Jump to content

mpauls

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    350

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by mpauls

    Recent FT Headline: "US says debt outlook worsening."

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Ay my laddies, these are fine and true words. Unfortunately, the ruling class is too intent on mollifying the masses with freebies in order to assure their re-elections. Massive deficits are fueled by self interest at the expense of the national interest. Term Limits would help eliminate this distructive behavior, and also encourage more responsible people to run for office rather than career politicians whose prime goal in life is to get re-elected.

     

    Just my 2 cents.

     

    Just imagine congress trying to pass that bill.

    a complete explanation of investing. Enjoy.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    The video apparently takes some time to load and depending on your internet speed some were unable to view it altogether, so I went ahead and provided the frames as images which you will find below.

     

     

     

    http://www.synthesispartners.net/export/Complete%20understanding.001.tiff

     

    http://www.synthesispartners.net/export/Complete%20understanding.002.tiff

     

    http://www.synthesispartners.net/export/Complete%20understanding.003.tiff

     

    http://www.synthesispartners.net/export/Complete%20understanding.004.tiff

     

    http://www.synthesispartners.net/export/Complete%20understanding.005.tiff

     

    http://www.synthesispartners.net/export/Complete%20understanding.006.tiff

    Recent FT Headline: "US says debt outlook worsening."

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/68b8c09e-919f-11de-879d-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1"

     

    We are ignoring the lessons of "Poor Richard" rather, more importantly, Benjamin Franklin.  It might be wise for the individuals of the United States to reconsider why we have been successful and what will drive us to failure.

     

    Poor Richard:

     

    The Indies have not made Spain rich, because her outgoes are greater than her incomes.

     

    Buy what thou hast no need of, and ere long thou shalt sell thy necessaries. . .

     

    Many a one, for the sake of finery on the back, have gone with a hungry belly and half-starved their families. Silks and satins, scarlet and velvets, put out the kitchen fire, as Poor Richard says.

     

    "These are not the necessaries of life; they can scarcely be called the conveniences; and yet, only because they look pretty, how many want to have them! By these, and other extravagances, the genteel are reduced to poverty, and forced to borrow of those whom they formerly despised, but who, through industry and frugality, have maintained their standing.

     

    "But what madness must it be to run in debt for these superfluities? We are offered by the terms of this sale, six months' credit; and that, perhaps, has induced some of us to attend it, because we cannot spare the ready money, and hope now to be fine without it. But, ah! think what you do when, you run in debt, you give to another power over your liberty. If you cannot pay at the time, you will be ashamed to see your creditor; you will be in fear when you speak to him; you will make poor, pitiful, sneaking excuses, and, by degrees, come to lose your veracity, and sink into base, downright lying; for the second vice is lying, the first is running in debt, as Poor Richard says.

     

    "What would you think of that government, who should issue an edict forbidding you to dress as you should please, on pain of imprisonment or servitude? Would you not say that you were free to have a right to dress as you please, and that such an edict would be a breach of your privileges, and such a government tyrannical? And yet you are about to put yourself under such tyranny, when you run in debt for such dress! Your creditor has authority, at his pleasure, to deprive you of your liberty, by confining you in gaol till you shall be able to pay him. When you have got your bargain, you may, perhaps, think little of payment; but, as Poor Richard says, Creditors have better memories than debtors; creditors are a superstitious sect, great observers of set days and times.

     

    He that goes a borrowing goes a sorrowing.

     

    What maintains one vice would bring up two children. You may think, perhaps, that a little tea, or a little punch now and then, -diet a little more costly, clothes a little finer, and a little' entertainment now and then, can be no great matter; but remember, many a little makes a mickle. Beware of little expenses; A small leak will sink a great ship.

     

     

    The leak is an old one.  We would be wise to plug it sooner rather than later.

    Interesting video for Buffetologists

    in Berkshire Hathaway

    Posted

    uggh.  I stopped listening after the first sentence that came out of this lady.  "Does it tarnish his record"? I can't stand people that talk as though he is new at this.  All he is doing is allocating capital to those areas that earn the most attractive long term yields.  As new opportunities become available on terms more attractive than current holdings he simply buys the more attractive asset and sells the lesser attractive asset.  Moreover, facts can change and when they do, you must make appropriate adjustments-otherwise you are irrational. 

