SharperDingaan

Not to argue that merits of technical analysis, but you might want look at a BTC chart. Alternatively, build your own if you also want RSI and moving averages. SD Technical analysis on a value investing board? Mayorly undervalued is mayorly undervalued. Just mindful that the current price is below the last trough low (Feb-05) of USD 6,914. For those who belive in the voodoo science, this supposedly means that at the curent price of USD 6,611 it could drop quick a bit until it 'finds' a new level. And given that there really isn't any agreed fundamental value approach applicable to Bitcoin - tossing bones may well be as good as it gets! No opinion as to whether it is under or overvalued. ;D SD

Not to argue that merits of technical analysis, but you might want look at a BTC chart. Alternatively, build your own if you also want RSI and moving averages. SD

Strengthens the Yuan/USD FX rate by reducing Asian demand for USD, & significant as quite a few other 'Asian' nations may prefer to pay with Yuan as well. It also strengthens the broader case for payment in regional currencies (Euro), and ultimately the development of a boad cryptocurrency specifically for trade settlement in the global oil market. Yes everybody laughed because the use of cryptocurrency was a SA idea, but the fact is that it's a very good one. If you're tired of US bullying, develop the cryptocurrency outside of the US (China ?) & use it to start reducing the global demand for USD (& its influence over you). SD

The best person I ever played was a very old babushka who escaped the former East Germany just as the wall was going up. As a female in the east block - she wasn't 'allowed' to do many things, & her grandfather/father (mathematicians/engineers) had trained her 'on the side' in chess and the sciences. It was like playing several people at once, from the super aggressive to the typically defensive, & all of them very good. Got my but kicked until I worked it out, but thereafter it was a 50/50 split. Needless to say we got along famously and I learned a thing or two. She was also the only person I've ever come accross who could play just as well hammered out of her skull, as she could sober! Life experience. SD

Interesting thing we found was that this is very cultural; folks from the former 'east block' and the various 'asia's' all play the game very differently. The hardest part was always trying to find someone who played the same way you do - but better than you. There's never a Gretzky around when you want one! SD

It's useful to remind yourself that you're really teaching kids to think for themselves. Investment is just one of the many tools by which to do it. All our family learn't to play chess first before they learnt investing, and continue to play to this day - even at 80. You have to walk the talk. Investment isn't just buying/selling assets, it's also continually DEMONSTRATING re-investment in yourself to replace obsolescence. The message you're trying to 'sell' is that wealth is not the size of your bank account; it's ability to do what you want, when you want - without having to rely on someone else. Talk business, tell stories, and don't shield kids from the experieces of life. Bit more interesting though when one end of the family bar-bell is more 'open minded', and the other is 'by the book'. When our nephews were 17 & 20, 'grandma' arranged for them to visit a friend of hers in Paris - a retired madam in her 70's, and her daughters. While both nephews can speak french, the eldest was horrified; wheras the youngest was clearly impressed - and tried to convince me that this was a business we should be in! SD

Most people are 'sociopaths' at least some of the time, but it's not their 'normal' state. Most recognize that the only 'healthy' way to lay off a large portion of your workforce, is to be somewhat sociopathic about it. Sociopaths also don't have to be both amoral, and have zero empathy. A great many people are extremely good at evading 'authority' simply because they disagree with the 'authority' (anarchists); yet give generously at fund raising events. Yes it's a business 'expense', but the fact is - they didn't have to contribute. The above range from tax practioners through to drug/arms merchants, the intelligence community, despots, hackers and sanction breakers; the vast majority of which are state sponsored. Obviously if you get to meet one of these people - it's an interesting conversation. SD

Value proposition. You could continue doing what you're doing now, or be a HF partner. For this change of status what's your net benefit (short/medium/long term)?, your net cost (time + $)?, & are you getting paid enough for the additional risk? If you're the 'silent partner' with no say, you want the MAJORITY of annual net income paid to you - it's your money, & nobody makes anything unless you put it up. $ invested. Is this a small amount of your total wealth, or a concentrated bet with most of it? Ideally it should be large enough to keep you focused, but not enough to kill you - if it fails. Consider paying for market research on the success of HF's, and treat the cost as due diligence. SD

