Gregmal

Well theres another very simple aspect to this, but its hypnotizing and very much a siren song for many the egomaniac who needs to be right or "call it". Stocks either go up, or down. Many times, those calling it, think they are geniuses simply because the direction matched the forecast, even when the logic/framework behind the forecast was totally wrong. So they sit around waiting to eventually be "right"...and generally speaking, if given enough time, one can almost always clip a window where they can claim to have called it. However, if instead of being deathly loyal to an ego and "being right"...one can also choose loyalty to making money...IMO..the reason one is in the markets, and in which case the whole "calling it" thing and sitting around waiting for that cookie...becomes a fools game.

The banking crisis was largely overblown by people trying to create one and Jerry trying to be a tough guy for his friends. In other news, the 2010 inflation crisis called and says it wants its oil prices back. It’s amazing the straws that continue to be grabbed at in order continue to peddle the inflation story.

While I dont think we go back there anytime soon, nor that the economy is on the brink of disaster, the major flaw you guys are making is exactly those assumptions. If theres no longer inflation, why wouldnt all those programs be back on the table? Especially now that they've, gasp, given themselves 500 bps of room to breathe, which was previous the argument for the "theyre trapped and have nowhere to go" bear crowd.

Like all the “ma calculators and excel sheets prove her Tesla work is total bullshit!” bros…….it’s like yo, brotha, didn’t you call it a short and have a $30 price target on it…..in like 2015? At least she got the direction correct lol. We all know both of you are just guessing on where it ends up and when that happens…but Ken Griffin appreciates your business.

They all must be mocked equally. I especially enjoy how much rage the underperforming value bros throw at Cathie. Deep down, they know she’s superior to them…the goal for neither is to really compound, but make money. And Cathie’s biz just had a run like few ever had and it eats at those fucks which is why she gets so much hate. Would I ever invest with her? Hell no. Although I’d consider investing in the parent company who generates fees off the crazy ARKs. But girl has a fuckin business and a brand, thats for sure. Someone like Hussman? Not so much.

I’ve added “financial professionals opining on valuations” to the list of folks to either ignore or point and laugh at. As a group, they’ve clearly demonstrated that there’s no correlation in terms of what they think something should trade for, and where it eventually does. More cynically, their opinions really seem to just be marketing material or ego caressing attention grabs.

Yea I turned off CNBC in 2016 and haven’t watched a second since. Peak was Icahn vs Ackman on HLF. Peak entertainment that is; there was never any value and if anything it was a distraction.

Yea I’m not @BG2008 close to this so maybe that’s part of it, but I just don’t view the company as distressed and I don’t buy that they’ll have any trouble tapping the debt markets on their core stuff. So when the market gives the picture you’re severely distressed, and you’re not, sitting around doing nothing isn’t my preferred plan of action.

Idk but while I’m sure all else equal these guys prefer their stock trade at $15 vs $5, if it’s worth $15 and trading at $5 you buyback stock. If you’re building real long term per share value, it’s a no brainer. If you can develop with 100% upside, buybacks are still the right move at $5. That’s the owner operator mentality. If you’re just collecting dirt or growing Sq/ft or unit #, at the expense of other stuff, what’s the point? If you’re swimming upstream(NY, microcap REIT, etc) you need something working for you, proactively. That’s all. AIV can buyback stock all day between $5-7…with a $12 NAV that gets scoffed at. But Clipper with a $12-15 NAV can’t be bothered?

The first paragraph to me validates the reason to dabble with the last two paragraphs. FRPH or FIZZ is the model. Show me you give a shit on allocation. There many different things I can point to with the FRP or FIZZ teams and profiles that seam ugly but there’s just as many where I can say they create value and care about shareholder value. Is there anything you can point to with CLPR that shows management gives two hoots? Im perfectly fine owning illiquid and even private stuff if everyone is aligned. But I need to know they’re aligned.

I don’t think anyone knows for sure but same stuff @thepupil mentioned a few years ago when we were all smashing these sorta names. They’re ugly ducklings, if the duckling never gets pretty, or gets uglier, theres little stomach for stuff like this, especially when the market gets fickle. That’s why we need to see a meaningful corporate action from management, which I’m not sure is coming.

LOL my man I can’t even tell you how many times I’ve been told variations of that. Or gotten requests to really create a fund or ETF. I don’t know why, although I could gander somewhat, but I’ve never been all that ambitious about anything other than being able to live life on my own terms. At a certain level financially, that’s achievable. After that, the money loses its meaning, at least to me. Part of why I’ve never understood how people who already have so much, behave in certain ways, just to get more, of something they don’t need. Even worse, harming others with less than you, in order to do it. So I just enjoy interacting with likeminded people who also do it for love of the game rather than likes, clicks, or dollars. All of this stuff can be closely related, but hugely different, all at the same time. I like investing but I also like hanging out with my daughter all day like I’m doing today, just playing together, or pulling my son from school Wednesday to go see the Super Mario movie…so I guess it’s just priorities.

My old man was always into this kinda shit. The Gloom Boom Doom Report type stuff. ZH as well. I just remember asking him many years ago if he thought it odd that all these places that are selling you these "services" almost always seem to arrive at the same conclusion, almost irrespective of the situation. They always find a way to bridge whats happening back to the same old, same old. Imagine an investment or financial publication, with unique insight, that presented things like IDK, Tepper, or Eisman, or just in general, took a calm, measured approach LOL? That shit doesnt get page views or generation subscription sales though. I bought some GLD today. Without getting too much into the reasons, whenever I think of gold, I wince, because its the perfect example of this sort of thinking. Talk to die hard gold bulls...theres never a point in time where they arent super convinced that everyone needs to hoard gold. 2005, 2009, 2013, 2016, 2020, 2023...what should we buy? Gold off course!

