thowed

I am curious as to how different things are between large metropolises and the countryside. I imagine things are much more normal in the latter. In London, one of the larger metropolises, things are continuing to slow down in the centre. Offices are starting to effectively close down, cafes are very quiet. I know someone who flew back to Europe yesterday in a plane with just 20 other passengers. To go right back to basics: cash-flows cash-flows cash-flows. I don't see what governments can do to get people spending money (apart from online) if they're too scared to go places. My guess is that there are some big 'unknown unknowns' to come. At present it's hard to imagine a stockmarket recovery until the virus is contained and people are going out again. But no doubt governments will make some big moves before that, and some of them will take, either permanently or temporarily.

I don't know whether to start a new thread about this, but here goes... Obviously all sorts of sports events have been cancelled. Apart from this: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-13/clubs-may-face-1-billion-bill-if-virus-wrecks-soccer-season what happens about player wages? I guess that clubs will have to pay their eye-watering salaries while they're doing nothing? Or did a smart lawyer think of this and put something in their contracts? I'm thinking of Manchester United, Juventus etc. for example. Any insight appreciated.

So it looks like there's going to be a big rebound today. I mean, that's not unusual after such a crazy day as yesterday. On the other hand, it feels like it's in anticipation of substantial government intervention. And it still feels like that the next few months are going to see a lot of economic problems in various industries, as long as people are 'self-isolating' and working from home. I've got cash ready, and have done a tiny bit of nibbling, but personally it feels like the economic hit hasn't been priced in fully yet. It feels like a number of people here have been nibbling, but felt like next week would provide better opportunities. But hey, timing is impossible...

I don't disagree with you that people are overreacting about the overall health position. My problem is that governments & businesses are reacting by shutting everything down and spreading fear, meaning businesses are not operating normally. Until people feel confident in going out and mingling properly, I think there will be a problem. In Europe movement is going down, and it feels like this will happen much more in the US. I suppose perhaps one question is if Asia will now outperform as they're ahead of the curve, and share prices have suffered comparatively with the US for so long. But I still suspect that things are too interconnected.

First off, I think Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is a crazy idea. However given the lack of firepower available to governments, it seems as though heavy fiscal stimulus will be the next step, which suggests that we are one step closer to MMT. I mean, we've all had 10 years of unconventional monetary policy, so we've been softened up for more weird stuff. Obviously this is an unknown, and would normally be one for the harder-left, but nothing would surprise me any more. I guess you'd want to own TIP$ in such a situation, but what else?

I don't know the context, but just to say that while this is probably fine, I'd generally be wary of using the Daily Mail as a news source. It is not the most objective of papers, if fun for gossip & stuff.

Threads like this are very useful right now. I am drawn to options as tail-risk insurance, but I know: a) I have never owned any (and my CFA knowledge is rusty) so am likely to be the 'sucker' in a trade. b) they are expensive right now because of volatility. It's always good to keep learning, and I hope I'll be able to keep doing so, but so far, this has been a good reminder for wiser heads to effectively say, 'don't do it'! PeteC - I think you're based the same as me - I've also struggled to find the right venue to do it. I'd want to buy a Put, say, but most platforms seem to just do spreadbet trading, which I'm even less comfortable with. I believe Swissquote may do it and UK people can access it, I think. In other UK protection considerations, I've been looking at Pershing again, as the protection seems to have worked well, and the Brevan Howard trust, which is doing what it's supposed to as it did in 2008, though it still feels a bit black box, and I don't know what opportunities there are now rates have gone down even more. Ruffer supposedly has all this tail protection, but it still doesn't seem to be working, unless it just hasn't fed through to the NAV yet (I think they use their own funds for this, which may only be valued weekly or monthly).

Another of these that might be interesting is Brembo, which does high-end brakes for sports cars, motorcycles etc.

Report from the UK. People are definitely starting to get twitchy - lots of stories about empty supermarket shelves, especially for hand sanitisers etc. Lots of people here get supermarket deliveries from online orders - you're looking at a week wait to get a slot in London. There is more of a culture of closed-end funds in the UK, so you're starting to see decent discounts emerging, which could present opportunities. The main UK index (FT-SE100) has been a dog of an index for the past 25 years, first being dominated by the 'hot' sector, which then gets wiped out (tech in the late 90s, commodities in 2008). Since then, it's stagnated, so is still big oil and tobacco instead of all the 'disruptors' the S&P has. Anyway, you can imagine what it's like today... Anyway, I provide the supermarket info to show that perhaps a significant number of people here are behaving irrationally, so god help us for what could happen in the markets. And also I wonder if this is all to come in the US?

