rkbabang

I'll start off since no one else is. I'm not going to spend the time to figure out percentages, because I hold some of these in multiple accounts and others in just one account. My largest holding right now is: BAM Other stocks which I'll just say are large percentage holdings are: (in no order) APPL, AMZN, BAC-WSA, BRKB, MIDD, SYTE Stocks which I hold a moderate amount in: (in no order) MKL, POEFF, UBNT, WFCF Other stocks I own which range from very little to almost as large as the above category: (in no order) CLWY, JD, LAACZ, TDW-WSB, SHOP, JOE, NEWR, ANET, DATA, OSTK, SAIL, SINA, PRDGF I also own crypto: (in order) BTC, ETH, XMR, DASH, XTZ, tZERO And my 401K at work only offers mutual funds, so I have it in mostly foreign stock funds to diversify away from the mostly US stocks in the rest of my portfolio. I also have some in a midcap fund, because I notice that my portfolio is mosty either large companies or tiny ones. And finally, I own restricted stock in the company I work for, both vested and unvested. I try to keep the vested stock to about 10% of my portfolio, so I sell when it gets too large because of increase in price or when more vests.

Wouldn't it be interesting if TSLA bought FCAU or some other automaker and started selling the cars online bypassing the dealers. I'm not sure if there is some kind of contractual thing that would prevent it from doing that, I've never looked much into the auto industry and how it works (or doesn't work). Also it could offer its selfdriving feature on every car as a $5K option. Cars need maintenance. If you look at dealership's financial reports, like AN, they don't make much money from selling cars. Their biggest recurring rev is from maintenance rip offs. Margin was ridiculously high. Therefore I don't see the point of by-passing dealerships for selling cars. Also, doing this would piss off these dealership, and how would you handle after sale services? Go to google maps and search for "mechanic". What you will find is that there are a lot of them near you. Many of them do as good or better work than the dealership and most of them are cheaper.

Wouldn't it be interesting if TSLA bought FCAU or some other automaker and started selling the cars online bypassing the dealers. I'm not sure if there is some kind of contractual thing that would prevent it from doing that, I've never looked much into the auto industry and how it works (or doesn't work). Also it could offer its selfdriving feature on every car as a $5K option.

Yes that was big news at the time. This is the latest with Fidelity: Fidelity Launches Institutional Platform For Bitcoin And Ethereum https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeldelcastillo/2018/10/15/fidelity-launches-institutional-platform-for-bitcoin-and-ethereum/#66982bb493c4 Now that we've had our bubble and our crash and the media hype machine has moved on to other things. Just like the internet after 2000, crypto/blockchain will slowly just become a part of how a growing number of things are done.

"Bruce Wayne. Elon Musk. Tony Stark. Three men worth billions of dollars who care more about solving important problems than living comfortably, but only one of them is real"

I agree. He also provided the sole funding for SpaceShipOne. I know he died young, but to say he was first diagnosed with cancer in 1983 he got to live a relatively long time. And it seems he made the most of it.

Yes. Last week I think it was I watched the live feed of him announcing the manned moon mission purchase by the Japanese billionaire and I thought Musk just looked extremely tired and exhausted. He needs a vacation. He should take a month off and relax. Then maybe never go back to Tesla. Focus on SpaceX and getting us off this rock.

#4 baffles me. Why woyld you say that? Gates made a great, and sometimes ruthless, leader of a software company, but how is that anything like Buffett and Munger, or a combination of the two? Buffett was far from a benign leader. He could be ruthless when he needed to be...Sokol's firing, Salmon Brothers incident, the original takeover of Berkshire because he got screwed over on 1/8th of a dollar. I can't imagine a better Chairman than Gates. Howard is a very nice fellow, but really I think shareholder's would be best served with Gates as non-executive Chairman. Who else in the world would better understand how to maintain a moat through thick and thin? He became the richest person in the world when he was a little older than Zuckerberg, and remained so for most of the last 30 years once Sam Walton's wealth was split up and until all of the other tech wonderkinds took over the world. In this type of environment he has not only endured, but survived and maintained his wealth, all the while creating the greatest philanthropic foundation in history, funded by his best friend who was often the 2nd richest man in the world over the same 30 years! And he's still young enough to Chair Berkshire for another 30 years! Cheers! Chairman certainly, CEO no. Berkshire is a different animal than Microsoft. Different skills and talents are needed.

#4 baffles me. Why woyld you say that? Gates made a great, and sometimes ruthless, leader of a software company, but how is that anything like Buffett and Munger, or a combination of the two?

