scorpioncapital

is anyone worried about a nuclear war, followed by deflation, a rush to certain continents vs others, panic, and some companies doing well that sell radiation monitors, or even Amazon delivering essential goods via robots?

anyone locking in 2-5 years for higher yield in case short-term yields reverse in next 2 years? Or is the risk they go even higher?

Is operating margin also propping up fcf ratios? op margins are an indirect proxy for 'moat quality'. I've observed slow fcf growers with high margins and good moat tend to have higher p/e ratios but they will also compress, but perhaps less?

https://recision.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/jens-parsson-dying-of-money-24.pdf Fascinating book. I would have never thought as a hardcore capitalist about the risks of and to democracy and change my view to actually desire higher capital and inheritance/wealth taxes. This guy was very persuasive. I started to see that while the world has many types of systems what protects gains in capitalism is some types of a fair, just and altruistic society, even if it is painful to the individual hyper-capitalist. The only criticism I have is that humans are not perfect and repeat errors and this works only for advanced developed economies that do not regress back to developing status. He also seems to acknowledge the errors and failures that led to inflationary disasters. He seems to balance theory and reality of human nature and is a pragmatist. Still, unless people get along and don't get ultra polarized, you will tend to get sub-optimal economics in any state or society.

I'm glad you mentioned Bruce Greenwald. I've watched his youtube interviews and he is quite astute. I remember him saying over and over - that advantages get competed away. He said this happened in agricultural stocks and now is happening in manufacturing stocks (the 'hard asset' stuff). He gives a warning that in the years and decades ahead it can happen to software stocks too but he still thinks this is a fruitful place to be so far. Another guy I like is Viktor Shvets at Macquire who believes the same thing from the angle of the marginal cost of capital approaching zero with technological advancement. I am not sure if or when we get to some pure communist phase but he says the banks are toast if there will be no cost to capital and a cbdc. I also like The Death of Money, a fascinating book I am sure Gates and Buffett have read as it talks of farmland as an inflation hedge and seems to mesh with Buffett's ideas on inflation. He even predicted UBI in 1973 but like Gates has said that we are not yet there, lots of work still to be done. The cost of capital being zero is probably premature but abundance or commoditization in some industries may make investing challenging.

just cut out the word 'value' and the key is to avoid traps , in all investing. The traps that I find most challenging are the slowly deflating kind. They waste your time and just show up as 'sub-benchmark' return over time...How to spot them? it's an art and a science. Don't forget the art part. That comes from synthesizing 1. past experiences 2. past patterns where you saw this before 3. thinking outside the box and 4. reverse engineering this and other situations. I can't say there is an algorithm but generally watch out for egregious management actions, the nature of a business (recently hard asset stocks tend to have done worse than asset-light or software/tech stocks, but this trend could continue indefinitely), and perhaps even sometimes just bad luck. You sometimes need scuttlebutt to know if a company is doing worse than another and why.

"+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.