shhughes1116

Can you elaborate, what makes you say that? Suggest that you take a specific discussion of DVA to the DVA thread.

I second what was said by eclecticvalue. Start with some smaller companies to get your feet wet with 10-Qs, 10-Ks, and S-1s. Then work your way up to larger companies with more complex filing documents. In general, the amount of time I devote to 10-Ks and 10-Qs depends on the company, position sizing, and purpose of my research: - If I am putting together a basket of similar companies (that represent a small portion of my portfolio), I may not spend much time on the 10-K and 10-Q - the basket will generally be based on a simple evaluation of balance sheet metrics or cash flow metrics. - If I have a "conviction" holding (i.e. a single company that represents a meaningful % of my portfolio), then I attempt to read, front-to-back, the last 5-10 years of 10-Ks (if available) and/or the S-1. - If i am trying to expand my circle of competence into a new industry or niche, then I will spend some time reading, front-to-back, 10-Ks for multiple companies within the industry/niche. Since you are new, it is especially important to do a lot of reading. Pick an industry, start with small companies, and make yourself an expert by reading. Then start to expand your circle of competence. It is a slow process, but in the long-run, you will be a better investor.

The retiring baby boomer generation, coupled with relatively rapid technological advancement (particularly in AI, automation, and energy efficiency) are structural factors pushing Western societies into a deflationary trajectory. Loose monetary policy seems to be central banks' solution / band-aid for these structural issues to avoid the deflation bogeyman. So with that in mind, I don't see inflation perking up until the Millennial generation starts to buy houses and have families in earnest. In the meantime, I see our economy bouncing along with low inflation, low interest rates, and a shitty stock market. My fingers are crossed that a lengthy period of time with low interest rates does not impair our banking system. While there are many factors that have supported the rapid growth of the United States, I believe a healthy banking system and property rights are at the top of the list. Low interest rates are causing some bankers to extend duration to keep NIM constant (or to slow the decline), or take on increased credit risk. This may result in an unhealthy/impaired banking system. In case it wasn't obvious, my view is US-centric.

So I have a fairly quantitative, financial background, while my wife does not. I've found that my best performing stuff (I.e. The stuff that outperformed my expectations) are the investment theses that I can write on a napkin and she understands. On the flip-side, the ideas that require a slide deck to explain are almost always the crappy ideas that underperform my expected returns. In practice, this has resulted in a fairly large portfolio of community banks, micro-cap real estate equities, and a few demand-pull MLPs.

Sorry for the somewhat non-constructive reply. My professional background is in environmental health...I spent a lot of time in the past talking people out of fancy water filter filtration systems and/or indoor air systems that were hawked by less-than-savory sales people who prey on irrational fear.

Hard to provide an appropriate recommendation unless you indicate what you are trying to remove from your water. In general, unless there is a particular organic or inorganic contaminant that you are trying to remove (and you have tested the water to verify its presence at an undesirable level), I am not sure water filters are a great investment.

AGO

+1. Documentary was excellent...although his interview with Bill Maher to highlight the release of the documentary was a waste.

One other suggestion. Books will be helpful to build a foundation of knowledge, and that is a great place to start. As you progress in your knowledge/learning, I think in the area of real estate, the insight of a mentor will be priceless for you. I happened to work with someone who became somewhat of a mentor to me in real estate. It benefited me because we both had a similar mindset - very conservative - and a similar background - small part-time real estate investor/operator. He pointed out a lot of pitfalls that I would never have picked up from a book (i.e. finding, screening, and dealing with tenants; picking up on bulls**t when evaluating/buying property).

Muscleman, I suspect there are multiple tax experts on this board, but it is March 31st. I highly doubt they are active on these threads to answer tax questions when the US federal tax deadline is 2 weeks away. All the tax pros that I know are working 18-20 hour days right now, and will continue to do so through April 15.

