scorpioncapital

"+1. With foreign stocks, your biggest asset is that you don't live there; hence, you can temporarily see what locals cannot." I take the opposite view. It is the biggest disadvantage. I assume the locals know much better than the foreigners their culture and weakness or strengths. Buffett has always said he stays away from foreign countries because he does not know the system and is not comfortable taking such risks. Keep in mind that besides the USA, most countries have not had capital markets that have succeeded to such a degree, or have been reset - from scratch! every few decades due to communism or hyperinflation, among other types of capital controls. It's a real risk.

"Beaudry said stalling globalization, rising wages, and increasing investment opportunities in artificial intelligence as well as the transition to a low-carbon economy were contributing to the increase." Of course no politician will ever add the key element to the list - the stupidity of the country itself!

Best article i read on this https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.barrons.com/amp/articles/us-china-trade-deglobalization-economy-russia-politics-7125abe7

How much of society and law is human nature and elements? The AI maybe can be an assistant to find the best path but it offers no guarantee.

I think you can't compare all moats in a lump sum way. There are very broad moats and very niche moats. The main different as I see it is the expansion potential (the TAM, the growth potential), and the cyclicality risks.

I like the article. Most countries have free education, or near free. Also, let's ask how many of these ultra-rich would make these donations without a tax deduction at all. Why should there be any deduction at all to induce ultra rich to make donations? Try an experiment - have 0% deduction and see if donations plummet.

i keep 95% of my money in MM and broker. Does anyone still use banks except for immediate bill payments?

Yet Swiss has one of the most inflation protected currency on Earth? Can you imagine the uproar when less than Swiss low inflation currency games occurs? Or is it a question of just taking a long time for the currency debasement to occur? The crypto-coins have made people very rich. Ethereum from 10-20 to 1800. It makes you wonder if the bubble is not even started to pop or if regular stocks could really boom in such an environment. They both do something useful, make money and are trading far less than these crypto coins!

I almost went bankrupt once investing concentrated in a black box. I vowed to myself I will never ever invest in a black box. The company has to do 1 thing I can keep my eye on. And if it is a conglomerate it better have a leader I can really keep my eye on it, and even then their strategy should not be too complex. This is why I now find investing in banks, investment managers, insurance cos (except maybe Berkshire) is not for me. Too much black box.

buy & hold requires a very strict criteria combined with a very good insight into what businesses do well and which flounder. The reason isn't always clear. I watch some very expensive stocks and see them do well. Even longer term. Figure out why. Also keep in mind that markets tend to revert in cycles so that the market timer may get in and out but even one big mistake on timing can make it perform no better than buying and holding through the drawdowns.

I use Quicken, old but good.

do you consider tips in the same category as they can only 'rob' the portion above what they lie about on CPI? )

Or just own BRK - 1 stock as it contains all of the elements mentioned inside it, in a balanced way Regarding that axis chart, seems oil and maybe short term tips fits all 3 quadrants except bottom left, and that seems politically impossible in any country seeking an inflation rate at 2%..even Japan tries to prevent deflationary bust.

i'm down more than those with a positive return but I console myself that my upside is a coiled spring

if he will replay the genre playbook maybe buy AIG and increase cash/bond holdings? He did buy Y but that is small fish.

This does not make sense to me. In 1980, the 30 year rate was 20%. Was the bond market right in assuming 20% rate for 30 years? No it was wrong. It was in fact 0% 30 years later. Therefore I do not think this fashionable idea that bond market predicts things has any validity.

if rates go down or stop rising will that weaken the CAD? After all the Yen did weaken massively this year..but it stayed elevated for like 30 years before that.

this article shows that saas stocks are valued somewhat differently than traditional stocks. and there are many of them today. Not just human capital r&d but also the accounting for subscriptions - https://a16z.com/2014/05/13/understanding-saas-why-the-pundits-have-it-wrong/

Is growth rate dependent on human or physical capital for all companies? cost of capital only usually applies to physical capital. related to this, growth rate may not be held back hence the elevated pricing (although has come down still somewhat). perhaps the future will be a mix. Say 40 years ago, growth rate is 90% correlated with cost of capital and today maybe it is 50-50, leading to perpetually higher multiiples even if they compress 50%? Btw, high cost of capital businesses have always traded at lower valuation. Even today oil stocks are sub 10x p/e.

I don't quite understand how over 5 year and max period on Google chart (2014) , LBRDA underperformed its underlying asset CHTR by so much. Is that even possible?

where does money come from? if everyone buys the same stocks, are we all supposed to get rich together *in proportion* to how much savings we can afford to put in the market versus consume for day to day life? Doesn't this imply that the CBs of the world have to sort of make life difficult and not allow too much savings to form by restricting money and credit with higher rates and recessions? Or are we supposed to believe we can all be equally rich by investing in stocks vs work? Why does one person get richer than another? IPO pre-shares? more shares owned somehow? seems early birds will tend to get more capital formation by nature of the system. Then there is the limited number of companies to own at all relative to the sea of all potentially investable alternative and private assets. I wonder if getting wealthy only in public markets is so common.

how many people did americans, canadians , australians , spanish murder taking over those lands? and we dare to speak of Russia taking over Ukraine?

buying lentils

I'm reading this - https://www.cohencpa.com/knowledge-center/insights/november-2020/do-you-fully-understand-the-impact-of-foreign-currency-on-your-financial-statements and it says comprehensive income statement includes the effect of foreign exchange. Today the USD is strong so many companies with foreign income actually made no money in USD!! It's amazing the stocks don't tank. Yet I wonder if these will reverse or not. What if the USD stays strong forever? At what point do you take the loss? When you convert the currency back to usd? But even if you never convert it, its buying power will always be less so all earning statements should only be then relied about using the comprehensive income. In some cases zero for several years if USD stays strong and unhedged. Also this statement, "That amount will be presented on the consolidated cash flow statement as “effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents.” There is a tendency to have this amount equal the current year translation amount presented in accumulated comprehensive income — but this would be incorrect! If these two amounts agree, the cash flow statement is not right." Does anyone understand what this means? Why the two should not match? Is it because the cash-flow statement also includes foreign cash in the bank?

is this a case of if you build it they will come, or if they come we will build it? )