Castanza

Can't think of any pure online companies that are doing this. Personally, I don't see this taking off. Most online retailers use USPS for last mile delivery as it stands now. If I might ask, why are you interested specifically in this? interested?

http://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/2019/04/update-on-money-demand-currently-stable.html As always, Scott put out a few high quality posts this month. Regards

Curious on your thesis for shorting VBK?

Columbus, OH

Could you expand on this a little? Liquidity is coming almost entirely from the underwriting group, the issues are being priced at slightly below market (to evidence a marketing bump on issue), and underwriters are focused on volume (fees) - not quality. Get as much out the door as possible before the opportunity closes, and dump the inventory as quietly as possible. SD I see, definitely a good point. Ever since Venture Capital money has come into play, IPO's have been well, "disingenuous." These companies come out of the gates with massive valuations its hard to see how they are't set up for failure. Not sure if anyone watches the HBO series "Silicon Valley." But this show highlights some of these issues, such as being overvalued when you IPO. Also it's just a damn funny show.

Could you expand on this a little?

Even if we were to wait 1000 years for better sample sizes how accurate would the data even be? I'm not a fan of historical averages. I mean look at how the world has changed in the last 50 years. There are far too many variables in my opinion to draw any type of conclusion which would make me feel confident in averaging a 7% return. The time is now and whatever the return now is what we will get. I think putting more effort into real time vs historical time is far more important. But there still is value in terms of historical perspectives. Especially when it comes to policies, and psychological/sociological trends (Which can be hard to justify at times as well.) I'll leave this skyline montage to simply show how much places in Asia, SA, and the Middle East have changed. Certainly these have effects on today's economy compared to the early 1900's when the populations were low all over and countries were more nationally focused. http://the-technology-tips.blogspot.com/2014/03/20-skylines-of-world-then-vs-now.html

Greg, I agree completely. People shouldn't be thin skinned. But censorship wasn't the purpose. It was more to protect the sanctity and purpose of the forum to keep it from getting overrun like every other forum that has fallen due to this exact thing. But you're right, it's probably best to just ignore and move along. Regards,

Glad to be here John! In short I did not create this post assuming I had some democratic power haha. I am new to this site so my insight to the effectiveness of the political section is limited. The main reason I posted this was because I noticed a lot of people complaining about political posts and how they were beginning to bleed into other topics. Believe me, I am all for freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. But that doesn't mean a forum created for a specific purpose shouldn't be moderated. In the end I just want what the members want. Nobody seemed to raise the question so i thought why not? I was pretty excited to find this site as it seemed to be much more focused and had much more knowledgeable members than other forums. I get where you're coming from, but at the same time this forum isn't limiting ones ability to partake in free speech elsewhere. Politics certainly have a big influence on our investments and in an earlier post I said it should be completely fine to have political discussion if it relates to investing in some way. But I hardly can see how discussing Jesse Smollett would affect my investments. I don't think it's a bad thing to have a place void of political discussion simply to discuss investments. Viking had a good point. It's not easy to handle. But you have to weigh the cost benefit. In the end, I don't have strong opinions one way or another. I can see both sides to the argument which backs up the difficulty of the situation. As John pointed out this isn't a democratic forum (I guess?) but at the same time you think some people (long time members) would have a say. I think Sanjeev makes the best point as to why it exists. But I think it would be beneficial to have "politics" hidden by default so it's not thrust on new members immediately. Self-policing is probably how I will move forward regarding my interactions. Again, to all I don't want to cause any "angst." Just something I picked up on as a new member with a fresh view. Regards

That was my thought at first as well. And politics is easy to get sucked into. I think having the thread kind of pulls you in. But I wasn't here before so I cant really say and I trust what others say about it being better now. I think at the very least the "Political Section" should be hidden from view as a default.

Be willing to spend 100 hours analyzing 50 different companies and at the end of those 100 hours be willing to walk away without taking a position. I see a lot of people who feel obligated to open a position simply because they put in the leg work. In other words, don't let time spent doing DD emotionally affect your decisions.

$HCLP $SLCA After 2015 fracking ground to a pretty sudden halt in the Marcellus and Utica shales. This was primarily due to prices, storage capacity, and logistics. Oil prices are projected to rebound and increased regulation is helping natural gas begin to shift back into the limelight. This time around the target is the Permian shale basin. And this time around the big boys Exxon and Chevron are getting heavily involved. Northern White Frac sand is still the gold standard. HCLP and SLCA are well positioned for the influx of drilling ahead. The key to this game is logistics. Being able to get the sand where it needs to be when it needs to be there at a reasonable price. Both companies have pros and cons. HCLP has done a good job in my opinion developing their silo system (and has signed some big contracts). This is a unique advantage over competition. Personally I don't love the financials of these companies. HCLP just recently converted to a C-corp which hopefully helps them get better rates on capital (which I'd rather they not borrow and use FCF). But as well all know these a boom and bust industries. I like the management at HCLP and they have been very strategic and direct about their projects. A few articles i found interesting. First one is a few years old but very informative. https://www.aogr.com/magazine/frac-facts/permian-driving-frac-sand-supply-shift https://seekingalpha.com/article/4250935-hi-crush-partners-hitting-paydirt http://www.petroleumconnection.com/digest

I've thought about that. I mean, what the hell right? The worst they can say is no. Which is the most likely situation.

