Gregmal

Boom. Sold CLXT. Gonna look to chuck the funds into some boring real estate company as the march to safety continues.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/pelotons-viral-ad-captures-a-116-lb-womans-yearlong-fitness-journey-to-becoming-a-112-lb-woman-2019-12-02?siteid=yhoof2&yptr=yahoo Note to everyone. Pelotons are apparently bad gifts...Not a fan of the product, or the stock, but what the heck has society come to...who ever would have thought there'd be people outraged over encouraging a healthy lifestyle?

Closed out the bulk of my genetics basket trade; down to about 2% position and only 4 names left. Trimmed some CLF. Had to bite my fingers off to refrain from restarting a Peloton short as well, reminding myself that at this moment, its still just a valuation short with no catalyst.

Dont poke the bear! And FWIW, if good old reliable VMware was enough to give some fits, mainly it seems because a Barrons author wrote a negative piece or something, no way XOM goes over well....too many risks, in a universe where it seems any risk becomes a justification not to make an investment. With all the very smart people at Berkshire, I dont see why the dont have a team together who's job is to aggregate a bunch of $1-$20B businesses with synergies and simultaneously make offers to take them all out. Theres just way too many excuses and not a lot of them add up. This company is too small, this is too big, this one is not "Buffett like", this one is too levered, that one is owned by a friend, this one is too controversial....its all bullshit. Its a selfish, ego driven gambit. Best thing he could do if he trusted his "lieutenants" would be to start spinning out some of their businesses and allocating chunks of the cash to their managers. Let them decide to either roll up smaller competitors/grow the business win a way that the scale could create more value or return it to shareholders.

Which it seems you did as well with respect to the assumptions. I would agree with you regarding the timing of market moves, I've stated plenty of times Im winding down exposure quite a bit as well. But when you talk about the insanity of the markets, you're grossly misrepresenting things. Painting the entire market as if it's a sushi roll consisting of Wework wrapped in Beyond Meat with some Theranos sprinkled on top. Maybe some Peloton too. This is hardly the case. If you want to talk about the unicorns and Saas stuff, sure. But stuff like this has always existed. This time is nothing different. You dont need to tell me about handling November/December of 2018, I was 150% right playing that as many here can attest to. But to talk about what was easily one of the worst stretches in the history of the stock market, not to mention the reactions to it of many, many "pros".... its laughable hindsite/armchair confidence. Or at least, an arrogant oversimplification. Just as it is to say the market "goes up every week despite zero sales growth".... Plenty of things can grow or gain value despite growth in sales. This is where supply and demand is important to understand. Margin does not always mean balls to the wall long. Its also a way to hedge or eliminate risks. Its also a way to take more shots that dont necessarily have to correlate and if you're a good shooter, you will do fine. People can do what they are comfortable with. And sitting on cash for a little while is fine if you arent able to find anything better to do with it. But after a while, call it a year, 3 years, 5 years, whatever, your opportunity cost significantly outweighs whatever you think and hope to be able to do when "the big one happens". Its the price to pay for being wrong. There were people who were still calling for downside with S&P below 700 in 2009. In regards to the topic of the thread though, it makes perfect sense. Basic supply and demand. Much of tech is winner take all, or most of. You have dominant high quality stuff there commanding tons of capital and premiums, for many of the reason you describe. They have all the resources and almost all of the talent, or at least access to it. You were complaining about MasterCard in another thread, but outside of Visa and MA, maybe you've got a tiny few "others" on the periphery...what do you think thats worth? Now incorporate low rates. Decline of cash use. You're looking for what? Multiple contraction? MA ended 2013 at a mid $80's print. Its spent several years consolidating and doing little by the way of appreciating in share price to any wild degree despite continuing to exhibit dominance and hold a death grip on commerce along with Visa. So yea its gone on a bit of a run, and it might be a bit extended, but thats how the stock market works sometimes. Its hardly emblematic of a chicken little scenario. As I said before, you could have bought MA right into the GFC, at the highs, and been whole, plus some, within TWO YEARS! after not having added a share! And thats with a once in a generation type event. If that doesnt occur, then what? You're worried about MA in a regular old run of the mill bear market? LOL Come on. Recessions and collapses just clear out the weak. So owning the best of breed, high quality and dominant players...you could make the case that the less skilled investor or one not interested in timing the market should just buy it at any price and put it away. At any point in the cycle. And there's plenty of companies similar to MA that the above apply to. And as they continue to consume any worthwhile competition, not to mention make so much money that they can afford to piss money away buying out the bad ones too, that dominance will just get greater, and when the supply of competitors for them dwindles and the investment alternatives for investors does as well... its kind of obvious what the result will be, until the government decides to intervene.