Quite fascinating hearing about some of these very concentrated 'coffee-can' portfolios. I wonder how many of them apart from Spekulatius's have outperformed their parent's? It's interesting to consider the different elements that might affect this too, namely: 1: Concentration 2: Very low turnover 3: Fear of losing money for a 'client' is greater than for yourself, which focuses the mind. To add - if you can access it in Canada, I'd look at the Akre Focus fund (though he's getting on - I don't know what happens when he retires), which to me is like S&P500 +, quality large-cap portfolio with low-turnover. Also, PeteC, curious about your other 2 funds if you don't mind me asking. LatAm is so tricky - the Findlay Park fund was the one I was most impressed with (now at Brown Harriman), plus Stewart/First State, and Arisaig. Was never sure about the Aberdeen IT, though I haven't looked at it recently.

Gregmal, I agree with you that you shouldn't take things too seriously on a damn internet forum. On the other hand, I think you've got to watch out a little for blatant misrepresentation, because if it becomes OK to tell untruths, the useful exchanges of information here become worthless. So sure, who cares if RNO got 30% or 35%. But I confess I don't slightly buy someone who says they've made better returns than pretty much anyone except Greenblatt at his peak just by market timing, because it feels like more people would be able to do it. Though I also don't see why anyone would be so pathetic to make something like that up, so maybe it is true. Very happy to be corrected, and even more happy to be taught how to do it.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-22/bridgewater-co-cio-bob-prince-says-boom-bust-cycle-is-over Oh good lord, we know how this story ends... And I thought Bridgewater are supposed to be the smart guys!

I'd take another angle and suggest that European indices just have more crap companies in them than the US. I think that if you look at the top European funds, they've done pretty nicely over time and outperformed their benchmarks, by 'avoiding the bad stuff'. Ditto with China, even more so. The US has by far the most high quality and efficient index, so it's done better, and is also extremely hard to outperform over the long-term.

Never heard of Gartman, but I LOVE the Money Game - it's well-written, it's very funny (not easy when writing about finance), and the kids market thing doesn't seem unreasonable, though I wouldn't be surprised if it kept running for a while as these things usually do for longer than you think possible.

I think everybody's made some interesting points here, but I'd go back to basics and say that it is completely pointless to make any comment about 'hedge funds' as it can mean too many different things. If you are a long-biased hedge fund, then Gregmal's point are entirely valid. But the problem with these articles is that the definition of 'hedge funds' includes long funds with various Macro funds, bond funds, commodity funds, Arb, Short only funds etc. etc. And so this makes the 8.5% figure meaningless. Except that if you're a journalist you need the figure to be either much lower or higher than the S&P500 so that you have an angle for your feature.

It is, thanks, and Seilern is/was an interesting fund house (the key manager left and has started a very similar fund at CQS - it will be interesting to see who does better over the next 5 years). I resisted this style of investing for years because... it seemed too easy/obvious. And boy do I regret it. Now I am nervous again, because it seems to have become almost groupthink, and while I accept great firms can be expensive and still do well, I also think that the Nifty 50 shows that there comes a price level where you have to wait a Long Time for them to outperform - and, y'know, in the long run, we're dead. So I hold on for now to the Fundsmith/Lindsell Train/Akre/Seilern etc. way of doing things for now, but I would love to find some diversity. It feels like value areas like Energy e.g. E&P could be on the turn, but such a specific bet requires luck on the timing. And value funds have taken such a hammering for the past decade that it seems hard to identify who has still got the ability and hunger to really slay when value becomes a thing again.

I'm more of a funds person to be honest. But going back to the earlier idea of contrarianism, I was reminded of Russia recently. Cheap and hated (if not quite as much as a couple of years ago). I've never felt too comfortable with the governance. While it's the 'one that everyone owns', I'd have thought that Sberbank would have a pretty decent chance of doing well over time. If you want retail, then I suppose X5 would be one to look at. At the more obvious end, I find FEET (Fundsmith EM IT) becoming gradually more interesting, whether for owning or inspiration. The portfolio's been tightened up, and is full of super impressive EM consumer companies. They've just been too crazily expensive I think, even for their impressive stats. They seem to be slowly getting a bit cheaper. I wouldn't expect them ever to be 'cheap' (except in a 2008 situation) as they're just too high quality and profitable, but if they become semi-reasonably priced, they should be no-brainers for the long-term.

