Gregmal

The thing to be careful for here is that the media loves hysteria because it sells. They also hate Trump and realize that one of the only threats to Trump is killing the economy. Thus, a perfect storm of events that have a high likelihood of being dramatically portrayed and incredibly blown out of proportion. This is basically the flu. With the current ratio of 100 Dow points for every 2 new cases, the markets will be at 0 in no time. Just wait a few weeks and then everyone here can pull straws. We can have a fantasy football type draft on who gets to make $1 per share offers to buyout our favorite companies! I call dibs on Disney.

We dont have that kind of dedication here, which is why it will be much worse in the US. The Chinese will just throw motherfuckers in the pits on the basis of national security and voila, 2 months later their already past peak and opening shops and factories back up, business as usual. Trump is too weak and not taking this seriously and as a result, this will likely linger much longer here. We may even start getting CNBC Markets In Turmoil specials again. We might even have to elect a Democrat since apparently they have the answer to this.

Not Algos, they depend on live events which might get cancelled if things go Corona south. MSGN is tied to the same mast. The volume surges definitely seem like algos, and zip within ranges quite noticeably. Either way, at worst, this is a one off hardship assuming its full blown Resident Evil. Hardly enough to impair the value 10% when it's already discounted 20%+. Just markets being skittish. Could be worse. Like AMC.

Added a small bit to MSG at 272. Algos are going bananas today

Classic sucker rally. Sold a little GOOG, CIBR

On one end, much of this is overdone, especially if you are investing in US isolated companies. I can think of plenty that have gotten wrecked. On the other end, the market had no business going up 10% or whatever the past few months, for practically no reason. So I guess much of it is a wash. As always, life is a lot easier when you focus on specific investment you know well.

I can at the least, guarantee you we will see a lot of companies "blaming" it.

I liked some of the action in certain names during the last hour or two of trading. But generally speaking, much like last night, I dont like when the futures immediately rebound following the close. Usually you need all hope lost, and a good gap down to open that can then flush everyone out. Funny side note. Apple still has like 20% downside. To get back to October's prices...

Added 50% to MSGN, back up to about a 6% position. Small add to PCYO, BRK, MSB. Would guess we're close to a bottom. But what do I know.

I do find it interesting, but agree he's probably a little full of it, although not in a nefarious way. Everyone knows, if you cant get stock at market, the move is to tender. If he's not tendering, he's not that serious about buying stock here. However what I did like, is that it seems we're moving towards repurchases, at least in terms of my interpretation of the tea leaves. If we figure the ~125B or whatever cash piles just stays as is, its not unreasonable to deduce that the balance of future earnings not needed for the business should be returned via buybacks. I'm cool with that. At least until more compelling things come along.

small adds to DD, BRK, FIZZ, MSGN

After a few reads I actually thought the letter helpful in addressing, or at least, maybe being a little more transparent on the future. We can all do the run down on the financials, but I think thats a waste of time here in the same sense it was a waste of time getting too granular on Apple a year or so ago(and no one was more guilty of this than I). Berkshire will make lots of money regardless of where the economy or the world go. I think addressing the future gives clarity, and the buybacks, while minimal, are creeping up and setting a floor that should continue to shift supply/demand skews and thus risk/reward profile. Performance wise, who the heck knows but at worst this is kind of an index fund proxy with a world class active manager(s) overseeing it. If $226 was a price they were willing to pay, you can only imagine that turret starts firing more rapidly at 21X, 20X, and definitely 1XX. Again, stacking the deck in the favor of outperformance. Regardless IMO this was somewhat better/more than I had hoped for, with the operating results, good enough. I'll probably add a bit to my position in the coming weeks if its still under 230. Oh yea, and anyone who thinks this has any shot and going down 50% from here is crazy. No way this ever trades at 50% cash. If it even gets remotely close, I'll eat my foot. Mortgage my house. Open up, and take cash advances on Synchrony cards at 26% interest rates, etc. Because as its heading towards those decline levels, I take it they'll be taking action in ways that is substantially increasing the IV. Whereas many fund managers have underperformed and blamed it on lack of opportunity, Ive seen enough here(especially note the "any holder of $20m who wants to sell" quip), that the team here will hit that opportunity out of the park if they get it. They've been waiting waaayyyy tooo long not to.

LOL, maybe even more opportunities in the upturn considering you can make money even in poo-poo that goes bust in a downturn. But thats a language most Berkshire investors dont understand.

little more MSGN under 14. can thank all these legacy turds like Viacom for continuing to create reasons for people to sell anything in this space into oblivion.