I think the reason stock prices keep going up without increased sales is the percentage of investors who have never experienced a bear market keeps going up everyday. I was just reading Howard Marks writing about the 1990s - the players "moving the market felt no fear." And just the same, you have an entire generation of investors who are still scarred by 2008 an just spent a decade plus sitting on piles of cash and whining about how valuations were out of line or using any excuse they could think of to write off making investments. With regard to your perspective or mine, one involves things remaining the same, and another involves things changing.... I'd just point out that last November and December's market crash certainly brought about fear to many. Just go read the threads about how many even here and on other platforms for investors where losing their minds. How many were clamoring about Fed policies and rate hikes and all this other excuse laden jargon from the past decade as "reasons" the market was going down. As if, for the first time in history, investors collectively just woke up and decided the sky was falling.... turned out to be more of the same from those folks. False cries of fire in a crowded room. So I also think the claim about investors not having seen a bear market or whatever is again somewhat misleading. Or at the least, symptomatic of the same fear thats held plenty back over the past decade. H2 of 2011 was certainly no cakewalk. We've had multi year periods of stagnancy, we've had oil market taking historic plunges, Q1 2016, multiple flash crashes, and December 2018 which was historically one of the most violent drops ever. So I dont really know what many of you are waiting for? You guys missed the boat and continue to do so and what? Claim to be waiting for once in a generation type crashes, which history has shown, even if you invested the day prior, you'd wait MAYBE a few years to get back to even with, even assuming you didn't average down ONCE along the way? And using outliers like WeWork as the basis to kick the can down the road on PLENTY of otherwise wonderful and healthy businesses...does what exactly? Then again, if it wasn't for this behavior maybe we would be in a bubble...

Aint that something, huh? A simple explanation to a situation that has long confounded many intelligent investors....supply and demand. Unlike tulips or Pokemon cards, you cant just manufacture additional supply of great businesses. Welcome to the modern world.

Yea theres a flaw in the last part....what value investments will work? The banks reliant on healthy economies and lending? Real estate tied to interest rates? Emerging markets that rely on western consumers and businesses? The autos? Airlines? A lot of it, if not all, is tied together. There is indeed a lot of capital changing limited assets. The boomer assets will be scooped up by the institutions and the occasional millennial who doesnt piss their money away on Whole Foods and Starbucks.. And fwiw, at least here in NJ/NY/CT area, a 1.5% property tax is nothing. Try 3-4%. And we're still alive.

Thats the thing, and something I dont think many of the Buffetteers appreciate. If nothing else, given what is obvious in the current situation, I fail to see how anyone would be harmed if Berkshire issued/starts issuing a dividend or did a one time special dividend of say $20 per B share or something. What I extrapolate, and what should truly frighten shareholders, is this. Buffett is obviously off on his perception of what companies are worth. Even if he isn't, theres nothing and hasn't been anything, that he s willing to pull the trigger on, and shareholders suffer. But what happens when he does find something? Anything worthwhile is going to have bidders, as we have just seen. He won't "go to auction" and won't "top bids", so one really has to ask themselves, do you want what ever is left over, that no one else wants or chooses to bid on? Which by process of reasoning, is likely going to be the only scenario in which Warren is able to make an acquisition? Ive tried narrowing down what universe an eventual acquisition would come from, and when you eliminate any company that would field competitive bids, move the marker up to a meaningful market cap, and then eliminate "non Buffett" businesses, I'm left thinking he'll end up buying some old economy Dow company like IBM or KO. I mean even GE which he said he would pull the trigger on in the mid teens, "at the right price", he whiffed on at like $7-8. Personally I think he should get with the times, bite the bullet, and pay up for something like VMware.

Just continues to fit the same pattern. Its fine and dandy being patient with what you perceive as high prices. But when thats been the case for an extended period of time, and you're sitting on an outrageous amount of cash that yields nothing...well you're just wrong and costing your shareholders. Id love to see accountability, but many who said the market was overvalued in 2014 continue to say the same things and the fact is, many quality names will likely NEVER again trade at 2014 prices. Nothing worse than someone who is wrong and won't admit it. Buffett and many others just refuse to get with reality. And that is that they need to recalibrate the evaluation of what certain assets are worth. Frankly, I think he should be pressed much harder. If he won't meaningfully repurchase BRK shares, he should be forced to use them for acquisitions. Shit or get off the pot. This whole...wont buyback stock but won't issue it, won't spend cash either and won't take on low interest debt...insanity, bordering on incompetence.

