Jurgis

That's been true for a while. The really important question is how exactly is it going to die. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0808151/ or http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3062096/

You have to be careful though. The "Outsiders" "We Don't Need No Stinking Guidance" CEO could be a real deal or could be a scammer who just wants to blow off the investors. Distinguishing the two is not as easy as the 20-years-after Monday morning quarterbacks make it appear.

I guess that is an interesting piece of information to use as a thought experiment, but unfortunately he didn't purchase those stocks without hedging. Yes, this is good observation. It's easy to assume that results without hedging would be as in graph. That's not necessarily true. They could have been quite different for a number of reasons (cash flows in/out of fund, mental inability of manager to buy/hold unhedged securities that he holds hedged, etc.).

He should have offered unhedged version of the fund and raked in money. 8) am I good or what

Not a bad platform 8)

Interesting topic. Out of the stocks mentioned, FB probably can grow 15-20%+ for 3 years. Not sure about 5. Asking about EPS growth makes little sense when you mention companies with almost zero earnings like AMZN and TSLA. Some other metric should be used there. TSLA probably can grow sales at 15-20%+. I would not bet against GOOGL growing 15%+ though it's possibly getting tough. Some other CoBF favorites to ponder: TDG? IBKR? PRDGF? ;)

I think there are a lot of us. We are lacking a party to represent us. I vote for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Movement_(Lithuania) Which might come as a surprise for some people who consider me red incarnate. 8) Not that it's ideal match and yeah, I don't think there's equivalent in US.

I used to think that I was too, but then I realized that they are not as orthogonal as it seems from the first glance. Usually the first thing "fiscal conservatives" aim their knife at is social programs. I agree however that the waste and graft in government and its contractors should be cut and controlled. It's not as trivial as the Orange T suggests. Some pressure is probably good though.

I suspect that those nifty features like air refueling, ability to withstand the EMP from a nuclear blast, ability to defend against missiles and ability to conduct a global war from 30,000 ft add a little to the price tag. In addition I suspect that a good chunk of the budget goes to the Air Force for planning, design of features, etc. That would be brown dollars not real cost since they'd still probably pay those people anyway even if they weren't working on this project. So new stealth bombers were supposed to cost $55B or 550M per plane: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/04/55-75-Billion-Guess-How-Much-New-Stealth-Bomber-Will-Cost $2.9B for two planes still seems a bit steep. On one hand it's only 2 planes so there's no cost spread over multiple planes build. On the other hand, even with all the fancy defensive and comm stuff, the Air Force One is likely less complicated to design and build compared to new stealth bomber...

I seem to remember that some orders were in fact cancelled during/after flash crash. So this is in fact a risk.

I really hope you are wrong.

You are right.

Seriously, he almost completely blew up. Maybe you could argue it's OK to invest with him for a lumpy 15% but not in mutual fund format. He could have been forced to close the shop.

Winter is coming! ... oh wait.

It's my understanding you can direct your broker/accountant of which to use. Some may even let you choose to customize at the position level instead of the account level. Just got to make sure it's all well documented and correct in the event you get audited. What TwoCitiesCapital said. I've done it @position level in the past. I'm not an accountant though and I haven't been audited so far, so FWIW and all that.

It's always black & white with you people. I enjoyed the Godfather & yet I wouldn't enjoy doing a hit. I enjoyed Band of Brothers & yet wouldn't want to go to war. You; on the other hand, deride me for being entertained by these films due to their violent content & yet you delight in picking virtual fights. Get the chip off your shoulder (I'll bet it's not there in face to face conversations...) The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas http://engl210-deykute.wikispaces.umb.edu/file/view/omelas.pdf

With current price (.3 of par), getting positive return requires over 40% chance of success and less than 4 years to achieve. (Or higher chance of success if it takes over 4 years to achieve it). Pre-runup, the numbers were ~20% of chance + over 4 years. Assuming 40% chance of success, gain to par, loss to zero, full Kelly's is 10% of portfolio, half Kelly's is 5%. FWIW.

Closing to 5% after current runup.

Well, I just had that kind of election in a country that now will remain nameless, since I really don't want to go into dirty linen with specifics. ~8 parties in total, ~5 major parties. All major parties have exactly the same platform. Yeah, they all gonna fight against corruption, bring back expats, lower taxes, support small businesses, support tech startups, support agriculture, support families, support education, and so on and so forth. If you would believe their platforms, they all are the same and they all will do great job. In reality... oh well. And after 4 years of corruption and scandals of party A, people elect party B as an "agent of change" forgetting all the corruption and scandals of party B did 8 or 12 years ago... And so we rotate A, B, C, then maybe A again, then maybe D created by people from A and B and renamed for fun... So... same crap. Might work differently in US maybe...

@SnarkyPuppy: OK. :)

I am sure you have great intentions. I am also pretty sure that your proposal if-adopted would be used to suppress votes from marginalized groups including based on race. But since this has pretty much no chance of being adopted, we won't know whether your positive expectations or my negative ones are closer to reality. BTW, I think that demonstrating basic proficiency won't change the results of elections much if at all. I base this on smaller countries that have close to 100% literacy and where most people know the people standing for election. But again - we won't know what this would do in US. Take care. Edit: I think I skipped over the part of your proposal where you suggest voting for candidates without knowing their names just the positions. This is somewhat interesting, but it is somewhat like voting for parties (in various countries). And it's very unlikely to be adopted in US. I don't know if it would be positive or negative.

The system is not "fine" if by "fine" you mean "ideal", but there are no simple solutions that Internetz forum chat will magically deliver. Restricting votes to X will never pass since it's not what democracy is. And if it passes, it's very likely to be for the worst not for the best - i.e. back to some form of fascism rather than to enlightened "rule by smart dedicated altruistic etc. superhumans" utopia. Things may change when humans get the Musk/Kurzweil brain implants that allow them instant access to cloud intelligence and thinking/education becomes less of a chore. Maybe. I'm not superconfident. Things will also likely change a lot when we get non-human superhuman intelligence.

Not bad suggestion, but there are exceptions. E.g. cancer. You still can find places that may treat you, but you'd have to live there and they may nor may not have as good/latest drugs and proficiency. And if they have latest/greatest, the country may not be cheap. (I have some 3rd hand experience in this through family members.)

/bow great teacher! 8) I might work at least until there is demand for my skills and I have some fun and sense of contributing to our society's progress. ;)

Yeah, that's the concern. OTOH, the valuations are lower than they were in 1999. But yeah, probably 4-6% per year from here for 17 years. And that might be optimistic.