My first instinct with stuff like this that is relatively new (at least new to being commercialized in any significant way) is that there are likely to be better mousetraps built over time. Based on what you know is this kind of software the kind of thing that would have network effects, where one researcher in CA thinks hey I found something promising so I'm going to send it to my buddy in Boston, and they'll need the same software to be able to see the same things? That would be great. I wonder if these softwares won't end up being part of a menu of choices to find new drugs. What I mean is Schrodinger says they their recommendations are physics-based. Maybe that type of software views the world of drug candidates a certain way. Then another type of CRISPR software with some other foundation might be better suited for other applications. From what I read, Schrodinger believed their software was better than others because their software can analyze all potential physical relationships between atoms, even ones that haven't ever been tested. The other CRISPR softwares are more based on actual attempted molecules by other scientists, so they kind of function like machine learning where the more molecules that are input into the software by other scientists the more the software "knows". This probably sounds like gibberish, and it probably is, but its a fascinating area of research/business. The idea that biotech could become a lot more like any other type of manufacturing has profound implications for the pace of drug discovery and ultimately the cost to bring drugs to market, which could reduce the prices of previously very expensive treatments. There was a great Andreesseen Horowitz presentation on this a couple months ago. The CRISPR application stuff is crazy complex and has shoot offs that make it very difficult to really determine "ownership" per say, which is different than an AI based software application. When you integrate aspects of the two though, you probably have something pretty remarkable, or at least capable of being pretty remarkable; although a lot of that is out of my universe in terms of understanding it. So yes, theoretically you could have some AI programs running simulations and algorithms to narrow down the field of combinations that ultimately leads to, say, a CRISPR pill capable of knocking out one's susceptibility to the flu...or (substitute pretty much anything). I feel the programming and software element is actually a little easier to track because its more defined and ownership is clear. Whereas the CRISPR applications you are seeing in labs, have many different intricacies to them and will undoubtedly continue to evolve. First, you had the Cas9 which then had sub approaches. Then you had the whole cpf1 approach widely deemed to be better due to improved precision. Not long after the c2c(x) developments. And so on. Its largely the same names doing a lot of the heavy lifting here, and as some have pointed out, its hard to really pin down how, say "Editas" will be the one who makes money from this 10 years from now, but its a game changing development and those with associations to it should reap the benefits, especially in a decent market.

Yea CRISPR will/is changing everything. There are so many offshoot and modifications from the base technology that its quite incredible. I have a few friends in grad programs at some of the top biomedical engineering programs and everyone says the same thing; that CRISPR is now the foundation for pretty much every application they study. Finding areas to invest is hard though. IP is somewhat vague. The companies working on it trade on potential revenue thats like half a decade or more out, at best...and nothing is even remotely cheap. BEAM Therapuetics I like as well, but its in the same boat.

Citron likes it too https://seekingalpha.com/news/3544070-citron-sees-90-upside-in-this-innovative-drug-discoverer Somewhere there is a market bubble joke in here. How do you buy a big position in a company you like? Buy a small one and wait a few weeks. Anyhow, I sold today, even though it was just a tiny tracker. This is kind of nuts.

Bought some MSGN

Yea its entirely possible. IDK Ive heard from a number of people if you do these right you can make outstanding money. I was invited to go out to view a few of them but haven't yet taken that up. I had someone pitch me two days ago on section 8 housing deals in Philly as well. But in regards to both, Im just not really interested in dealing with those types of people and situations.

Is that strictly passive? Or time intensive which equates to an imputed income? "very part time" was basically the gist of it. You're not dealing with shit everyday and often you can find a manager with handyman skills and cut a deal where he lives there rent free in exchange for managing the property.

Just passing along what Ive been told(no audit lol), his family has been running them for decades. They own the land. Cheap acreage. Like dirt cheap to acquire. You can buy the mobile homes for like $20-$30k a pop and these things are inherently simple. Fixing them is easy if theres problems. You get 30 years plus out of them. If you own multiple parks you can even move them around easily depending upon demand. Rents believe it or not can (area dependent obviously) be in the $800-$1000 range. Even the shit ones are like $500+ a month.

If done properly, mobile homes are a total gold mine. 20%+ type stuff. Brother in law does a bunch of this in central Florida.

Shorting momentum trash is a good way to get over by a dump truck lately. Yea PLUG has driven a large one up my a$$ past few months, but its still a terminal short. NVTA Ive got a pretty good handle on the story part. Their JPM Conference pump job has become predictable(why all the smart guy short pitches were awfully timed) as has the rally to earnings. From here though, they'll have to do better than losing $1.20 for every $1 in revenue. I dont think they do. Always size these small should be the requisite disclaimer.

Started small NVTA short after hours. Added to PLUG short AH as well.

Yea cash is trash. Manage your liquidity. Thats all. People spend years, if not longer, sitting on hoards of cash being scared of "the big one". Theyre better off just investing prudently within the confines of their own temperament.