I agree with you from the perspective of Ethereum being a utility for smart contract execution (i.e. a cheap agile UAT interface as you describe it). I have no conviction on Ethereum. Think it's possible the platform itself plays out in a bullish way with the coin itself being worth next to nothing (marginal utility cost for smart contract execution as described in the whitepaper wachtwoord posted a while back). But can you answer this question from the perspective of a cryptocurrency being valuable as a judgment and censorship resistant store of value? The value proposition is quite literally tied to the fact that it is completely removed from government decision making. Surely this is a strong counterargument against governemnt issued cryptocurrencies? I'm actually confused that the store of value thesis doesn't click with more people. Peter Thiel basically articulates the bull thesis as we have at 36min. Just seems incredibly +expected value right now. If you want a judgement and censor resistant store of value, your clear choice is Bitcoin. It was designed for zero trust environments, and is the only cryptocoin with a futures/options market - thus allowing the holder to control price risk; and therefore very valuable. Problem is that you're rubbing shoulders with the criminal element, 'cause the same things you want are as equally valuable to them. Ulltimately 'value' is determined by the users purpose for holding Bitcoin. 'Money/inflation/store of value' has always been difficult for people to get their heads around. The 'collective' also behaves very differently from individuals, and adapts to change much more slowly. The thesis doesn't click because it doesn't have sufficient critical mass yet (Gladwell's tipping point). In value investment we typically refer to it as being 'too early', and it means just that. The thesis itself may well be bang on, and perfectly sound. SD

The NAFTA 're-negotiation' is actually a very good thing; as the fundamental changes that it will bring - could not occurr unless they were forced by a big player. Provincial trade barriers, and provincial 'fiefdoms', are not sustainable - when you're being picked off and pounded on by a 800lb gorilla. Severely restrict BC's US softwood lumber exports, and you do all of Canada an enormous favour. Nothing forces change more effectively than a sustained spike in short-term unemployment. Politicians get replaced for bringng it on, and their replacements tossed if they cannot rapidly increase employment. ie: move as many goods as possible through BC ports, and increase trade as much as possible with Asia and South America. Todays BC politician is 'best served' by status-quo; NOT change. The US is also not immune; Alaska is far away, and Putin seems determined to return the world to 'cold war'. Arctic ocean ports and rail links would be highly beneficial to both Canada/US, and the trade would be in o/g and minerals as global warming opens up the North. Global shipping can already cross the NA landmass via the NSR passage; raise the value of the goods in transit - and everybody has strong icentive to play 'nice'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_Passage In August 2012, Russian media reported that 85% of vessels transiting the Northern Sea Route in 2011 were carrying gas or oil, and 80% were high-capacity tankers Since the early 2000s, the thickness and area extent of the Arctic sea ice has experienced significant reduction, compared to the recorded averages. This has led to an increase in transit shipping. In 2011, four ships sailed the entire length of the NEP, 46 in 2012, and 19 in 2013. The number of trips is still very small compared to the thousands of ships each year through the Suez Canal. Mainstream container shipping is expected to continue to overwhelmingly use the Suez route, while niche activities like bulk shipping is expected to grow, driven by the mining industries of the Arctic. SD

