Gregmal

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/apple-ceo-tim-cook-pressed-001912518.html Tim Cook “I think this virus caught the world by surprise” Who wants to criticize Tim? Come on! Who wants to be a homophobe? Also interesting on WFM While productivity is possible at a distance, Cook said, “it’s not like being together physically.” The company’s gleaming, circular Apple Park building was designed to foster creativity and serendipitous interaction between employees. “I can’t wait for everybody to be able to be able to come back to the office,” Cook said, though he added, “I don’t think we’ll be able to return to the way we were because we’ve found that there are some things that work really well virtually.”

Yup, yup. And then if they do make an appearance it will be to contort the arguments they were previous making. Much like the US vs Italy one.

We can only hope. But there is still risk that the companies then take the hint, much like Apple and others did in March. I dont think too many CEOs want to get on a new administration's bad side 2 months into the term. The flip side, is we will see stimulus on steroids if Biden wins.

Yea I actually just exchanged messages and emails with a few folks over the weekend and this morning on this rising risk. We are entering flu season. Everyone has their minds made up about a second wave. The EU countries are already chomping at the bit to lock everyone down again(MOAR POWER!) Lockdowns kill businesses. So that will have some adverse and material effect. Now what if Biden wins? One of his first actions upon entering the office would be shutting down the country from January til June....I wouldn't "go all cash". But I'd put some trades on that compensate you for this risk. Does the US federal government actually have the authority to lock-down businesses and recreational sites within the 50 states? SJ Per the constitution, I do not believe they do. But they doesnt really matter to most of these people. Executive orders and work arounds will allow them to accomplish this, if they wish to, which they have already hinted at.

Yea I actually just exchanged messages and emails with a few folks over the weekend and this morning on this rising risk. We are entering flu season. Everyone has their minds made up about a second wave. The EU countries are already chomping at the bit to lock everyone down again(MOAR POWER!) Lockdowns kill businesses. So that will have some adverse and material effect. Now what if Biden wins? One of his first actions upon entering the office would be shutting down the country from January til June....I wouldn't "go all cash". But I'd put some trades on that compensate you for this risk.

I get the thesis with sports teams in general...they are trophy assets that keep going up in value because billionaires don't have anything better to do with their fortunes. Most of these teams don't generate much in the way of cash flow (probably except NFL due to non-guaranteed nature of contracts), so it's kind of like owning gold where you hope that there's a bigger fool who wants the team for glamour. There may be a more fundamental angle to this, but I guess I prefer assets that cash flow or have a reasonable expectation of cash flowing. In the case of MLB specifically , you're owning part of a sport that has an aging fan base and while I wouldn't bet anything on this, the long-term bear case would be that some of these sports become way less relevant and are displaced by alternatives (gaming/esports, soccer). The Braves specifically have a pretty decent chunk of associated RE which is being developed and that makes them a little more unique here. Especially in Atlanta, which is one of the great growth beds in the US.

Closed out some AAPL puts, rolled down the chain and out a few weeks. Moved some to cash. Bought a little PIC, JBGS. EDIT: sold most of the PIC after hours. Too easy with these.

I am sure the pussies will find those jokes offensive.

Bought some more JBGS and also a trading position in SBE after the charging station announcement. This will probably be the next hot potato SPAC.

On market crashes and "calling them"...anyone have any data on the average amount of time the "crash caller" ends up waiting for the collapse? And also the gains forfeited by doing so? Versus the tiny number of people who happen to be going all in at exactly the wrong moment and how long on average it takes to get back to even?

interesting. what was pre-announcement stock price? $40s. But the above deals have faded quickly. It was more or less free money. No deal is getting nixed the same week it is announced. Next week's expiry has diminished as well.

There was even quite a few threads started right after COVID basically screaming about the housing market being fucked. Well located suburban RE, is more or less teflon.

There is often a misperception that you are either a participant in the bubble and bound for doom, or you sit on the sidelines and wait to get rich after it implodes. The truth is there is very much in between, and there are many ways to dance and enjoy the party without blowing yourself up. There is also, often, quite a bit of time spent waiting/doing nothing while the party goes on. Why waste that time? As a BRK shareholder, moves like this one and RH, make my happy. If they were doing this with billions....yea that would change the profile for me. But taking shots on high probability trades is a good thing. Simply putting the Berkshire name behind something, has historically shown to be a valuation booster. I'd gander that is part of the reason this IPO is so hot. Monetize that more often!

Without any take on what the women is saying...all I would add is that it is ultra dangerous to simply write off people who are being silenced because the media is trying to discredit them. Twitter today blocked the women. What a shitshow that is becoming. If we dont like what you have to say, we censor you. Playing with fire with that.

God damn it. The obvious was obvious. One can talk about the lockup, but a 100% head start aint bad. Perhaps now that Berkshire is doing it, people will dare to think(and maybe even venture) a little outside of their comfort zone.

Cramer is generally a pretty good contrarian indicator. Not to say he isn't capable of valuable insight, but he tends to avoid ever taking unpopular positions with respect to what investments he recommends. "Dont buy C because it cant buyback stock for a year"? I mean thats the definition of short sighted. I'd probably add real estate to this list. Its quite bizarre when you see things like VNO or SPG, clear cream of the crop companies with best in class assets and you still have people finding excuses even at these valuations not to invest. On one end the top performing companies are "too expensive", on the other end, value stuff has "too many problems"...the stock market isn't for everyone I guess. The bull market has probably psychologically scarred a lot of people in ways they dont even realize. Its so common now to see even "investors", avoid things because "they might go down" next week or month. But this should be to the advantage of the patient and astute. Banks, while not my favorites, will continue to gush cash. I typically avoid any type of energy stuff but even there, its definitely appealing and if I was sitting on cash I'd certainly be looking in that space. So in summary, I think Cramer is just catering to the obvious...not many people know how to invest anymore, and even those that think they are, have 1-3 month time horizons...

