts for a change. Your right, my fault. The US is extremely homogeneous and no way the population density of NYC contributed in a negative fashion to death counts, GDP loss, and the spread of the virus through out the country. Thanks!!! This is a hilarious interaction. Orthopa: "I'll spin some numbers while simultaneously accusing someone else of spinning!" <Gregmal predictably validates the approach by accusing some nebulous left of spin> Orthopa: "Haha! I'm brilliant! Nobody realizes what I did!" cwericb: "Umm, dude, you know you're basically comparing a country to a city? Can you at least pretend to honestly analyse the situation?" Orthopa: "Darn.... Umm, can't admit fault, gotta go on the offence! Well, um, New York City has lots of people which is bad in a pandemic, and that's completely the point that I was trying to make in my other post! And you're just stupid for not seeing it, and deserve lots of abuse!" Bravo. The thread is now more entertaining than informative. "NYC was so botched due to failed leadership as evidenced by huge number of cases"...but at the same time: "the only reason NZ has low cases because it has such low pop density!" (don't tell these folks about the densities in TX/FL vs NY/NJ...) "NY covid deaths are so high and show how badly libs failed" ...but at the same time: "the NY covid deaths were not real, but faked on the death certificates" Dude. Making two contradictory wrong claims at the same time is a sign of truly stable genius. Trump is proud of his children.

If we look at it that way, pretty much all USA is like that. ::)