Jump to content

biaggio

Member
  • Posts

    1,200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by biaggio

  1. Could you tell me more about The Markel Omaha meeting?
  2. Kraven from my personal experience I think its because i. its a PITA, ii therefore we tend to procrastinate (especially those who have money tend to have other things they would rather do) iii the banks don t go out of their way to expedite things
  3. Hellsten, thanks for posting re Don Smith Interesting read on his philosophy in 2010 interview here http://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/filemgr?file_id=736835
  4. Read my post history we have been positioning for this since Lehman. If anything we will be liquidating into the craziness. Thanks. Have read your past posts. You re looking to raise cash if we have a "melt up"?
  5. “Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants.” “The essence of philosophy is that a man should so live that his happiness shall depend as little as possible on external things.” “He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things which he has not, but rejoices for those which he has.” “There is only one way to happiness and that is to cease worrying about things which are beyond the power of our will.” Thanks for posting. Great reminder for the wise that know this and good advise for those who are always grumpy (will share these quotes for these folks that I deal with)
  6. Moore_capital, are you doing anything different or special now in view of the money printing...?increasing hard assets ? gold ?realestate ?buying a farm
  7. +1 giofranchi Ah! Almost forgot! Mr. Keynes had expressed exactly the same thought in a letter to the Chairman of Provincial Insurance, dated February 6, 1942: “To suppose that safety-first consists in having a small gamble in a large number of different direction…, as compared with a substantial stake in a company where one’s information is adequate, strikes me as a travesty of investment policy.” "As time goes on I get more and more convinced that the right method in investment is to put fairly large sums into enterprises which one thinks one knows something about and in the management of which one thoroughly believes. It is a mistake to think that one limits one's risk by spreading too much between enterprises about which one knows little and has no reason for special confidence." (emphasis mine) giofranchi I agree, but your success rate/strike rate should be considered. The person that gets 10 out of 10 picks right can concentrate more than the one that gets 6 out of 10 right. Buffett and Munger is rumoured to be in the high 90s Mr B good point. Even with a 50% batting average at picking a winner (say a double over 5 years), you can be ahead with just 4 picks I believe according to Kelly formula if I remember correctly. I was surprised number is 4. The most important thing that concentrating in 3-4 ideas does in my mind, especially with sizable amounts of money (e.g a lifetime of savings), is it challenges your level of conviction, including the quality of your analysis. There have been a lot of things I have done in the past that I probably would not have done if I had to commit to 25%. I think it was Richard Rainwater who also said that if you don t have enough conviction to put in 25% then don't put any in. I am working on this myself. Gio, thanks for posting- I need to take up speed reading-there is so much that can or should be read + not enough time.
  8. Agree i like the brands in the Mondelez part of spin off. Wish it was a little cheaper. I think it will be saddled with a lot of debt. Also I am not sure of the CEO that will be running Mondelez (she s the same person who ran Kraft). Still looking for SEC filing. I think I am putting in the watch pile for now.
  9. sure sign of genius, taking something that is difficult and making it look so simple. "Simple but not easy" as WEB says
  10. MVP I have enjoyed watching brief interviews on http://greatinvestors.tv/all-videos/ I believe this site is an offspring from manual of ideas. Have never heard of lot of these investors but have enjoyed them none the less
  11. So you do not actually own physical gold, you just have an unsecured claim with an issuer who might have gold or might have claims to a gold refinery (we don't get to know anything about these claims). In other words: you are buying a bond, and you are paying monthly fees to own it. It is ironic: the gold bugs want physical gold because the huge ETF's are supposedly unsecured and manipulated by the big banks. This led to scores of new issues catering to this niche market. Products like Sprott physical gold trust, issuing shares at a huge premium to net asset value. Or Xetra Gold, which is actually just a bond. These products lure retail investors by offering them the possibility to actually claim physical gold. Obviously at a cost and obviously nobody ever does this. Unless the world collapses and at that point the gold might not actually be there or other creditors have priority over you. It is just a nice marketing ploy. In their search for "extra-physical" gold the gold bugs end up buying shitty products that are specifically marketed to them. The big ETF's are actually the most safe (and the cheapest) way to own a stake in physical gold. I am not sure I trust the large ETF's though I admit I have never really looked into them in detail. To me it seems a bit like a ponzi scheme. I have thought of owning gold coins (buy 1 or 2 coins a year and just hold- but have never gotten around to it)-would imagine you can get ripped off here too as there is a premium over and above the actual cost of gold
  12. Don t laugh but I just filled my freezer with beef tenderloin the other day - (at $7 per lb I am ready for any beef supply problems). I am afraid though it won t last long however.
  13. Giofranco, Agree with you re FFH, BRK, L How are you holding gold? Physical gold? ETF's? FWIW, my capital allocation 40% cash (probably more than I like- I am a chicken-my plan is to continue to dollar cost average into ideas) 60% equity (UNH, ALS, FFH, BRK, BAC/AIG, LUK, small amounts of SHLD,L, PEY, SU, RNK, BMO, HCG)
  14. SI, What did you think of the book?
  15. let me know what you think. I thought it would be fully valued + that the run up is do to the shorts scrambling to buy stock that is in short supply (am assuming if they are short SHLD then they are also short securities that are spun off i.e SHOS) I still don t see rights in my account. I use TD Waterhouse. Any SHLD holders here receive SHOS into their accounts?
  16. just finished reading this book this morning. Thought it was good. Enjoyed it. Could of used some of the things in the book years ago when in school.
