KJP

I believe every sponsor of that bill is a member of the Progressive Caucus. So, it's really the Progressive Caucus, rather than Democratic leadership, that has proposed that bill. I think the probability range of a windfall profits tax in the US is low.

The House may vote on a cannabis legalization bill this week. The text of the bill, along with the Judiciary Committee report on it, are available here: https://docs.house.gov/floor/Default.aspx?date=2022-03-28 As far as I can see, the bill would not preempt state cannabis laws; instead, it deschedules cannabis under the Controlled Substances Act and builds a new federal licensing and tax regime on top of existing state regulation. In addition, it requires the FDA to hold public meetings "to address the regulation, safety, manufacturing, product quality, marketing, labeling, and sale of products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds." That sounds to me like the prelude for future FDA regulation of cannabis products, perhaps along the lines of the current FDA regulation of tobacco and now synthetic nicotine products. As I have explained in another thread, FDA approval processes typically are time consuming and expensive, so they favor large, experienced players, like the tobacco companies. So, overall I think this approach would be bullish for big tobacco. This is a Democratic-sponsored bill, so even if it passes the House I doubt it does anywhere in the Senate anytime soon. But the fact that Democrats are proposing this approach to cannabis legalization seems particularly good for big tobacco, because I doubt Republicans are going to be less favorable to that industry. What remains unclear (to me at least) is how courts would apply the dormant commerce clause to state cannabis laws under this bill or one like it. For example, can a state continue to require that all cannabis sold in the state be grown in the state? I didn't see any provision of the bill that addresses this issue, but the bill is 90 pages so I might have missed it.

If you believe additional LNG export capacity will be build on the US Gulf Coast and use gas from Haynesville, Williams and Black Stone Minerals may interest you.

A good essay on this topic: https://philo.substack.com/p/scarcity-truthers?s=r

As far as I can tell, Zyn, on! and Velo are all tobacco-derived. They filed PMTAs for Zyn back in 2020. Those applications are still pending.

The bill has now passed in the Senate and will be signed by Biden: https://tobaccoreporter.com/2022/03/11/synthetic-nicotine-rule-clears-senate/ I focused on nicotine pouches in my original post, but I believe this is a significant issue for many vaping products as well. Take a look at the tweets coming out of the vaping industry trade group @VaporAmerican and its President @AmandaWheeler32 Also, I believe the FDA has some discretion with respect to its enforcement authority and may issue guidance saying it won't bring any enforcement actions against non-compliant products for a certain period of time, particularly in light of its inability to process marketing applications on anything close to the existing timelines.

I have been looking into the synthetic nicotine provisions tucked into the omnibus spending bill the House passed last week. It appears to be a nice win for big tobacco against new competition. My understanding is that historically FDA regulatory authority extended to tobacco products and products containing nicotine derived from tobacco. This created a potential loophole for upstarts to create and market free from FDA regulation (and potentially various forms of taxation) products containing entirely synthetic nicotine, i.e., nicotine created entirely in a lab, rather than chemically extracted from a tobacco leaf. The budget bill closes this loophole by amending the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act's definition of "tobacco product" to include products containing nicotine derived from any source. The bill is available at the following link and the provisions I refer to begin at page 1861: https://vaporvoice.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/03/pg-1870-syn-nic.pdf Then, "[w]ith respect to a tobacco product that contains nicotine from any source other than tobacco," the bill requires the manufacturer to submit a marketing application within 60 days after the effective date of the act, and to withdraw the product if that application isn't granted within 120 days of the passage of the act. As a practical matter, marketing applications appear to be very costly and time consuming undertakings [look at Turning Point Brands' earnings "adjustments" for context] that require significant scientific studies. It's unclear whether the manufacturers of synthetic products have conducted the necessary (and quite expensive) studies, but it seems doubtful that they'd have applications ready in time and even more doubtful that the FDA would actually rule on the applications within 120 days. For context, Swedish Match's PMTA for Zyn has been pending since 2020. So, as far as I can see, the House bill is effectively a de facto ban on synthetic nicotine products. Big tobacco, on the other hand, appears to be marketing products -- including nicotine pouches like Zyn, on!, and Velo -- that use tobacco-derived nicotine, so they would not be affected.