Couple of points around REITs Timeframes and interest rates. High quality office buildings, industrial, etc. generally have much longer and more reliable periods of CF generation. We know from duration (bond math) that the longer the period of CF generation, the more impact a change in interest rate has. Malls. Most malls are struggling; highest/best use of the land is to knock them down, & replace with office/apartments/condos. But execution means near term writedown/demolitiion/construction costs, and new supply making it more difficult to raise market rents in the office/apartments/condo markets. The capital will come from banks, but the debt-service until the new asset starts generating - comes from existing near/medium term FCF. Less FCF to PV = lower valuation. Technology. More folks working from home, and the expected advent of blockchain technology, will materially reduce the amount of office space needed to house employees. In the near/medium term it will primarily affect financial services, and the demand for office space in those locations where financial services are concentrated - much of which is preferred REIT investment. A large FI could fairly easily reduce its existing space requirements by 1/3 to 1/2; and FI''s would also have incentive to rapidly follow each other, to force rents on the remaining space as low as possible. Higher vacancy rates = less FCF = lower valuation. Alternatives. For a long time, with the very limited national investment in infrastructure; RE has been the next best alternative. Today, infrastructure opportunities are both competitive and more widely available, diverting some of the capital flow away from the RE sector. Less demand for a REIT unit = a lower price for it. Cap rates. Ultimately the uncertainty/disruption produces a cap rate premium over the market rate, and REIT's end up looking like 'bargains' (relative to comparable bonds) for John and Jane fixed income investor. But not until the current price of REITs drop quite a bit from where they are today. SD

Key word here is legitimate. If your value proposition is 'real', Googles banning may cause some short-term disruption but truly is a non-event. Google will also have the benefit of Facebooks experience, and will be able to more precisely target the ban. Overall most would expect an aggregate drop in total demand, lowering the prices of all altcoin and token. Bitcoin being hedgeable, likely suffering the smallest decline. Not a bad thing. SD

The reality is that 'no-go' zones are much like boils. Intially the toxicity concentrates in one place & is just uncomfortable; but if you don't deal with it - it grows, and ultimately can kill you. And it's not the people - the most honest starving person in the world will steal to feed their children when there's no other choice; they have nothing to lose. SD

Etheriums network creates users for Ether; the bigger the network, the more demand for Ether. A company uses the Etherium network because it wants to use its tools to build and test out its own smart-contract blockchain applications. Once the concept has been proved with a working application, they decide their next steps. Hence Etherium is essentially an agile project management facility that allows participants to test - without having to first risk a fortune on an uncertain IT setup. A very attractive value proposition. A CBDC is just a 'digital dollar' - a CB creates/runs it; but anyone can use it, the same as anyone can use a 'paper' dollar. Most altcoin is created to pay for transactions within a specified group of users; 'cause by accepting 'this' altcoin, we can sell a ton of it today and use the proceeds to collectively develop the business (essentially seignorage). But if I can pay with a CBDC the recipient can spend that CBDC anywhere; if I pay with Altcoin the recipient can only use it within the group of users. Hence if the user groups business is fairing poorer than the economy overall (most cases), the last thing a recipient wants is this restrictive altcoin. The altcoin 'devalues' relative to CBDC, and gets their via a 'price' collapse. SD

Basically ... if I can pay for any transaction with a CBDC (e-Krona, e-$, etc.) - what do I need the altcoin for? The altcoin becomes akin to a $Z - very nominal value IF you can find someone willing to accept them, and pay with a wheelbarrow full - or 1 CBDC. Bitcoin and Etherium (post Casper) are probably exceptions, primarily because there is at least some real use for them. Ether has value because anyone using the Etherium network can use Ether to settle transactions created via the Etherium smart-contract writer. Etherium is esentially a high security cloud provider of blockchain smart-contract applications running on a distributed ledger, in a private network. As long as a users transaction volume is small, and the network keeps expanding (increasing its value to all), it's an excelent sandbox to protoype new applications on; hence there is an actual functional purpose (& demand) for Ether. The FI crypto will very likely be determined by whatever the R3 Consortium chooses to use. GS would like it to be their patented SETLCoin, others would prefer something more akin to a global CBDC. It will also very likely be a 'private' - versus 'public' currency that you or I can buy. Rather than spreading your research 'wide', you might want to focus on Etherium. Understand how Ether is issued today, the relative merits of Etherium itself, and what would change were Casper implemented. Then assess against comparable altcoin, to develop an investment thesis - it might well put you through school. Obviously do your own DD, we are not making an investment recommendation. SD