Like the EM bank thoughts. I'll add in BCA in Indonesia and Public Bank in Malaysia which I'm told are the two ASEAN banks with the highest corporate governance. And if you want to go really off piste, there's Brac in Bangladesh, which seems to be a class operation, though not cheap from memory. I REALLY like the EM reversion stuff - as a big EM fan, here's hoping - it's been a rough 5 years. I don't know much about Ulta, but Retail is definitely getting interesting. We all know it's being disrupted, but I believe that retail isn't dead, it's just being transformed. There are going to be a lot of value traps out there, but if you can work out who can adapt their retail format to the future, there's a chance of picking it up for a song right now.

Thanks - more good thoughts here. The Ayalas are definitely one of the handful of Philippine families with high levels of corporate governance. As you may know, you mention the holdco, but there's a bunch of other listed ones too (e.g. bank, water co etc.). I saw the thing on Jardines, which is interesting - I found it too complicated and couldn't figure out the Keswick history (I get the impression some members of the family have been more impressive than others). Jardine C&C is definitely interesting - auto has been grim. I know it a bit because they have a subsidiary that invests in Vietnam (I research this a little). Similarly some of the best small-cap Asia value funds are super beaten up at the moment, whereas you look at their track records from 2003-13 and they killed it. It feels like their day must come again, but it's painful waiting at the moment. I think it's harder than ever perhaps to identify the unpopular stuff as this cycle has gone on so much longer than usual that our brains have been wired to quality growth compounders in certain industries, and it's hard to remember the people who succeeded with a previous style before, and even harder to know if they'd still be able to do it if things switched again. Thanks to all for this contrarian thinking - I used to be more attuned to it, but I've been gradually been drawn to groupthink out of jealousy at missing out on the returns of the past 10 years. Finally, I don't know the figures well, but instinctively I'd back FPT in Vietnam for the next 10-15 years. Unfortunately foreigners can only buy it at a huge premium (due to Foreign Ownership Limits). It's a phone/broadband company that has moved into IT services. It seems to be a quality operating, growing, and not expensive, but DYOR - I get this from a bunch of Vietnam reports I've read.

I like the Softbank idea, though it's not really my style of investing i.e. I struggle with the governance of both Softbank and Alibaba. To throw another contrarian idea out, how about some commodity companies? When you say Microsoft, it makes me think that a great time to invest in it was in 2003-4, when everybody was still scarred by the tech bubble. It was a brave call then. Commodity companies were roaring in the 00s until 2007, but now are generally reviled. My suspicion is that to make great returns, you want to make a brave call. I think that Microsoft, BAM etc. are outstanding companies, but right now, so does everybody else, so I think returns could be disappointing over the next 10 years. Having said that, I tend to favour the 'Fundsmith-esque' quality compounders. Thanks for making me think about this. This is what makes investing so interesting - it feels like we are starting to approach a new Nifty Fifty era i.e. that however good a company is, there comes a point when if a) it's very expensive and b) EVERYONE owns it, then it won't produce great returns for a while. However, the tricky part is 1) getting the timing right and 2) working out which 'unpopular' companies will reverse. Maybe it's a case of looking at the best quality, hated Value stocks. Of course, that's a speciality of many people on this board!

Here's some Chilean stocks that might be worth having a look at: They're just from a few LatAm funds I respect, though obviously the whole continent has been a struggle for a while now. I haven't looked at them myself. From memory, it's mostly quality consumer & retail stuff. SAAM Sonda SACI Falabella Cia Cervecerias Unidas ADR Embotelladora Andina Inversiones Aguas Metropolitanas Quinenco Sociedad Matriz Forus

Don't suppose you were on the Hollertronix board? I've always had a slight curiosity if there's any crossover between the music boards I hung out on, and here.

OMG - Munger_Disciple, many thanks for that. Hilarious. And jaw-dropping.

Some features I've got so far, in case anyone's interested (and I think Primecap are pretty interesting as Active managers go, though that's perhaps augmented somewhat by the secrecy around them). 2016: https://www.barrons.com/articles/primecap-in-the-spotlight-1460174680 decent overview 2000: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2000-03-12/three-contrarians-share-their-secrets they've been doing this a while!

Hi all I'm just reading up on the history of Primecap. Those who know will be aware that they don't talk much, but apparently Schow did an interview in 1994 in Forbes, and I can't find it anywhere on the web. Much appreciated, thanks.