You must be a broker. If he's not, he's gonna be soon. ::) You nerds need to live a little. It's ok to have some drinks, even if Warren doesn't. :) Not a broker. Business owner. Original post was a joke, but since you care... :) I live just fine TYVM. :) Couple drinks per day is a way to alcoholism and other medical problems. It's your life though. We care and we wish you well, but it's your choice after all. ;) And yeah maybe you gonna be just fine. Have fun and good luck. Update. I quit drinking. Was using it as a crutch. I'm not opposed to it in the future in moderation, but done for now. Good for you LR. There was a time in my 20s that I was drinking too much and just decided that I wasn't going to anymore. I was only drinking on the weekends, but I was getting drunk, not just having a few drinks. Now I only drink socially when offered it at other people's houses (and limit myself to 2) or a beer with a restaurant meal. I never buy it for home and rarely drink it even on those other occasions. Even at restaurants I usually order unsweetened ice tea. I said earlier in this discussion that I have about 6-12 beers per year and that is still true only probably less than that lately. It is September and I don't think I've had 6 beers this year, I can only think of 2 occasions that I had 1. You will find that you don't miss it.

The rise of crypto in higher education ". 42 percent of the world’s top 50 universities now offer at least one course on crypto or blockchain . Students from a range of majors are interested in crypto and blockchain courses — and universities are adding courses across a variety of departments . Original Coinbase research includes a Qriously survey of 675 U.S. students, a comprehensive review of courses at 50 international universities, and interviews with professors and students When David Yermack, the finance department chair at New York University Stern School of Business, first offered his course on blockchain and financial services in 2014, 35 students signed up, eight fewer than the school’s typical elective. By spring 2018, the number of enrolled students climbed to 230, forcing Stern to move the class to its largest auditorium. This academic year, Yermack will teach the blockchain course both semesters to meet interest from students."

"Robot, go get me some venison".

There are a little over 100 people who work in my building and there are exactly 3 women. One is the secretary and the other 2 are engineers. My son is starting in computer science this year at a 2-year school with plans to transfer to a 4 year school afterwards and all of the incoming freshmen in his major are male. When we were touring the school earlier this year they showed us the Dental Hygienist building and they had pictures of all of the graduating classes in one of the hallways and there was 1-2 males in each picture (out of maybe 200 students) and they told us that the program started in the early 1960s and that they didn't have their first male graduate until the 1980s. It is strange how the sexes separate themselves into and away from certain professions. You are correct here, which goes against the "women have no time theory". There is a local "concerned parents" FB group in my town and my wife and I are both members. I never post and rarely read it, because every time I look at it there are tens or hundreds of new posts each with hundreds of comments (almost exclusively by women) and I am not interested enough in any of the topics to spend any time reading it. Also from what I have read there, they are not nice to each other at all in the comments. It makes the politics section here look like a bunch of people holding hands singing kumbaya.

I was being sarcastic. One or two ladies on this and other financial forums does not change the overwhelming sausage-festedness. The thing is you see women on Twitter engage in political debate which can be as contentious or even more nasty than exchanges on financial forums. Which begs the question - Why don't women engage in financial forums? Avoidance of mansplaining? General disinterest? I know this is VERY un-PC to say these days, but just as the Google memo author was correct about the lack of women in Computer Science and other tech fields is simply general disinterest, I believe the same is true for finance. It has nothing to do with intelligence or aptitude, it is simply that women don't pursue these as interests. Not only professionally but as hobbies either. There are many like me for whom investing is a hobby, not a profession, but not many women. There are many for whom tinkering with programming or electronics is a hobby not a profession, but not many women. Now whether this is nurture or nature I don't know. I suspect to some extent it is both. The same reason you don't see very many men teaching Kindergarten. Here is a role model for men to be Kindergarten teachers, https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099938/ As you can see I have nothing better to do than to try to post humorous things on a message board. Being alone in a room with 15-30 5 year-olds has to be one of the hardest jobs there is. I wouldn't last an hour.

You change tires for the winter? :o Yeah, I know my relatives do this in Lithuania where it is required. I think you're the first person I've heard to do this in US. I live in W. Canada, where this is pretty much a requirement for anyone who drives in the winter. I would have thought lots of places in the US would be similar (Colorado, Montana, Minnesota, Vermont, etc). I haven't lived in any of the states above. It's not a requirement in MA (or NH AFAIK). Personally I don't drive if there's snow and it hasn't been cleaned from the roads/streets. It seems that in Europe (even rich(er) countries like Finland) they don't clean the roads as much as in US. In MA next day after snow it's all clean asphalt pretty much even on minor streets (Boston area, might be different in western MA, I don't know). In Helsinki, for example, you have snow and slush on the streets even if it hasn't snowed for a while (?). So I don't use winter tires although I agree that they would be needed if you had to drive during snow (e.g. have to get to work even on snow days, etc.). Studded tires are allowed/banned per state, so check state laws. More discussion: https://community.cartalk.com/t/do-i-need-studded-snow-tires-in-ma/82516/21 I'm in NH and the only change I make is that if it snows I drive my Sequoia in 4WD mode and once the streets are clear, the next day like you said, I will switch back to my Hyundai. I usually go to work regardless of the snow unless there is over 15-20+ inches on the streets.

You change tires for the winter? :o Yeah, I know my relatives do this in Lithuania where it is required. I think you're the first person I've heard to do this in US. I've never changed my tires, but after my son totaled his car his first winter driving a few years ago shortly after turning 16, my wife insisted that we buy him a Subaru Forester and put winter tires on it for him every winter.

