Dinar
-
Posts
1,829 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Dinar
-
-
7 minutes ago, Jaygo said:
Revamping my RRSP with some real dogs this morning. I may be on a reach for yield but its a fun experiment so we shall see. I have effectively sold half of my position in VOO / SCHD to scrape a few off the sidewalk and put them in my new portfolio of dogs, the kennel.
All have plumbed new lows lately and have bad stories attached. I plan to give this 24-36 months to develop and I will compare to the original holding. 50/50 VOO and SCHD
Roughly equal 7500 increments of the following
MMM Killing the planet one non-stick pan at a time.
DG Rats, robberies and fire safety violations
C Shitibank all banks are 0's anyway
MO Kills its customers and nobody smokes anymore
BTI Same problems as MO but even worse as they are British with a French CEO, yikes! already own a bunch but added here.
HD Nobody will ever reno again with rates this high, hovels are the new Mcmansion
AAP the ugly stepchild in an otherwise incredible oligopoly
DIS See the Disney thread, nothing more to add.
I am also considering CCI ,SWK, MHK, BUD and some others but this is where i'm starting off. I'm not sure about US reits in a Canadian registered and im already pretty heavy in reno/ home markets with GGG and SD. I would also love to get some Food in there but until someone finds a finger in their cup of coffee at starbucks ill wait and hope for the worst.
They were all one time market darlings but have pissed off the market gods. Maybe one day they will shine again and Ill clip some coupons while I wait or they all go out like old Yeller and I retire a year later.
Having fun with this one and at less than 10% of my portfolio i'm ok with some roller coasters. I really think all will prevail long term. If anyone has another pooch to send to the kennel i'm all ears.
Two quick comments:
a) BTI is better than MO since it is both cheaper (adjusting MO for the stake in BUD and BTI for the stake in ITC) and has slower volume decline thanks to its non-US business
b) BUD just had an investor day, and seems quite cheap to me, although I do not own it. Company is essentially promising both organic volume growth and margin expansion, neither of which is priced in as far as I can see.
-
27 minutes ago, Luca said:
Added to Evolution AB
Why? What do you think of Entain news today? (Somewhat different business, but still) Thank you.
-
32 minutes ago, no_free_lunch said:
There is a jewish leader in the country and a Muslim defense chief.
The other meme going is that Ukraine is run by Satanists. I am not kidding. So it's run by Jewish Nazi Satanists according to these theories.
Really this is all an obvious attempt to derail the conversation. These theories are made by fools and for a level of iq below anyone on this board.
Let's talk about the tens or hundreds of thousands killed this year and last. This ongoing casualty count. If all you got is some made up history I got nothing much else to say to you other than I know what you really are doing. It's not to get to the bottom of current events.
Made up history? So Shushkevich and Bandera and their men did not kill hundreds of thousands of Poles and Jews? Their statues are not all over Ukraine?
-
8 hours ago, John Hjorth said:
This topic has to me personally recently derailed totally into a trainwreck.
All this Nazi talk makes no sense to me. Would any of you posting in this topic blame a 1. or 2. order decendant of Adolf Hitler for Hitlers doings under WW2? -Or for that sake blaim it on any living person of German origin today? Come on - it makes no sense, and you all know it. In Europe, there are likely Nazis in every European country, even here in Denmark.
Also, in an other dimension the whole discussion going on in this topic is or has become one-dimensional [,as in "Europe is Europe"]. I'm here talking about the separation of, and distinction of :
1. Europe [Russia west the Ural mountains is actually generally accepted as a part of Europe],
2. EU member [, or not] &
3. NATO member [, or not].
German government does NOT glorify Nazis, you do not see statues of Nazis in Germany. Ukrainian government does. That's a key difference for me.
-
32 minutes ago, no_free_lunch said:
Go search the thread and you will find what you are after but really I'm in no mood to placate. I think this is a trumped up argument to distract from the murder and war brought on by RF this past year. There are tens of thousands of dead civilians, more every day but sure the real news is some Ukrainian joined the nazis 80 years ago.
If we want to look that far you will also see a pact with the soviets and nazi. Where Poland was divided. Thousands of poles killed. That was all under Stalin in league with the nazis yes.
The Ukrainians that joined SS in World War II and murdered hundreds of thousands of Jews and Poles are considered national heroes. That's not some Ukrainian, they are national heroes. You worship genocidal maniacs? That's your right, but do not expect the rest of the world to help a country that believes genocide is a good thing.
-
3 hours ago, no_free_lunch said:
Where were your guys criticism when Russia murdered tens of thousands of Ukrainian civilians in Ukraine. This link is just a one off and frankly Russia's wagner group has it's own nazi links.
If Russia were winning why would they reach for links to North Korea of all places? What does this say about Russia?
Go read the thread and you will find it. I have never been a fan of Putin nor do I think that the Russian invasion was justified.