I don't know how it is in Canada(frankly it sounds like a fucking nightmare) but one of the main reasons I haven't moved to an outright fund structure(Im in the US) is all the crap that is required in regards to regulatory, legal, audit, etc; that for a small shop, is an outright burden and waste of time. Why deal with that when you can just run SMA's or even, worst case, just management funds for someone in an unofficial capacity? It sounds like the person who wants you to manage their funds admires your ability. It also sounds like there is an element of trust. So the easiest path IMO(with those things assumed to be accurate) is to just have him cut you a check to cover first year costs and fees. Then manage the account which would already be setup in his name. And then just settle up on a quarterly/semi annual basis. Set up an LLC and call it a consulting business. Then you can even start tallying official business expenses as well. Many ways to get around the bullshit

Got a smidge more of GRIF. Would buy more but it just doesnt seem like theres any to be had. Mainly it looks like shares are all dried up below $40. Heading into year end, with low floater, light volume, and other potential news, I like the setup.

Selling some EDIT

They key is to use a little bit of brain power and then just throw a net. Cyber security to me is such a no brainer. I bought CIBR years ago and don’t even look at it. Like ever. It just prints money. Im sure there are others out there like that. With such specific theme based ETFs it really shouldn’t be too hard to find stuff with satisfactory returns.

Hi Gregmal, is your comment from a US perspective. Key factor is that OP is in Canada. Many Canadian mutual funds have expenses of 2.5% and higher. High fees like that on a diversified portfolio of funds WILL have an outsized, negative impact on returns over long periods of time. Yes I should have clarified that. Here in the US it’s common to hear people and media pundits(who are themselves promoting index fund products) whining about expense ratios of .5-1% annually which is a joke. The name of the game is making money in a sensible, risk adjusted way. Not chasing some stupid, man made, basket called an index. Which ironically enough is heavily weighted in a select few companies, who’s pass through expenses ratios far exceed a few basis points. Which is why now many are gaming the system, and just buying the FANGs.

At first I thought this was another muscleman thread. Just buy BRK and GOOG. Average in over time. If you really want ETFs or mutual funds, don’t be afraid of fees. People these days make way too much of an issue of paying for anything. But a good manager is worth every penny. Although it’s easy to see why, after a decade of easy returns, everyone thinks otherwise. Ironically, the number of people who have ACTUALLY realized/achieved easy money returns seems to be dwarfed by the number of people who are in the easy money, don’t pay for anything, buy the index fan club.

I think I mentioned here before(if not it was somewhere else), but the amount of FANG+a few(as I call it) that showed up in the filings on dataroma this quarter was staggering. I continue to pare down high beta, risk equities.

I'll derail this a bit, but dont you worry that the self liquidating narrative is gone? Adding dozens of employees, acquiring assets, and now potentially converting to a C corp doesnt seem like self liquidating to me. The trustees do suck a big giant eggplant emoji, but otherwise, this was hardly broken and I cant help but be a little pissed at all the players involved here for trying to "fix" it.

+5

Started a bit of CLXT

Hamilton Thorne

JEF. Attaining returns from this thing has been like extracting blood from a stone. As such, I'm happily taking my one week returns here and calling it a day.

Interesting clinical candidate with an unmet need. It looks to me like they will need to raise cash with a secondary very soon though. Word of advice...this is a highly promoted stock at tier 4 brokerage houses and to date, the company has been very eager to use any sort of share price bump to raise capital. Note, that's what they all do, some just more regularly than others. Thanks for the color. I have no idea what a Tier 4 brokerage is, but I suspect that these are the dinky outfits that recommend and pump microcaps? Anyways, the way I see it CR P has maybe 2-3 quarter of cash left, which means that they probably raise in the next 3 month or 6 month at the very latest. Typically buying ahead of a secondary is not a winning proposition. Tier 4 example http://www.teribuhl.com/2019/03/19/honigs-broker-dealer-laidlaw-target-of-fbi-investigation/ Good warning on CRBP https://seekingalpha.com/article/4245168-corbus-ties-suspect-investors-history-failed-clinical-trials-lenabasum I have a bunch of accounts at a lot of different places either personally or for those I oversee. So occasionally the dirty wringer produces "sales leads" which I end up on. No joke I had a fellow maybe 4 years ago call me unsolicitedly and hard selling me some options strategy on....Corbus. At like $8. A few days later in went down like 50%. I have nothing to add as to whether what the actual company is doing will bear fruit. But having been almost exclusively involved in seeking out and doing deep dives and short only candidates earlier in my career, I can tell you that many times, just using guilty by association with some of these names, is all you need to do(outside of securing a borrow and timing the short entry :P)

Restarted a little HHC. Replacing a lot of my momo and hot potato stuff with good old boring right now.

I definitely agree with a lot of this perspective. I often laugh to myself at how hypocritical even myself can feel sometimes with various investments and angles because it is an art and something that is highly personal. Your framework for investing can be everything while also being nothing. It can be exact and also inexact. Something sometimes and nothing sometimes. It really does vary situation to situation. Just because something is the same as something that has worked before, doesnt mean that this time it won't be different, and vice versa.