Gregmal

The top 5 trending stocks on Stocktwits are TSLA, SPCE, BYND, APHA, CGC.... one probably couldn't put together a better short basket. Just let the sheep and cattle lead you to the greener pastures. Daily gains for those, +11%, +9%, +21%, +11%, +12%... material news? None.

The end is nearing. Just look at what kind of junk is trending everyday. A few glamor stocks and FAANGs and then retail investor stocks. I would be almost certain a good amount of money will be made being short just about anything sometime in the near future, especially stuff like AAPL. Nothing goes up in a straight line and things that do almost always retrace much if not all of it.

Picked up a few DD as close to $60 as I could

Yea FCAU has long been a regret of mine. Its been the better investment, largely because Machionne was a world class manager. With GM, you cant be a growth company when revenue isn't going anywhere. You cant be a dividend play, when you cant even bump the payout a mid single digit % every year. You cant be a buyback machine if you refuse to buyback stock, and you cant be a conservative company with a strong balance sheet when you are teetering on junk status. So, I'm not an auto executive and Im not arrogant enough to say I have the formula for running an auto company. But what I do know, is that I would find an identity and just stick to that. GM has half assed everything which is why its gotten credit for nothing. They've gotten some push from shareholders occasionally, and like with Tepper, done enough to shut them up for a bit, and then revert back to bad behavior. Einhorn had a flawed presentation, but the right idea with the dividend shares, and then growth shares. I also think the ship sailed on Cruise. There was a huge opportunity to IPO that in Hong Kong, or even here, and they did nothing. Now its hard not to question that valuation, given it may be another Softbank special. The right move IMO, which would obviously never happen, would be to shut the sedans, sell/JV the truck lines to Toyota or VW(someone dying to get into the NA truck market) and then become a pure play EV/autonomous driving company with only modest exposure to the best parts of "old auto".

Don't forget pissing away money on Lyft, Maven, and probably Cruise. While Ive long liked Cruise, it is hard now not to view it through the tainted lens of Softbank being the main reason it's considered a home run... All the car companies except Tesla have been trading like junk for the last 12 month almost without exception. that includes Europe, and to a to a lesser degree Japan. They are like the c malls of the industrials. For sure, with regard to the sentiment, but 2019 was yet another record year for auto sales(in $ figures). The problem is they are terrible allocators. E&P companies are probably better peers than the malls. They make tons of money in good years but give none of it back to shareholders because dumb career industry folks run the companies based on out dated and inefficient theories for "what you're supposed to do". Then during the bad years... shit gets ugly. As my bearishness on the overall market has grown, GM has started to bother me more. If this is how they perform in a record market, I probably dont want to be around for when things stop going perfectly.

Don't forget pissing away money on Lyft, Maven, and probably Cruise. While Ive long liked Cruise, it is hard now not to view it through the tainted lens of Softbank being the main reason it's considered a home run...

Hedged out the bulk of my GM position. Lightened up in high $30's a few months ago and have locked into a trade that makes this now or never with capped downside. Incompetent management and naive shareholders are a recipe for basically what this company has been since its IPO. Things are not dandy when your stock has gone no where, dividend hasn't been raised in years, buybacks nonexistent, and ratings agencies considering your debt-junk. Yet some continue to tell themselves things are great; probably fueled by Buffett inspired "value investor" wisdom.

Been trading FVE. Maybe something interesting for you special situation folks after restructuring.

@Cigarbutt- definitely interesting. This was around 2010 and in Quebec, yea? I dont doubt that happens...we all know if free healthcare in the US takes over costs will be completely ignored! All kidding and politics aside, I would more so think moderately scaling out available is what occurs. Most employers dont offer coverage, but that is changing. And I don't know if "stigma" is the right word, although maybe, but its definitely not an open subject of discussion for people here. Taboo, perhaps. Or maybe just uncomfortable. Then theres also the whacky religious folks who hate it as well. The markets in Europe and Asia seem to be way ahead of the US; hard to discern what this actually implies, but I would think we do have some catching up to do with the world given our societal trends.

Theres a few. VITR is a monster and the undisputed king but you're paying a high price for that. You've got a few others like Virtus and Jinxin but my favorite is HTL which is much more off the radar and has what appears to be enough hair to keep most folks away. But Ive found management to be good stewards of capital, disciplined with acquisitions, and not terrible in choosing how and when to raise capital. PGNY I like too but not at 10x sales for what is ultimately middleman work. I'd at least be waiting until lockup to consider touching that, even if its part of a basket approach.