You however seem incapable of admitting that Shushkevich and Bandera were mass murderers, and committed genocide. A nation that glorifies people who commit genocide, calls them national heroes and puts up their statues cannot expect sympathy from civilized people. Its people yes, its government no!
-
2 hours ago, mcliu said:
Zelenskyy came to Canadian Parliament recently. They gave a standing ovation to an Ukrainian veteran that fought against the Soviet Union in WW2. Turns out that he fought as part of a SS unit.
The man was identified as Hunka by the Associated Press, which published a photograph showing Zelenskyy smiling and raising a fist during the ovation.
The AP caption described Hunka as having “fought with the First Ukrainian Division in World War II before later immigrating to Canada.” The First Ukrainian Division is another name for the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS, the military wing of the Nazi Party; the unit was also called SS Galichina.
This is the same unit that is honored by controversial monuments in Canada, Australia, and, as the Forward recently exposed, the suburbs of Philadelphia and Detroit. Jewish groups have called for their removal.
Formed in 1943, SS Galichina was composed of recruits from the Galicia region in western Ukraine. The unit was armed and trained by the Nazis and commanded by German officers. In 1944, the division was visited by SS head Heinrich Himmler, who spoke of the soldiers’ willingness to slaughter Poles.”
Three months earlier, SS Galichina subunits perpetrated what is known as the Huta Pieniacka massacre, burning 500 to 1,000 Polish villagers alive.
Funny, Zelensky was applauding a man who would burn alive his grandparents if he had the chance. In other news....
-
59 minutes ago, sleepydragon said:
If Biden had done nothing , I think China probably would have already started a war with Taiwan now.
Oh, I am not saying that Biden should have done nothing, I am saying that as an American citizen, I wish Biden was as concerned with our borders as he is with Ukrainian borders.
-
What is so great about Mary Barra or the clowns running Ford, or United Airlines, or most large US companies? L'Oreal has been crushing Estee Lauder while paying a fraction to top management, similarly Safran vs RTX, and the list goes on. What is so great about Sundar Pinchai at Google? Does Satya Nadella really deserve $200MM per annum or would he work less hard for $100MM per annum?
-
I find it interesting that Democrats and Biden, are willing to work so hard to defend Ukrainian borders, but not willing to lift a finger to defend American borders from millions of invaders.
-
3 minutes ago, Santayana said:
You are assuming that the bond investor took that interest payment every 6 months and just buried it in their backyard rather than reinvesting.
What makes you say that? I am not assuming that.
-
2 hours ago, thepupil said:
I think @TwoCitiesCapital was talking about constant maturity long durations, which would have done very well over the time frame. I have tried to find a benchmark/performance for this in the past with no success. I think this would be competitive (not sure more) with equities for much of the past few decades.
If he's talking about bond index vs stock index, obviously stock index done much better than bonds. no idea why he'd say bonds done better.
I think what would be real competitive with equities is a 30 year zero coupon Treasury issued in 1981/1982, without checking, I'd bet it crushed S&P over its 30 year life. Also, TIPS issued/trading at 4% real in late 1990s.
-
51 minutes ago, Santayana said:
I don't think there is an onus on anyone on this board to prove their assertions to anyone else. If you're convinced an argument is wrong and want to disregard it, that is on you. I think the point he was trying to make is that a savvy bond investor would have outperformed equities over that time especially given the huge advantages the bond investor had in the first half of that time period. Will we ever see a time like that again? I don't think so, but that's what makes a market.
In the first half of that period (09/20/1973-09/20/1998) S&P 500 returned 13.7% per annum. Given that 10 year started at under 7% in that time period and 30 Year when it appeared a couple of years later was under 9%, hard to see how a 10 or 30 year would have outperformed.
So how would have a savvy bond investor returned more than 13.7% per annum from 09/20/1973 to 09/20/1998, unless it was in distressed debt, but non-investment grade debt was never mentioned?
-
16 minutes ago, Santayana said:
A much better comparison would be stocks with dividends reinvested and bonds with the semi-annual interest reinvested.
You are correct, but the onus is on the person who made the claim to provide proof.
-
37 minutes ago, Santayana said:
Are you sure you looked at the performance of the 30 year over that entire time?
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/ERP-2011/pdf/ERP-2011-table73.pdf
As you can see, had you invested on 12/31/1972 and reinvested on 12/31/2002 (mind you 30 year did not exist till 77), you would not have even been close to double digits over the 50 year frame. Meanwhile, the opposite claim was made - that bonds outperformed stocks over the past 50 years, and when asked for proof, the answer was go f..ck yourself. That of course is the response of someone who is clearly assured of his facts, never makes mistakes and all around a gentleman and a scholar....
Mind you, the proper comparison is from September 20th 1973 to September 20th 2023 would be even more in favor of stocks.
-
1 hour ago, Cod Liver Oil said:
Cowen thinks DOD spending on major weapons programs will more than double between now and 2027.
That is a pretty good tailwind for an oligopolistic industry. Which contractors are most levered to that spend?
I bought some LHX but Lockheed, RTX or TDG may benefit more.