Re GS article. At this point you should know enough to recognize that cryptocurrency ISN'T blockchain - it is just ONE of many blockchain applications. Blockchain generally doesn't change output (product or service), it just changes the inputs/process (the pipes) by which to produce it; we don't benefit from new mousetrtaps - it merely costs a lot less to make those that we already have. Very different to most progress where it's always output, better than what was. All crypto is just a 'unit of account' and a payment system. Bitcoin is unique in that it also has TWO 'stores of value' - value to the criminal element, and it's value as 'digital gold'; how much it's worth - is in the eye of the buying beholder. Keep your Bitcoin only at Mt Gox, and you should be pretty safe. As CBDC (e-Krona) enters the picture, most of these will also crash to well < 1$/euro per unit - simply because they aren't backed with the far better 'full faith and credit' of a CB. 'Supply' here, also isn't what it 'means' everywhere else. The more it comes from ICO rounds (Etherium), versus entirely mining (Bitcoin), the more of it there is - and the less volatile the pricing. Once Etherrium brings in Casper, Ether will start to price very differently ;) SD

There is no central website that tabultes the number of users per cryptocurrency. Altcoin using bitcoin protocol will generally have the same 21M limit as Bitcoin. Token will generally have the ICO total outstanding, but nothing prevents further issuance as the opportunity presents. In theory a miners verification should be worth more than that of a database checking algorithm - so long as a 51% attack isn't possible; however the more obsure the altocoin the less likely this is. The better way to think of these is as 'gift cards' with no expiry date; you give me $5o I give you a prepaid card for $50 - if you dont spend all of it, I'm up the change; but it doesn't change the residual value of your card. If you subsequently just toss the card ('cause you couldn't buy anything with the change), the value is zero. SD Other people can only explain to you how it works. As for why it is valuable? It is valuable for the same reason gold, or diamonds, or baseball cards, or stock in companies, or old coins, or stamps, or antique cars, or rectangular pieces of green paper, or anything else might be valuable...because people are willing to trade other things for it. Whether or not you want to trade other things for it is a decision only you can make.

Best guess is somewhere well under $1. As it exists to facilitate settlement of the consideration portion of a smart-contract, & there is no limit as to how many are issued, its value is really based on how much the miners verification is worth to you. As the smart-contract leaves an audit trail, there's no premium for annonymity. SD

"SD, have you forgotten that Alberta is formed of independent producers? This is not an OPEC country that unilaterally decides what happen." Even independent producers need to have a coordinating industrial policy. Tying the cats in a sack, and tossing the whole thing in a fast flowing river doesn't help anybody. The hoped for industry leadership just drowns in the bag. Agreed that to an Albertan this is 'socialism'. And while 'diversity of opinion' is a good thing; industrial policy is common practice the world over, and for the most part - it works very well. There is nothing wrong with sharing a beer with Karl Marx, if he actually has something that works better than your way. You don't have to kiss him! SD

If your time frame is (< 2 yrs) Canada should probably be avoided. If it is long term (7 yrs+) and the intent is to 'roll-in' the investment over time - it's pretty hard to find something better. No matter what, NAFTA is going to force very big changes. Highly desirable, but it will be extremely disruptive in the short to intermediate term as interprovincial trade has long been extremely restrictive - and used to support provincial fiefdoms. Most would expect that once it's done, Canadian inter-provincial trade/people movement will resemble the EU - and that ultimately, it will become easier to ship goods entirely within Canada, than it is via northern US rail links. No matter what, demographics are pointing to extensive and disruptive cultural change in the near to intermediate term. We don't have enough young people, technology (blockchain, self driving vehicles, etc) will force up productivity by cutting jobs, and much of the existing workforce is going to turnover due to retirement. Skills shortages will be met by 'import' from abroad, with the 'divide' between the working and retired populations widening considerably. Nobody likes 'change', and the older you are the more resistant you are to it. The record suggest long term advantage to Canada vs the US, short/medium term advantage to the US. Lot's of folks hated Trudeau (pere) - primarily because he wouldn't play the regional 'game'. Instead the 'bastard' played for Canada; and didn't hesitate to pit provinces against each other (scorpions in a bottle), or slash throats (NEP) when it was in the national interest. If you had a problem with that - bring it on; but if you failed - you either retired 'gracefully', or fell into line and did what you were told. Looking forward, most would expect that Canada is about to enter a period of 'muscular' federalism. There will be threats to 'seperate', and there will be throats cut - no different to a meeting of mafiosi 'dons'. Not a bad thing, but probably not the place to invest when the blood starts flowing. SD