    El-Erian: Bull Market Won't Last

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    The only value to an individual investor is the amount of cash that the investment generates, i.e., the dividend yield. Since the 1950s (and maybe earlier), the return has been gauged in terms of capital appreciation rather than dividends.  As we have seen over the last year, capital appreciation is ethereal. On the basis of dividend yields and bond yields, stocks have been overvalued for decades. This is more apparent with the lack of investor influence over company policy (vis a vis capital allocation and return to investors) and the fact that companies become bankrupt, resulting almost always in complete loss of value of the equity.

     

    Given the present situation, the emphasis of the individual investor must be on risk management. The concept of a stupidly undervalued stock is itself an illusion as we cannot know what the managers are doing with the company from day to day and what decisions they are making.  For this reason, a selling strategy must be as important as what to buy.  Buying what we understand, if properly applied, would prevent our buying more than one or two stocks.  Large corporations, like pharmaceuticals, are vastly overvalued as the dividends do not compensate us sufficiently for risk and we cannot influence their policies at all.

     

    Regards,

    Tex

     

    "Tex"  The greater proportion of your points are valid.  The residual might warrant improvement.  

     

    I would substitute, "i.e., the dividend yield" with e.g. the dividend yield.  Whether or not it was part of your point, to say that earnings are meaningless unless paid out as dividends is incorrect.  Dividend yield or increases in dividends as a measure of return is not much of an improvement from capital appreciation.  For years GM paid what appeared to be a meaningful dividend, but these payments, though cash in the investors pocket, turned out to be worthless in relation to the loss of principal they ultimately suffered.  

    --

     

    I love the term Risk Management.  It's a nifty little word that the industry just loves.  It's almost as amusing as Due Diligence.  Granted there are ways to mitigate risk (properly defined) but for the most part money managers who talk about Risk Management, offer little more than a false sense of security.  (If you jump the gun this will be taken out of context.)  

     

    A comment on sell strategies as they relate to what must come first, buy strategies.  While they appear to be two things, they are effectively the same, because all you are really talking about is being able to rationally appraise underlying business value.  Meaning, if you can't identify companies that are stupidly undervalued, then good luck with your sell strategy-and good luck trying to justifying your fees. (exception: special situations, workouts, etc.) 

     

    El-Erian: Bull Market Won't Last

    in General Discussion

    Posted

     

     

    Forecasting the future of the stock market is very different from forecasting the future of your investment in a particular company.

     

    There's a huge difference between owning a handful of stocks and predicting that the entire S&P 500 is going to move in one direction or another.  It's barely comparable in my opinion.

     

    Huge difference. 

     

    One is very general, the other specific.  So while they are similar in that your making some guess about the future, they are quite different in that one is a cross-section of a nations production of goods and services and the other is (generally) specific to one or more related/identifiable products.  It's not hard to conclude that the government will employ policies that promote at least some inflation, which will cause prices to go up.  If, as I think most do, investors are interested in income and earnings then if prices go up in equal proportion to the costs of labor (more or less) then values should rise in similar fashion for most businesses.  I think that is quite a different thing from saying, you expect xyz to increase production by such-and-such percent, which will lead to lower costs per unit production from scale of such-and-such amount, which will increase profits and per share earnings by such-and-such after the assumed net change in stock buy backs and therefore after discounting by some interest rate (or interest rates) it might be purchased for $x1y2z4 today such that you might expect some rate of return. 

     

    But this ignores the main reason people invest.  If you conclude that some inflation is likely and you choose not to invest, you are essentially taxing yourself.  So the purpose for most people is to protect their savings (i.e. future purchasing power.)

     

    To be fair to each argument, investing is in some ways forecasting.  But investing in the general stock market is a far cry from projecting a companies future earnings over the next 1-5 years and discounting it back to today.  But while it may appear that I am in favor of the former more so than the latter, this isn't necessarily the case.  It's the timing of the general market that gets people in trouble theoretically and in practice-largely due to (as someone mentioned) psychology.  Trying to guess what irrational and uninformed individuals will do on any given day or in any given year is, well, silly.  I mean just look at what happened to Berkshire Hathaway's stock today or over the last 8 months. Most people on this board are more sensible than "industry or investment experts" (most of which are either idiots or have been brainwashed).  Most people on this board are also more rational than average.  Why make life hard studying facts that may or may not be relevant and then trying forecast uncertainty?  Especially when you can make a really good living by identifying companies that are stupidly undervalued and following up this simple conclusion with the decision to make purchase? 

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...