IAC, though it is focused on online-to-offline transition rather than a go-anywhere conglomerate Also, if Clarke's relatively small size doesn't bother you, FRP Holdings may interest you, though the controlling family doesn't have the same style as Armoyan and is more focused. Going even smaller, Volvere PLC in the UK, though the track record isn't nearly as long. Finally, Exor (Agnelli family) or the various Vincent Bollore companies may interest you, though the latter have alot of interlocking shareholding and governance complexities that give me pause.

For better or for worse, Manchin just blocked the trillion dollar BBB on which the President of the United States campaigned and which 48 of his fellow Senators (including Warren and Sanders) backed. I don't understand the suggestion that he would be afraid to "stand up" to any Democratic Party elected official. Maybe he ultimately would vote for a fossil fuel windfall tax, but not because of anything Senator Warren says.

Coal is also through the roof. Is Manchin (necessary to pass anything in the Senate) going to agree to a windfall profits tax on fossil fuels? How about Casey from Pennsylvania (Marcellus)?

Not sure how much a producer can lock in. Oil curve is quite backwardated, so if you have oil for delivery in, say, December you can't lock in $120 for that oil today.

Does this qualify? https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/why-john-mearsheimer-blames-the-us-for-the-crisis-in-ukraine

There is a high dispersion of effects in those states. For those directly involved in O&G it's great. But the further away you are from that industry, the more you just get the downside, which can be particularly acute if you live in, for example, a rural (and thus likely largely Republican) area in which driving relative long distances is required. To give a specific comparison, think about how high O&G prices affect an oilfield worker or someone who sells trucks in the oil patch versus a teacher, police officer, or mailman.

1. I've already got exposure to U.S. natural gas (and the Haynesville in particular) via Black Stone Minerals. I prefer to keep that over Williams. 2. At the current price I think it will be hard to make 15%/year on Williams, and I don't want too many investments that don't meet that standard. That belief isn't based on much though. At the price I bought, very little research was required. At today's price, I think you need to look deeper into the company, and the pipeline business doesn't interest me enough to do that. 3. The Williams shares I sold today ~$32.80 I bought two years ago for around $7. This ought to have no bearing on anything, but I suspect it continues to color my views about reasonable valuation.

Williams (WMB)

Midstream, e.g., Williams, Enterprise Products Partners, also doing very well, which also suggests some bullishness on US oil & gas production growth.

I've also heard the hesitancy among public E&Ps. On the other hand, oil futures are in pretty steep backwardation (April 2022 $110, January 2023 $85) and rig counts are steadily increasing, though still below 2019: https://www.investing.com/economic-calendar/baker-hughes-u.s.-rig-count-1652

If they had adequate anti-ship targeting capability, I believe the Chinese would implement their blockade of Taiwan with land-based anti-ship missiles, not submarines. So convoys with submarine escorts would be ineffective. Depending the capabilities of the Chinese missiles, convoys with surface combatant escorts may also be ineffective for the same reasons that even a carrier battle group may not survive attacks from sufficient numbers of advanced satellite-guided anti-ship missiles.

You've explained the difficulties of an invasion earlier. But wouldn't blockade be China's strategy with Taiwan? If the Chinese had a large quantity of highly accurate, satellite-guided anti-ship cruise missiles (including hypersonics) with 500km - 1000km range that could be fired from land (perhaps from mobile launchers) and were willing to sink non-combatants, couldn't they interdict all shipping into Taiwan. Could even a US carrier battle group survive in such an environment? To the extent the Chinese don't have such missile technology today, when will they have it? The flip side is what you mention above -- US and Japan blockade China.

Swedish Match Hill International Leatt Corp. MacFarlane Group PLC

Here's one: https://sinstockpapi.substack.com/p/swma?utm_source=url

Nickel 28 Capital Corp. Swedish Match Hill International Leatt Corp.

There's demand for this even among the 55+ crowd?: "At each location, it said Disney cast members trained in the company’s guest service will operate the community association." "The first community [will] . . . offer a range of home types including estates, single family homes and condos, including at least one area expressly for 55+ residents."

How are things like Tornado Cash affecting the usefulness of crypto for criminal purposes?

Take a look at Shopify's range today.