Monday’s and Fridays less productive? I would like to know what’s the difference to being in the office then? Liquor supply 25 ft away vs down the block?

I did a few of these as well. Thanks guys. Keep the ideas coming here.

More AAPL puts/short positions. If one gives any credibility to charts representing a psychological leaning of market participants, this is going down...short term at least. Every rally has gotten faded and the event was just a dud.

Personally I think its crazy the amount of focus being given to this when you look at the size of the investment vs Berkshire's total capital... Additionally, whats wrong with doing this? I do similar things with the capital I have at my disposal...granted, not a few hundred million but still, speculating on small amounts is perfectly fine. Heres a newsflash for folks...over the past decade, investments like SNOW have worked wonderfully, whereas a good many of the ones put on by Berkshire under the "old formula" and many value investors, have not. Are people averse to making money? I would wager a good amount that this trade makes BRK some money.

Sold some more SPAQ and put proceeds into WFC and JBGS

I would just add that from my reading of value investing literature, there is an emphasis on limiting the downside. growth investing looks with more emphasis on exposure to upside. now, how does a value investor limit the downside? you can look to all of the metrics discussed, such as low P/E, low P/B etc, look for a moat to limit competition, etc...all of these metrics can be debated as to how effective they are, but they simply are filters that value investors use to try to achieve some modicum of safety. probably the best filter is to invest in a great business, but this is in the eye of the beholder. Buffett once said that he thought Sees Candies was a great business since whenever some guy bought the product, he got a kiss from his wife/GF etc. so I suppose there are many paths.... Personally, I've noticed that it seems the way in which most people apply "value investing" philosophies, encourages continuing to stick with things that dont work. If you've held something for 3+ years and haven't made money, in a crazy blow out bull market like we've seen where almost everything under the sun is making money, you are just flat out wrong and should move on. Sure, it may "eventually" come around, but why wait for a perpetual disappointment to change its behavior, when pretty much everything else is going to reward you today? Blackberry is one that comes to mind in this category. You could have literally held anything else in that space and done well instead of sitting around, hoping and waiting for the tide to turn on a reclamation project..... Don’t all your REIT holdings fit this bill perfectly? Comparing this after a major reset is silly. SPG and ESRT I just started buying this year; ESRT I am still buying. If in 3 years or so I haven't made money, then yea, I'd probably consider my investments a failure and a waste of time. I have a hard time doing so after a quarter or two. A better example, although not purely RE/REIT would be MSG(as in the CVC spinoff). Even with the COVID decline, thats printed money for shareholders over the past 3-5-10 yr or whatever timeframe. Same with ARE. Blackberry stuck out to me because it's a cultish value stock, in a sector where everything is going bonkers. Different than someone investing in real estate or energy right now...in those respects, you know what you're getting into as it's sector wide headwinds in classically cyclical business/asset classes. The post above probably came off as supportive of a "buy whats popular" strategy, which is not what I was trying to convey. Better said, dont go buying into problems you dont need to because you are a cheapskate. It would be like going after PEI or CBL instead of SPG. There is a quality component to things and often people look past quality in search of value. If something is working, the top notch companies will do well. When you get into reclamation projects, many of the ingredients for underperformance are glaring yet overlooked frequently. EDIT: I'd add that a better example in terms of what I own would probably be MSG Networks.

I would just add that from my reading of value investing literature, there is an emphasis on limiting the downside. growth investing looks with more emphasis on exposure to upside. now, how does a value investor limit the downside? you can look to all of the metrics discussed, such as low P/E, low P/B etc, look for a moat to limit competition, etc...all of these metrics can be debated as to how effective they are, but they simply are filters that value investors use to try to achieve some modicum of safety. probably the best filter is to invest in a great business, but this is in the eye of the beholder. Buffett once said that he thought Sees Candies was a great business since whenever some guy bought the product, he got a kiss from his wife/GF etc. so I suppose there are many paths.... Personally, I've noticed that it seems the way in which most people apply "value investing" philosophies, encourages continuing to stick with things that dont work. If you've held something for 3+ years and haven't made money, in a crazy blow out bull market like we've seen where almost everything under the sun is making money, you are just flat out wrong and should move on. Sure, it may "eventually" come around, but why wait for a perpetual disappointment to change its behavior, when pretty much everything else is going to reward you today? Blackberry is one that comes to mind in this category. You could have literally held anything else in that space and done well instead of sitting around, hoping and waiting for the tide to turn on a reclamation project.....

Anyone know how Kraven is doing? I was just thinking about him earlier today. I was re-reading some quant stuff which led me to some antitrust legal canon concerning how Porter's Five Forces is basically bunk. I had a similar personal realization with M. Gladwell's stuff. I think my journey toward quant-esque investing has been probably kind of similar to his. I dont think I was here while he was an active poster, but we exchanged messages a little bit ago. He can chime in if he's still following but the gist was similar to what a lot of us have acknowledged the past few years. There is not a ton of unique investment related discussion here, and the investment related discussion that does take place, is often in the same trite names and largely an echo chamber...BRK, FFH, etc.

Bought some PSTH warrants