+ 1. I have a technical job that I very much enjoy (think a combination of food safety, epidemiology, and toxicology). In high school and college, I had some opportunities to work white collar intern jobs, like many of my friends. However, I chose to spend my summers in high school and in college doing plumbing work, electrical work, masonry, and finished carpentry. (In hindsight, it is clear that these white collar intern jobs were of no use to my friends when looking for real jobs...they were basically a coffee/xerox queen.) I view these trades as essential life skills, and think that every man (and women) should be able to do basic plumbing, electrical, masonry, and finished carpentry. These skills will save you a bunch of money over your lifetime. And as Oddball noted above, I met some folks during this work that I would never have met otherwise. To this day, they remind me of the impact that a poor decision can have on your life. They also remind me how lucky I was to be born in the United States...

+1. his record as a businessman is fairly abysmal. After inheriting his money, he could have put his money in an index fund and done 2x better. And for the record, while I certainly want our politicians to be frugal, you can not run a country (or another political subdivision) like a business. Take a look at Flint if you want to see the result of running a City like a business...

I don't agree. You take what the market gives you, and I think there is plenty (for me) that is cheap outside of the energy, metals, and mining sectors. Keep in mind that, for the most part, I also don't attempt to play with the big boys...I am mostly looking at sub-$250 million market cap stuff that fits into a couple of broad themes that I think will play out over the next decade. On a more general level, the world seems pretty screwed up right now ....Europe is messed up economically and politically, the Middle East is messed up economically and politically, China is busy building new sandboxes in the South China sea that are armed to the brim with missiles, radar, and planes, we have a bunch of clowns running for the Republican nomination, energy prices are in the toilet (good and bad), we have central banks blindly wandering into uncharted waters with ZIRP/NIRP, the list goes on. To be quite honest, all of the above makes me happy, because absent World War III, it would seem that things can only get better. And in the meantime, I am sure I will keep uncovering individual companies that are cheap with a bright future.

Wow, very sad for his family...married with three adult children. Reminds me a little bit of honor suicides in Japanese and Chinese culture....the shame of public humiliation is so great that it causes one to take their own life. I hope that was not the case here, as shame tends to be a temporary problem, while suicide is a permanent solution.

BBBI and BFFI.

Increased position in ETE as it hit ten bucks.

The only thing that matters for LNG is the cost differential between the exporting country and importing country, after accounting for the cost of liquefaction and Regasification. If the differential is sufficient, the liquifaction facility will sign long term contracts with upstream players to supply the requisite gas. As I've said on other threads, there are numerous completed but unconnected wells....any rally will be short lived because these wells will be connected as prices rise. Add to this the sweet spots they have found deep in the Utica, which are yielding the some of the most productive gas wells drilled on the lower 48, and ultimately the result will be short lived rallies as the supply spigot gets cranked open again.

I don't think you can read much into Berkshire's cash balance. While I don't follow them closely (I know, that is like blasphemy on this message board...), I'm pretty sure they have held a high cash balance for the last few years, and I assume some of the cash sitting on their balance sheet is for the closing of their $32 billion acquisition of precision castparts.

Make sure it is a Stealership you trust, and/or make sure there is a reasonable time/mileage warranty if you are going to buy a certified pre-owned car. You may also consider inquiring to see if they have the maintenance records for the previous owner to see what work was performed and when.

Used cars are a mixed bag...If you know what you are looking for (or have a trusted mechanic that does not work for a Stealership that can do an inspection for you before the purchase), used cars can be a pretty good deal. However, I think the probability of someone unloading a POS on you through a private sale is very high, and I generally don't trust the Stealership with used cars. I'd highly recommend new Toyota Camry's or Corollas. I've heard good things about Tacomas also, but can't speak from experience. The new Corollas and Camrys are relatively cheap, and ongoing annual maintenance expenses are fairly reasonable. Most importantly (for me at least): (1) OEM parts are cheap and easy to find; (2) Most maintenance and most repairs can be done at home by DIY'ers, saving a bundle of money; (3) The residual value on these cars tends to be decent, even after 250k miles.