With regard to genetic deficiencies in the IVF process, I have been told that more recently, given the advances in accessibility, couples are being sold the option to perform genetic testing on embryos prior to selection. While it is old news that one can choose the gender of their child, now having the ability to select the healthiest of the harvest further makes this something that potentially appeals to a wider audience. The mainstream acceptability is also still incredibly low. No one ever wonders why so many celebrities have twins at what seems like a significantly greater rate than normal folks? Or how wealthier folks tend to conceive later on? IVF...so as this starts becoming more acceptable to talk about, and accessible from the healthcare standpoint(Starbucks for instance covers this for part time workers now!) I think it is an inevitable growth arena. From there, it will merely become a decision, rather than an embarassing subject and a financial hardship, and when people are given the choice between "trying" blindfolded and leaving the health of their baby to chance, VS, having the entire process planned; no different than a vacation and the health more or less assured- I think I can see where it leads.

If anyone has followed whats gone down the past week or so, I think its incredibly important to notice what has happened with the major cryptos. This was one of the first times I noticed a VERY direct response via price action, responding to macro events, similar to gold, treasuries, and other safe haven instruments. Often, for things to be effective, they have to be accepted within the context of certain uses. If nothing else, I found this unmistakable correlation to be somewhat landmark. Now of course we can get back to debating the intrinsic value of voodoo currency...

Yup, my brothers wife is in her late 20's at EY and its always thought but not loudly spoken how she either won't be able to have a healthy pregnancy or if she does, will have issues. 15 hour work days, eats very little, constant stress/anxiety/deadlines, always traveling... bad recipe. Separately, IVF is one of the few areas that IMO are immune from the general "attack healthcare" agenda of politicians and insurance companies. Basically, poor people with fertility issues deserve to have babies to is my way to make money off socialism.

Someone told me a joke a while ago that I found simple but hilarious... Poor people in America live in NYC and SF....

IVF

100% AML CYA issue and will only get worse. It also may not even be specific to IBKR, although that above method of handling seems Draconian.

Gregmal - can you expand on Hilltop / RBC / Axos...I'm curious how you're using these institutions as I don't see those discussed often. I'm also not sure if you are able to open accounts directly with those firms, or whether you need something like an "introducing broker" - I can't say I'm familiar with that process other than I've heard the term (not sure if I'm using it 100% correctly here). Are there specific instances in which you use each of these? Are these cost effective options for an individual investor? (I understand it probably depends on the type of trading, but curious to hear any further thoughts you can share) Theres a couple ways to go. For those you would either need a direct clearing arrangement, or an introducing broker. It is indeed largely dependent upon your needs. The biggest advantage is that if one gives you a hard time or presents problems, you have backups. But Ive found it helpful because each can provide their own benefits. Pricing is typically negotiated. You're probably paying anywhere from $5-$45 per trade. Margin rates are in between what you'd pay at IB and what you'd pay at a Fidelity. The main differences and areas of use Ive found relates to things like what types of accounts you have, if you manage money for others- where the individual with the account resides, the types of securities you can buy/sell and/or transfer in, and purchasing ability, ie, some of these firms you can buy up to, lets say, $500k in stock without a penny in available funds, and you'll have 5 business days to fund it- good for unexpected opportunities. Axos for instance, you can own anything under the sun and margin pretty much anything under the sun. Although regulators have been giving them some issues lately. Hilltop is friendly to foreign investors and Canadian investors, whereas many firms, including ironically enough, RBC, will not touch non-retirement Canadian accounts because of jurisdictional burdens with the provinces. RBC Ive found is generally good enough at everything but the best at nothing. If you are someone who heavily invests in specific types of arcane securities or securities the regulators would flag, ie low volume, OTC, micro cap, there is probably a big advantage to using these types of firms and paying the extra few bucks. If you are just buying Apple and Google, its not as necessary and you're probably better off with traditional names.

I am not sure I fully understand the specific issue relating to Interactive; I have accounts there are have had my share of inconveniences, but not relating to this. Typically however, it would appear this to be more an issue relating to the security, vs the amount owned. I use IBKR, Hilltop, Fidelity, RBC, and Axos. All have their own quirks and inconvenient features. At the end of the day it always comes back to cover your ass regulatory bullshit. And the two biggest triggers are penny stocks(sub $10 shares occasionally and definitely anything under $5)/OTC positions, and AML. I think I mentioned in a previous thread, but even Fidelity would not transfer in(from an outside firm) shares in LAACZ and HTL. Two companies that are hardly "high risk" but when judged by their covers, fit the profile. I do believe there is a high correlation between industry wide fee reduction, and lack of risk a firm in willing to take. The motto in the biz used to be that paying regulatory fines was just a cost of doing business. But as fees get driven down I'd imagine the number of favors firms are willing to do for clients contracts, and the degree to which they are willing to dedicate resources to potential compliance matters, dwindles. As such, they just throw many of these issues on the compliance "lists". Which just inconvenience the fuck out of us. Now its our "cost of doing business".