Well "you" basically can't. Bonds are a very cloudy market and the brokers like it that way. Really the easiest way would be to get access to a Bloomberg terminal. Doesn't that info have to exist as public information somewhere? Just spit balling here.....not super familiar with corporate bonds, but it seems "transparency" would be required by the SEC? Maybe someone else can speak to the legality side of this?

I think the Finra trade data comes from actual trades reported by brokers and dealers so I think it is highly accurate. There is a also a screener with it which is decent. Not sure about pulling raw data but I think the site is meant for small users as they don't want people pulling 20 pages of data all at once. Inefficient if you ask me. How does one go about getting info from brokers and dealers?

I've used Finra but I've heard that it isn't always accurate on the prices. Also I'm looking form something that I can pull the raw data from and use as I please. Where does finra get their information?

I've been doing a little "educational research" into corporate bonds but I'm having a hard time finding any relevant data. Is there a reason most of this info is locked behind institutions compared to stocks? Is there some way to get access to it via license etc. other than a Bloomberg terminal?

We already have that in place. If I get even one complaint of politics entering into a non-politic board/thread, I investigate. If it is something blatant, then it is removed (not moved). If it is something that is mentioned in passing, then I leave it. So the more complaints I get about a post, the more likely it will be removed. Politics should stay in the Politics section, and those that don't want to waste time with politics, always have the option (which is very easy to do and works extremely effectively) to ignore the Politics board altogether. If we don't have the "Politics" board, then I will be constantly getting complaints about politics in the Investment sections. The manpower needed to monitor that on a free site would no longer make the site free. Cheers! Thanks for the insight!

I appreciate the feedback. Does anyone think a moderation tool would be useful? Example: I alter the discussion of a thread by bringing up politics. Someone reports my comment which sends it for a vote to be removed for politics. If say 5 other members vote yes then the comment is removed from the thread. Or is that just too much work? I know there are some threads that have been going for a long time and it can be frustrating to see them hijacked by politics. Or is self accountability just a better option. I'm happy with whatever. I just noticed a "pushback" recently regarding politics.

I get that, but do you feel it takes away from content? As in people are only coming here for political discussion instead of discussing investing? Just ignoring it doesn't necessarily fix the issue. I get your point though, I can see how it prevents spill over.

As a new member of this site I was pretty excited to have a place to come to talk about value investing. There aren't many places on the web with a good gathering of people who put effort into their posts like they do here. However, I'm sure we can all agree that the "political" posts have been far outnumbering "investing posts" or simply garnering more attention. I'm not sure how long most of you have been members but I can tell its beginning to bring "divisiveness and division" to members here. As someone else pointed out it's beginning to spill over into other threads as well. Now, I am just as guilty as most and can't pass on the temptation to take a jab etc. But I think to keep that sanctity of this forum and have one place untainted by politics we should remove the political section and just refrain from posting political posts. Forums really aren't conducive for political discussion anyways. Not sure what type of moderating there is on here but I would be more than happy to help with this. Or if you think there is someone better because I'm new that's understandable. Undoubtedly there are some posts which will involve politics and investing. Fed Rate hikes, taxes, etc. Those are unavoidable and should be discussed as they are important. But we should do our best to stay on topic and discuss the situation instead of the political opinions behind the situation. So again, I apologize for my conduct and involvement in the overbearing political posts. Regards, Castanza

And you'd almost certainly have more (due to efficiency) is govt stayed out of all those things minus rule of law. Private schools outperform. Private infrastructure works just fine. There are hundreds of examples. me Too bad my parents couldn't afford private school for me. Private school would be much cheaper if the monopoly, i mean govt would remove itself from the public education system and allow the free market to work. Let teacher compete for a salary. It's funny when you get rid of monopolies prices generally go down....You really think if all schools were private that they would hold the entire population hostage with high prices an nowhere to go? When exactly did college begin to get expensive? When did healthcare begin to get expensive?

And you'd almost certainly have more (due to efficiency) is govt stayed out of all those things minus rule of law. Private schools outperform. Private infrastructure works just fine. There are hundreds of examples. me

"I would have almost 2k more a month to invest if I didn't have to pay income tax, SS, and medicare. 24k a year, 480k over 20 years. which would be worth almost double that if invested in SPY (backtest from 1990-2010)." me

No interest in investing in the field. I just like the tech and am looking forward to the EV transition. Just seems like an industry filled with snake oil. I can't make heads or tails about it and that's enough to keep me away.