Maybe the ego club? The launch and landing was incredible. I watched most of it live, then watched it again with my sons this morning. My oldest loves space and to see this stuff happening monthly is incredible. My wife commented that there was no progress for so long, and now suddenly it's going crazy. This is how it should be. I'm excited to see where we are a few years out at this pace. I agree, it is certainly exciting to think about where we will be in a few years. But that also causes some consternation/melancholy for me. Some of the greatest advancements in science came from our government's investment in the space program, and because this was funded with taxpayer money, these advancements were generally shared with everyone such that society benefited. Now we spend so much money on entitlement spending that we can barely scratch together money for our space program, and thus we rely on commercial enterprises to do the work. This is a poor reflection on us as a society, that we over-invest in our past at the expense of our future and our children... Wouldn't it be something if we could invest in our future, and give society (especially our children) something to aspire to (i.e. in the same way that Kennedy challenged the United States to reach the moon within a decade)? I have the exact opposite reaction. I think it is wonderful to see a private company, sending a private rocket, loaded with private satellites into orbit. And the only thing that would make it better is if it was done from a private spaceport and had private astronauts going to a private space station or even better a private settlement on Mars the moon or an asteroid. The government needed to drain an enormous amount of money from the private sector (the only way government gets money is either taxing the private sector or printing more which is just a tax on savings) to get into space and to the moon. How much quicker would private industry have been able to do it if $Trillions haven't been sucked out of the economy over the years fighting wars, drugs, poverty (ironically), and subsidizing everything under the sun. We will never be a space fairing society if the final frontier is left to government bureaucracies (with no incentives to succeed or not waste time and resources) funded by stolen money. Watching that rocket touch down last night gave me the chills, it is finally happening. The first important step to opening up space to humanity. I would have not responded to you comment, except that you stated that taxpayer money is stolen. Your political biases are very apparent from your post, and thus I now I feel the need to point out a few basic facts: 1. If you look back at history, government has generally been responsible for opening up frontiers using taxpayer money. The Wright Brothers would never have been successful without that initial contract from the US Army Signal Corp. The United States would have struggled to settle the Western Frontier if not for the taxpayer-funded Lewis and Clark expedition to map the territory, the taxpayer-funded army outposts in the West, the Transcontinental railroad, etc. 2. We would not be in space in the first place if it wasn't for the government. Don't forget that the entire reason SpaceX is able to fund this adventure is with taxpayer money that is funding future resupply of the International Space Station. Remind me, did private companies fund Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, the shuttle, the ISS or SpaceLab, or did the taxpayer? Most of these commercial companies (with the exception of Virgin) are innovating precisely because they are competing for government contracts.) 3. If you compare the amount of money spent on the space program to the scientific advances directly attributed to the space program, the ROIC is substantially positive. However, government is generally not allowed to patent taxpayer-funded scientific advances, so the private sector takes them and exploits them. If you look at the American aviation industry over the last 50 years, the primary reason we have been competitive is because private companies were able to exploit taxpayer-funded R&D in hard science and avionics (funded by DoD, NASA, NOAA, etc). If you look at the renaissance in biotech that is occurring right now, a big reason that is happening is because many of these companies are exploiting taxpayer-funded R&D that was conducted to answer basic fundamental questions. The entire reason this taxpayer money was spent on R&D @ NIH and HHS is because commercial enterprises were unwilling to do this science in the first place. Just like space, and just like the moon, the Martian frontier will also be opened up by the government, using taxpayer money, because commercial firms will be unable to show a positive ROIC. But don't worry, commercial firms will come along for the ride, because they will benefit financially from the government contracts.