This has been going on for some time. Yet only now ..... it's suddenly 'in the news' Or is it really just a marketing campaign - decided upon by a small group of people, trying to save their ass? The reality is that Alberta is flooded with heavy crude, cannot get it out, and has new 2 new tarsands plants coming on line with huge quantities of heavy crude per day. Most places would have dried up their excess supply via a temporary shut in of these new plants, and used the current BC/Alta spat to shut-in all o/g production from BC using Alta facilities - at the BC/Alta border. Very unpopular, especially amongst those at risk of shut-in, but no different to what we expect OPEC (now expanded) to do - control supply. Material portions of WCSB heavy oil production are going to get temporaily shut-in within weeks/months, and unemployment is not avoidable. Furthermore it will stay shut in until the west coast pipelines are built/expanded, and all the obfuscation in the world is not going to hide the fact that the cause is gross mismanagement. Hence the screaming match between Alta/BC. Until that heavy oil is shut in, don't expect any changes. SD

Arguably it really comes down to FFH not being 'his' company anymore, but treating it as though it were. Sadly it's not that unusual, as the folks at the former Toronto Street post office found out a while back. We wish them luck. SD

There is nothing wrong with bringing your kids into the business, and we have all kinds of examples in Canada's business dynastys. But they all work their way up, and they cut their teeth in the board positions of subs first. Elevating family too quickly isn't fair on them, your partners (shareholders), or the people that elevation displaced. The reality is that at 7% ownership FFH isn't Prems company anymore, and succession planning is everyones problem - not just Prems. Calling him out on it was valid. Might it have been done better behind a closed door? Probably. SD

Why? Sorry if this is a dumb question. We would suggest that this is a version of Taleb's 'taxi driver' anti-fragility. Rather than rely on a single high paying job (pipeline build/terminal delivery process that is fragile), do a number of smaller jobs (delivery by rail to multiple terminals that is anti-fragile) where you are not as reliant on any one employer. Ultimately it may cost a little more (insurance premium), but you will never suffer a total shut-down (& economic collapse) - as you always have a way of getting at least some of your oil out. In business we try not to be beholden to a single dominant customer, same idea here. Transport cost/mile is important, but the real advantage of pipelines is safety. Accidents happen, and the more tanker rail-traffic the higher the odds that there will be one. Nobody wants another Lac-Megantic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%C3%A9gantic_rail_disaster SD

It might not be popular, but this thread is in the right place. The reality is that o/g investment in the WCSB includes a material political component, and it should be part of your decision to invest. Canada already has pipelines going west, east, and south. Unfortunately they are nearing end of life (corrosion & leaks), and were sized for smaller volumes than we have today. Fortunately the rights of way already exist, as does the permiting. Most folks would suggest that the long term solution is both replacement (& bigger) pipe, double piping in sections, and removing/re-cycling the old pipe/steel. Long term utility infrastructure investment, ideal for pension fund investment to offset their long term liabilities. Less enviro damage, lower cost through scaling, all kinds of construction/operations jobs in Canada, unrestricted tidewater access on both coasts, and much lower differentials. All Canada benefits, and in a very big way. Canada is a pretty civil place - a industry has to have been behaving pretty badly, and for a long time, to meet this much resistance AND from so many disparate people. We used to think that 'rock 'em, sock 'em hockey' was 'part of the game' - but have since moved on once it was realised how destructive it was to play this way. Agreed it's frustrating to be Albertan, but at times they are their own worst enemy. The smartest thing the fighting kids can do for themselves is to shut-up, and let the adults (fed) clean up their mess. SD