Of course. That goes without saying.

She could be on to something. That's really an interesting theory which thus far I hadn't considered. That the females of the species are very busy, while the males of the species have time to shoot the shit. I wonder if anyone has ever studied that? Surely there are men out there who would have the time for such an inquiry. :)

I was being sarcastic. One or two ladies on this and other financial forums does not change the overwhelming sausage-festedness. The thing is you see women on Twitter engage in political debate which can be as contentious or even more nasty than exchanges on financial forums. Which begs the question - Why don't women engage in financial forums? Avoidance of mansplaining? General disinterest? I know this is VERY un-PC to say these days, but just as the Google memo author was correct about the lack of women in Computer Science and other tech fields is simply general disinterest, I believe the same is true for finance. It has nothing to do with intelligence or aptitude, it is simply that women don't pursue these as interests. Not only professionally but as hobbies either. There are many like me for whom investing is a hobby, not a profession, but not many women. There are many for whom tinkering with programming or electronics is a hobby not a profession, but not many women. Now whether this is nurture or nature I don't know. I suspect to some extent it is both. The same reason you don't see very many men teaching Kindergarten.

I bought a cup of coffee this morning from Dunkin' Donuts because I woke up late and didn't make it at home like I usually do. Before you say that isn't discretionary I have free coffee in the break room at work (but it is even worse than DD), so buying it at DD instead is discretionary. Looking back at my Amazon order history the last things I bought that you could call discretionary was an Instant Pot on PrimeDay and an Apple TV 4K a few days before that. EDIT: I've also purchased a number of kindle books and audible audio books in the last month, but I don't consider that discretionary, because in my own personal hierarchy of needs books are located just below food, water, and shelter.

From the article: "To achieve that vision, ICE is partnering with heavyweights from the worlds of technology, consulting, and retail: Microsoft, Boston Consulting Group, and Starbucks." Starbucks implies coffee. But I agree with you. The world's gold is worth $trillions and (almost) nobody is buying their morning coffee with it.

LOL. If someone who isn't rich does this you probably just saw my grandmother.

LOL. The same as everything you wrote above can be said for anyone who deals with cash. You said it yourself all of the banks launder drug money to one extent or another (as do grocery stores and retail outlets when drug dealers buy stuff with cash). None of that is anything new. Why would cash on the internet be any different from physical cash in that respect?

They haven't thought this through. Every one of those holding altcoin/token needs to meet KYC enhanced DD requirements, and there is only one investable altcoin (Bitcoin). Then you have to choose to hold your Bitcoin in a hackable account, instead of in your own annonymous 'unhackable' account at Mt Gox Take out those who can't pass the DD, don't need the annonymity, and who don't want the more attractive 'direct' account at Mt Gox - and it's a very small market. We wish them luck, but it doesn't look promising. SD No. Everyone buying or trading or holding crypto through them needs to meet KYC enhanced DD requirements. No one "has" to hold their Bitcoin with them. The same could be said for Coinbase yet "Coinbase has twice as many customers as Charles Schwab.” You can build a trusted network on top of a trustless one, just not vice versa. Not so sure.... Agreed that a NYSE BTC counterpart to Chicago BTC Futures and Options is a desirable thing. Agreed that buyer/seller enhanced DD isn't their responsibility - IF they are PURELY an exchange. BUT .. why would you use a regulated channel to buy/sell Bitcoin, in scale? When the whole value-add of Bitcoin is it's annonymity, and its ability to evade capital and regulatory controls. It can only be a small but very active market I would suggest that the only reason for this is so that institutions can trade BTC Futures and Options. Limit the trades to just Bakkt, evidence that all FI's trading through Bakkt have to have an enhanced DD US account, and institutional BTC hedging becomes much easier. Problem is that any trading done through a fraudulent DD US account, will make Bakkt complicit - as it has just abetted a theft. And a great many people, have a very strong incentive, to do exactly that. Agreed it's a good idea. But these are just two of the more obvious things they don't seem to have thought through. But we wish them luck. SD Some might not care about evading regulatory controls and simply want a currency which can not be inflated by governments. In fact the lack of regulatory certainty is probably what is keeping institutional investors on the sidelines. There are other ways already for people who do not like KYC.

They haven't thought this through. Every one of those holding altcoin/token needs to meet KYC enhanced DD requirements, and there is only one investable altcoin (Bitcoin). Then you have to choose to hold your Bitcoin in a hackable account, instead of in your own annonymous 'unhackable' account at Mt Gox Take out those who can't pass the DD, don't need the annonymity, and who don't want the more attractive 'direct' account at Mt Gox - and it's a very small market. We wish them luck, but it doesn't look promising. SD No. Everyone buying or trading or holding crypto through them needs to meet KYC enhanced DD requirements. No one "has" to hold their Bitcoin with them. The same could be said for Coinbase yet "Coinbase has twice as many customers as Charles Schwab.” You can build a trusted network on top of a trustless one, just not vice versa.