Maybe the ego club? The launch and landing was incredible. I watched most of it live, then watched it again with my sons this morning. My oldest loves space and to see this stuff happening monthly is incredible. My wife commented that there was no progress for so long, and now suddenly it's going crazy. This is how it should be. I'm excited to see where we are a few years out at this pace. I agree, it is certainly exciting to think about where we will be in a few years. But that also causes some consternation/melancholy for me. Some of the greatest advancements in science came from our government's investment in the space program, and because this was funded with taxpayer money, these advancements were generally shared with everyone such that society benefited. Now we spend so much money on entitlement spending that we can barely scratch together money for our space program, and thus we rely on commercial enterprises to do the work. This is a poor reflection on us as a society, that we over-invest in our past at the expense of our future and our children... Wouldn't it be something if we could invest in our future, and give society (especially our children) something to aspire to (i.e. in the same way that Kennedy challenged the United States to reach the moon within a decade)?

This is why cartels don't work. Yes, we are in agreement here. (sigh), no. Why would a bankrupt, oil producing nation decide to pump less oil? Why would it be less incentivized to cheat on quotas in a cartel? Because in a bankrupt banana republic, there is generally a regime change. And politicians in all parts of the world (and particularly in countries with less-than-developed democratic institutions such as Venezuela, Angola, Nigeria, Iran, etc) tend to make decisions that consolidate their grip on power. Venezuela is a prime example of this, by spending 100% of oil revenues on social programs, at the expense of setting aside money to maintain/enhance their oil production. You can bet that a new regime will realize that a stable price of oil makes it easier to consistently fund the social programs, and funded social programs (as opposed to bankrupt social programs) are ultimately what keep these autocrats in power.

This. 100% People underestimate the cohesiveness and power of OPEC. If the puppet masters could pull the strings, wouldn't they have already? This goes back to the idea of Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait/UAE to a lesser extent, acting as the Central Bank of oil. They've played this game before, and know that when they curtail output to raise prices, not only do the banana republics (of South America and Africa) continue to cheat on the quotas, but Saudi Arabia gets screwed on market share. Saudi Arabia's decision to produce full-throttle (and if you noticed, Russia is also going along with this), and their recent decision to further cut prices while also subsidizing the insurance for oil tankers delivering Saudi crude has everything to do ensuring long-run adherence to OPEC quotas. In America, we would bomb the s**t out of these Banana Republics to effect a regime change. Instead of bombing the s**t out of these Banana Republics, Saudi Arabia is going to depose their governments by bankrupting them and forcing a regime change, with the idea that a new regime might be more "receptive" to OPEC policy on oil production.

Everyone is pumping the max they can. Years of 100$ oil financed this. Projects still came online in 2015. Now at 40$ it is getting harder just to maintain production in 50+% of prod and what they called a glut has already narrowed down from 2.5mboe/day to 1-mboe/day in the last year. Stocks is the thing that allows for all these shorts to feel confident for now. Shale I think puts a soft cap on prices close to 60+$/boe. But production still > than demand and no one will be willing to slow production before they are economically forced. So doesn't that simply mean that all those NA shale producers will simply go bankrupt or taken over by majors as they are the weakest players by far? No one knows where the price goes from here but there sure seems to be little incentive for oil to go up given that all players are still hanging on. Many claim we won't see sub $30-$35 simply because ... ? Idk honestly. It seems unlikely but given everything, why not? $40 seemed just as unlikely a year ago. So can someone tell me why all those North American producers aren't fucked? Oh, ok... :-\ ;) Anyone here interested in (or actively long) refiners? Decent dividend yields; likelihood of lower crude prices for longer could be positive for spreads. Etc. I haven't checked in the last two weeks, but it looked like crack spreads were contracting. If you are investing in refiners in the United States, you are either betting on them taking advantage of differences in regional pricing (slowly going away as more crude pipelines come online), or differences between WTI/WCS/etc and Brent (possibly narrowing if the export ban is lifted, which seems like a distinct possibility given current discussions in Washington). Things are good right now, and I can only see things getting worse relative to the current situation.