  17. Ericopoly, Liberty, Planmaestro, et Al thanks for all the great posts. I have saved that little clip of Rothstein for future reference. When you guys find an idea that you have a lot of conviction in, selling at a deep discount (like you BAC, AIG buys) and say you would like to put say 25 or 50% of you equity in it, how do you do your buying? Do you average in over a small period of time-say 10% at a time, do you go "all in"? I like what Howard Marks said- don t try to buy at the bottom as it is impossible- he said something like buy before the bottom, at the bottom and then after the bottom (as you will know the bottom price only in hind sight)
  18. RIMM, Very good points: -banks willing to extend line of credit of $250 million. (maybe because ESL + E. Lampert backing deal?? or because it will be secured by specific asset) -one can also get poor results by dramatically underestimating the value of a business- I have been guilty of this for sure (but probably wise to error on underestimating with a average or poor business) My liquidation valuation was just one way I look at investment. i.e worst case scenerio? I discounted receivables by 10%, inventory by 40%, "property" by 80%- yes they are arbitrary---I was just trying to get rough estimate. Truer estimate of valuation probably close to that based on FCF- I can buy that--the decrease FCF I stated was their estimate not mine. That would be consistent with the trend recently.- on the other hand maybe being independent from SHLD will allow management to be more entrepreneurial + competitive. One of my handicaps is that I am not familiar at all with these stores in the U.S. All of my family + friends think of Lowes, Home Depot, etc and don t even think of Sears Home... I think I probably calculate EV improperly (market cap + debt - cash), this has pointed out to me once before---if analysts use LTD I stand corrected (I did not understand why they would not use total debt? I am guessing it be that some of the operating debt is backed by operating assets like receivables or inventory . Never the less still does not seem like a real bargain. Seems like a fair business at fair price, no? As a SHLD shareholder paying their fee I would hope for or expect fair to a high valuation. My limited experience with these "independent" valuations give me that impression as well. Thanks again RIMM for taking the time to post reply- Hey are you buying SHOS? Just curious.
  19. Thanks RIMM re liquid value- Do I think its $2- I have no idea exactly what it is but I would like the calculation to be closer to or more than the $15 purchase price. How do I reconcile the difference in the share holder value -I think the difference is good will of $166mill + other assets which I assigned a value of 0. re other assets-do you know what's in here- I did not see a disclosure on this. When I read these things I am not reading word for word as they are so bloody long, so I probably missed something. re total debt- I was looking at the balance sheet as of Jan 2012 which showed total debt of $113 million + then I added $100 million that they are going to borrow and dividend to parent company just before the sale. I was just looking at the S1 again + I notice their April 2012 balance sheet on F23 shows total debt of $229.6 million which appears to include the $100m re projected FCF - personally I have no idea- I am using their numbers- page 156 management projections of FCF of $25.7 million I like the deal from SHLD point of view but not so much as a buyer of SHOS. I have been wrong or just early on SHLD so far, so what do I know (I am not being sarcastic here). RIMM or anyone else think differently?
  20. I am planning on selling my rights to purchase SHOS. I am trying to figure out why I am wrong. To me SHOS is bad because: i not a good business- operates in highly competitive retail market. Does not have any enduring competitive advantage that I can think of. Same store sales shrinking. Profit shrinking but would probably improve with improving economy. ii Valuation - not a big if any MOS - EV will be ~ $436 million. Free cash flow projected at ~ $38 million- then projected to fall afterwards. -I am getting liquidation value closer to ~$2 per share (minimal cash, Accounts receivable x 0.9, inventory x 0.6, property x 0.2, less about $214 million in total debt divided by 23 million shares) I like SHLD a tiny bit more after the sale as they will get ~ $400 million for crappy business + it appears they are working towards some sort of plan to show/create shareholder value i.e close the gap between the value posters saw in the company at the beginning of the thread vs the current share price. Disclosure: SHLD is a very small holding as I have never enough conviction to average down. Would not be surprised if above is wrong. Would be interested what others are thinking, especially those who will be getting a rights offering. Edit: http://www.searsholdings.com/invest/docs/SHO_Amendment_No_8_9.6.2012.pdf for those interested
  21. Thanks for posting. I was worried that there would be another book to add to the pile. I might add that I have not been disappointed yet by any of the other recommendations from posters here.
  22. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/lyondellbasell-industries-set-to-join-the-sp-500-2012-08-29 SHLD being deleted from S&P 500. Usually this leads to some selling+ lower price What are folks view of spin off of Sears Hometown and Outlet stores into a separate entity? -from what I remember from reviewing SEC filing several weeks ago-not profitable + being assigned some debt, so I don t think I will be holding it -I like it as part of Mr Lamperts "plan" to create shareholder value by carving out the "cancer"...the question is how much of the patient will be left over (I got this "mental model" on the perfect turnaround model from PlanMaestro's website which is very good- http://variantperceptions.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/munger-on-the-perfect-turnaround/)
  23. That's easy, it's not to buy back shares, but to reducing administrative expenses (for example sending annual reports). They also might want to delist if they have less than 300 share holders of record after cashing out odd lot holders. So what happens in the case that you re a smaller shareholder but not a odd lot holder, so you end up being one of the <300 shareholders and they do intend to de-list or go private? Assume you want to remain a shareholder.
  24. Thanks for posting. Pretty inspiring http://focusforwardfilms.com/films/49/the-invisible-bicycle-helmet
×
×
  • Create New...