RTX will probably be driven more by the engine issues.
-
1 hour ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:
No, you a showed 'a bond' that had a monster drawdown. Or rather, a small handful of bonds, that had a monster drawdown.
No broad based index of bondS, emphasis on the plural, looks anything like that and it's disingenuous use a small sub-index known for it's wild swings to represent a whole asset class that behaved nothing like those bonds do. Just like I'm not using an index of loss-making tech companies as my benchmark for equity returns...
And, no, i don't really care to provide proof. The data is out there. But just like all of my other claims about bonds outperforming equities over long time periods, it'd likely be summarily dismissed so why should I go through the effort of doing the leg work for you?
You don't really care to provide proof because you cannot. Bonds did not return 10.31% per annum from 12/31/1972 to 12/31/2022 like stocks did, and you know it. So when you asserted that bonds have beaten stocks over the last 50 years, you were not accurate. If we use 09/20/1973 to 09/20/2023, the comparison is even worse for you.
I was a convertible bond and a distressed debt investor for a for a decade, I am happy to buy the right bonds at the right price. But to assert that bonds do not have the drawdowns that stocks have and that bonds have beaten stocks over the past fifty years is not accurate.
-
@TwoCitiesCapitalYou claimed that bonds are much less riskier than stocks, and that bonds do not have the drawdowns that stocks have. I showed you that bonds can have monster drawdowns.
You claim that bonds crushed stocks from 1973 to 2023. Care to provide proof? S&P 500 did 10.31% per annum from 12/31/1972 to 12/31/2022. How did the 30 year, 10 year, 5 year or 1 year do over that 50 year period?
-
11 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:
How about speed on your connection? How is your experience of that? -Thank you in advance.
It was very fast, as fast as regular broadband in the US
-
@John Hjorth, Ukraine is NOT part of NATO, so what is your point?
-
1 hour ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:
I just don't buy that equities aren't riskier. Meta was down 80+% in 2022 exceeding even Bitcoin's peak-to-trough. Disney is trading for prices now that it first traded for 9-years ago. Peloton and Rivian are both down 90+% from their peaks and may never recover. Regional banks that were considered sound one week were insolvent and the equity worthless the next.
These are just a handful of observations at a time when equities are generally rich - not a "market panic" type valuations.
Bonds don't have this sort of thing happen. 2022 was a bad year for bonds - the worst on record. And yet its still better than most general equity drawdowns. And unlike equities, there places you can be guaranteed to "hide-out" in bonds regardless of what other bonds are doing.
You're not gonna lose much in 1-year treasuries even if rates go from 0-12% over that 1-year. 2008 demonstrated equity correlations go to 1 in a crisis and nearly EVERY equity was sold down dramatically regardless of their business conditions. Look at Google going from $700+/sh down to $250/sh (unadjusted for splits since) despite growing revenues and profits every quarter of that time period.
Equities are way riskier than bonds for anyone that doesn't have a 20-30 year time horizon and way riskier in any given year once considering the likely impact of human emotion and response to even paper losses.
You are kidding, right? 30 year treasury issued in 2020-2021 is trading at less than 50 cents on the dollar.
-
John, after my experience in Maui, I told my wife that when we buy a place there, we are definitely getting it. I used it for two weeks, excellent quality.
-
1 hour ago, no_free_lunch said:
I never said as a sovereign. Always under different yokes. Poland and Russia in particular. However, they were always independent culturally and this is what led to the creation of the country, like so many others, post Soviet breakup.
The US will support Ukraine, I believe, not because man on the street wants it to too but because the politicians know there is no real choice. It really comes down to fighting your enemy for a fraction of the cost. The US knows Russia is their enemy, Russia constantly reminds us of this when they threaten nuclear holocaust. So to counteract them for $25B, is really nothing. It's about 3% of the US defense budget. Contain Russia so the US is free to fight China, if needed, that is I think the US thought process.
Politicians have to respond to voters. There is a choice, not to support Ukraine, and let the Europeans pay for it. Russia is NOT our enemy, and has never been one. We fought two wars against Germany, two against England, one against Japan, and not one against Russia.
In any case, it is irrelevant what you and I think. What matters is what man on the street in US wants, and he wants nothing to do with Ukraine. Let the Germans & the French and the Lithuanians/Latvians/Estonians/Danes/Czechs and company for this is. This is their problem, not ours.
-
1 hour ago, no_free_lunch said:
Oh well, actually it has existed for centuries and in fact, it's now a sovereign country. If Russia wants it in it's sphere better ways to do it than at gun point but I know that's how Russia rolls.
Here they even made a wikipedia page to help clear things up for you.
When has Ukraine existed for centuries? Your own link shows that it was not an independent country before 1991. In any case, you can argue whatever you want, but the point is there is no support on the American street for helping Ukraine.
High Quality Multi-family REITs - EQR, CPT, ESS, AVB
in General Discussion
Posted
@thepupil, why would you own ELME rather than SUI? Thank you.