Crime is surging and they’re indicting political foes and charging security guards who get shot with murder….they’re earning every ounce of future pain in that city, and have no one to fault but themselves. Id honestly rather pay $7 for Clipper after seeing a massive buyback than $5 with the Bistricers just continuing the status quo. Show us you care….

Yea I think often with stocks folks get intimidated, for a lot of reasons. But rule of thumb with stocks, people, life, etc, at least for me, is if you truly know and are comfortable with who and what you go to sleep with at night, you'll sleep well. But most dont apply that to their investments. Find any 5-10 year stretch in history and if you bought a solid company and stuck with it and just intelligently but lazily DCA's in over an extended stretch, you did ok. Bubbles dont mean theres no value and crashes tend to happen quickly. Stairs up, elevator down Ive always heard is the saying. Its why even with stuff I really like, I'll never go all in on the first purchase.

I follow an outfit called the NIA, standing for National Inflation Association. They probably fall into a similar category and often are involved in stock promotions, but do often provide unique viewpoints and actually at times, actionable investment ideas. ZH though, IMO is too extreme and predictable. Nothing sells like greed and/or fear. Most choose to market the later because their target audience is so much more gullible. Pitching greed, folks know when theyre being greedy. Pitch fear? Those folks think theyre being prudent, conservative and responsible lol. But its the same shit. In general, in todays day and age with the internet, you need to be mindful of folks who make their money via page views and subscriptions. Be weary of outfits that ALWAYS sing some variation fo the same tune. Thats why when Tepper or Loeb speaks, I pay close attention. When Mark Spitznagel has something to say, its like gee thanks for wasting my time.

Flipped BUR and XLE and bought some GLD

Baffert is currently suing Churchill Downs which I found amusing.

Part of investing is adapting. Valuing investing doesn’t work? Tell that to someone who took a textbook approach in 2020….maybe started a long/short fund. Whereas if you started in 2009 you probably have a different view. Why do you think there’s so many guys who look like geniuses that are “value” investors born from the ashes of the tech bubble in the late 90s? So there’s two things, luck in terms of when you start, and for longevity…ability to evolve your process and read the market environment.

That is kind of what’s always rubbed me the wrong way. He hasn’t really demonstrated he s all that great of an investor and really has been handed everything. From how he started off to getting credit that wasn’t deserved. He “called the GFC and Lehman” but owned New Century(was on the board actually!) and lost almost 1/3 of his fund in 08….When it doesn’t go his way he whines like an entitled brat. Ackman minus the investing acumen. Not quite Peter Schiff though. Who reportedly lost over 80% of client funds in the crash and then a year later wrote a book saying he told us all and that next gold was going to $5000 bc of hyperinflation in 2012. I’ve brought it up before but you have to admire Prem Watsas resurgence. Ackman too although he’s quickly blowing it again…but those guys shut up and reset and got back to their bread and butter. Einhorn did +36% last year and it’s classic blind squirrel getting a nut. Why? Bc the process was the same one that caused him to squander the past 15 years. Ego driven and petty….IE betting against Tesla and tech stocks and it finally fell and bizarrely thinking he was sticking it to Musk buying Twitter which also worked. But nothing at all changed in the process and I’d wager he turned in a turd Q1 ‘23.

Totally. Like I said, that book taught me so much about so many different avenues on Wall Street. You know who nails it? In the last chapter Dave is talking about a chat he had with Buffett(of course not mentioning that he paid for it) and how Buffett on his Allied short opines something along the lines of, “don’t know the company but these generally aren’t good ideas because your short position is just a small piece of your portfolio. Whereas the people you’re attacking it’s everything to them”. Spot on from the legend on the difficultly of shorting. Another thing I learned over the years and that this book validates, is that much of this short term, market moving game is about controlling media and narrative. That’s why short sellers are always so crazy about grabbing headlines and seizing every ounce of the discussion. It’s why they hold press conferences(laughable in its own right considering the positions are typically sub 10% allocations and they…the fund managers, don’t really have anything to do with the company) and immediately respond to anything the company does to defend itself. The book itself is a great example. Controlling the narrative. In 2002 Einhorn pitched Allied short as his best idea. It was a total bust for what? Half a decade? Until he was bailed out by a generational market wide event. Again, narrative control..one he’s conditioned people to think “he called”…except “the guy who called it” was long a major position in New Century Financial from the top in 2005, and in 2008 lost like 25% LOL. He was so well prepared from calling it, that he then proceeded to bounce back from his -25% in 2008, by putting together one of the most embarrassing 15 year runs you’ll ever see from an “investing legend”, a status he “earned” by coming straight out of school, with no resume or real world experience, and making money in the mid/late 90s(who wasn't?), with a hedge fund that was practically given to him….so yea. And Chanos is another one. Look at him...he sits around all day "tweeting for alpha" and using almost every opportunity he gets to go on TV and monetize his name to move individual positions. I remember that clown pitching a "short Caterpillar" and knocking the stock down 5% to like 80 in like 2015...great call Jim....Not how I envision making money in my 70s. Compare that to a guy I have real respect for, Steve Eisman, who when he's asked for examples of stuff he is short, gracefully declines and states that he doesnt like publicly talking about individual company shorts...you know, cuz if your work is right, you dont need to manipulate or move the markets using the media or other scumbag avenues.

I feel like this has been engineered to a house advantage in what currently is called historical horse racing.

Learned so much from that book. Lot of useful direct and indirect lessons to be learned there.

Was doing some weekend cleaning. Found an old book which concluded with this gem.

Yup, make everyone poorer by hiking interest rates!