Its funny you mention tech, but I was looking through some stuff over the weekend and just continued to be amazed at truly how much market cap some of the tech companies have. Not just the Googles and the Amazon's or Saleforces... not even the top 10-20 per say. I am hardly a tech investor, at all. But when looking at, say, ADSK, SPLK, TWLO, WDAY...thats 4 companies and well over $100B in market cap! And I'd wager 9/10 everyday Americans dont even know what they are, and probably even a big number of investors couldn't give you all that great of an answer on what each one does and how it differs from the next tech co. But dont stop there, you can easily continue to find more... ADBE, VMW, NOW... there another quarter trillion... Its utterly remarkable.

From afar, it seems a combination of, on average, lower quality companies compared to S&P 500 as some have mentioned, lower interest in equities from the average European(possibly because of a greater reliance of socialist programs to subsidize ones retirement), and probably also something to do with the financial system/banks there being a mess. Negative rates are probably also a factor. I know of a surprising number of EU investors who look at US Treasuries and CDs as gold mines and its solely because of the risk free comparable over there. Some still seem to do ok, again showing its a game of skill. I've found few better at it here than John Hjorth. Every once in a while whipping out a stud of a stock pick plucked from his neck of the woods. But otherwise, its tough hunting it seems.

Bought a little more GRIF. If nothing more, because the divergence of GRIF's value relative to the general market melt up, and the lack of SWAN stocks currently available.

I think risk adjusted return is much more important for comparison than absolute return over one year. I could have levered up and gone 120% long SPY and sold puts on the SPY and generated "alpha" but I took on considerable risk. Maybe somebody generated 20% but had 30% in cash or hedged. Only times I hear "risk adjusted return" is when a money manager justifies his lackluster performance due to holding too much cash. They never mention this when the performance is the other way around. Yup lol. Holding cash through 2019 was the WRONG move. Pretty black and white. Not really an honest way to rationalize it.

Shorted some PLUG. Mainly because Ive got a bearish itch and many of the other candidates are impulsive and valuation based shorts. So, because Unilife is no longer with us, PLUG becomes the de facto, I just need to short some piece of shit eventual 0 outlet.

What is your expectation for EZPW? Seems with Cohn back in charge and paying himself well, no incentive to common stock value? So it's cheap, but seems the market doesn't trust him on account of his past actions, and the financing last year was probably also so expensive because nobody trusts the guy. Thanks! I'd concur with that assessment. I think saying the bar is low here is an understatement. The guy is a world class scoundrel. I was absolutely floored by the stock awards they hand out as well. But at the current prices, I believe that is well reflected. This company, even with its mismanagement, hasn't spent a whole lot of time trading below a 7 handle. The Cohen thing I think really seemed to be the last straw for many people. So my feel there was that you had a point of capitulation. I certainly wouldn't expect improvement as far as governance goes, but the buyback is important and if used should put a floor under this. And then, again because expectations are so low, I think give this thing a pop once its confirmed they've actually been using it. For a company thats exceptionally cheap, that'll move the needle. My tipping point to jump in a little was the glorious public beating Aaron English put on these guys during the latest call. No I dont think it will change these scumbags, but I think at least temporarily, everyone kind of has an incentive to at least get this back to the pre Cohen announcement levels. Many times Ive found that these hucksters like to remain in the dark and control the narratives. When they get called out like this, sometimes, there may be enough of an ego involved that it compels them to make minor(and usually temporary) adjustments to save face a little bit.

Gartman has had some absolutely epic moments and flip flops/embarassingly poor on timing calls, particularly during the oil crash in 2015-16. He is in many circles thought to be a contrarian indicator. One week he was making profound statements about we're definitely headed lower, only to mark the bottom, and then a few days later, profoundly declaring the bottom was in, only to see the bottom fall out...round and round for a good while. He's also one of those, "I'd be long emerging market equities but only hedged via mid duration sovereign debt, in yen denominated terms" kinda guys. A real goof. But yea, IDK know and totally agree with you guys, this stuff is getting kinda batshit crazy. Apple gapping up the way it has and continues to do. MasterCard, Now even GE +7% for no reason. I was long in the camp of "youre a dope if you think we're in a bubble", but the last few months have been displaying all of the signs and textbook markings of one. Whether in 2-3 years I sound bitter about getting it wrong like Gartman, as the party rocks on, IDK. But I think the moves in a lot of stuff is unhealthy.