rranjan

;D ;D ;D

Harry - Point noted and understood. Although I said enough on this, I will try with few lines. Here is the way I see it. We all have huge tendency to reciprocate. If you take a neutral view and re-read all the posts you may find that some of the bolded parts might have been in response to what you said. May be not exactly in response to what you said rather in the manner they were said or taken. You remembered those bolded parts and asked for apology because Netflix price moved up in short term. Some of the bolded parts were wrong before and after the price movement. No relationship with the price movement. All I am trying to say that, if I some one comes and slap me, I will feel like slapping the person back even if me getting slapped might do world of good to me. Don't take it literally and I hope you see my point. You can certainly do great by being honest and telling the things the way you see. But if you don't pay any attention to the manner you convey your points, then sometimes your effort might not come to anything. Yes, some people will still benefit but I am sure you would like to help most and not only the few who might be comfortable with the message, no matter how it was delivered. You might be comfortable with the way you deliver the message. But if you want to help most people then putting the same message in different way, which makes it least offencive to majority, will increase the success rate. Offcourse , it should be done without loosing the message. I am not writing this based on the merit of arguments presented on this thread rather a general statement. You are an intelligent person, so may be I am stating the obvious. My two cents ...

Took a very quick look. Adjusting for high debt, it has around 10% FCF yield. I assumed all capex as maint capex, but you can dig more. Decent but not a mouthwatering prospect. You may find similar/better businesses with similar yield and if yield is same after adjusting the debt, I will prefer low or no debt. I spent only few minutes so weigh the opinion accordingly.

Haha! I agree, I'm married to an Italian too! My inlaws are crazy! By any chance, can we have their contact details ;)

Good point and noted. Still, I think one can sometime go overboard with his/her arguments and might not realise that we are not in a homogenious environment ( like family, friends etc). This is more true for a discussion board where people from different background engage in discussions. I have shouted and used very harsh language at times but only with people I knew very well. That way I knew I was not crossing the line with the group. At different place, the benchmark for crossing the line might be bit different so we just need to be aware of it. Not specific to Harry's last post but given that most of the board members here are very well rounded, it should take very little effort in our part to avoid situations like this. Enough on this topic, let me go outside and enjoy the weather.

Agreed. He is very good contributor, no argument over that. I don't think anyone is saying that he is a bad contributor even if few might not agree with some specific ideas. We are not supposed to have same opinion on everything and having a clash of opinion is healthy for the forum. I was mainly curious about what he interpreted as an abuse during the heated exchange from the both sides. If there was an abuse then we all can learn and avoid in future. On the other hand, extending bit of civility to fellow posters makes it for good read, irrespective of the merit of our ideas or disagreements. Cheers,

Harry - What did you take it in this thread as an abuse? They were not asking for risk control advice at any time but you were still talking about it. It's good thing to remind a fellow poster about the risk control but making a point once is enough. It's obvious that for any short, the upside is limited but downside is unlimited, so nothing new here given that Netflix is a profitable company. I noticed only two things, you kept talking about risk control and they kept asking about why do you feel that Netflix is not overvalued. Two totally different points but some heated exchanges took place. Nothing to do with this thread but in general, the only question of interest should be if we are willing to pay current market price for the whole company and still safely expect a decent return. If answer is no, then short term price movement should not be used for making a point. I would think that most of us are mainly interested in knowing the rational for specific idea. Having said that , you can still make money with short term price movements but that's a different topic. There is no need for an apology as long as the line was not crossed during the discussion. If you felt that line was crossed any time, you should have asked for an apology immediately. People can be wrong or right about their predictions/analysis but crossing the line should have absolutely no relationship with current price of Netflix. All of us can be bit civil with each other even if we have opposite views on something. If I missed something, please point it out. Sanjeev, Just to add to your point - even with a killing record, bit of humility will go a long ways.

Kelly ofrmula is fine but you should never forget the worst case scenario and make sure that you do survive to fight another day even if worst case scenario comes true. Assume a gun with 1000 chambers has only one bullet and 999 of them are empty. I wouldn't pull the trigger on myself even for billions of dollars payout but with kelly formula your expected return might be in trillions and you are supposed to go for it. So, allocating the higher % in higher risk adjusted ideas is good but you need to make sure that even in worst case situation you are not out of the game. As some one else mentioned , allocation might vary depending on if it's only your money or pooled one. Different people have different reaction to fluctuations. Cheers,

+1

Rick_v must be quite a character to do so. Btw his comment about managing small money was very funny because there are decent number of clueless managers who manage big money and at the same time there are many very smart individuals/managers who simply manage their individual/small portfolio but do very well in long term. I found it funny rather than insulting. Not related but I have seen many times people in various profession use the logic - I do it for living so I am must be right. As result, not surprisingly, most people believe it due to authoritative bias. I fell for it recently but corrected the mistake next day. I promised myself to watch out to avoid the same situation in future ( getting influenced due to authoritative bias even though it goes against my earlier gathered information} Well, Rick_v was a good riddance. Well, following the logic of invert - We don’t need to focus on attracting quality members rather we should focus on avoiding members who will down grade the quality of forum.

I read this thread from start to end after refinishing my floors( btw, It came out very nice or may be after hard work results feel way better). Not for anyone specific but I think we all should tone down a bit if other person has different view point. Simply agree to disagree. I do think some of the Ricks's points were simply not backed by any fact. On top of that , the tone for making any point doesn't need to be harsh at all. Having said that, I think counter reaction can be also expressed differently even if some one crossed the line. Give the benefit of doubt 1-2 times. Some time people go overboard while trying to make their point and cross the limit. Easiest option is to refute it with verifiable fact. Rick claimed that even 30% per year return is not good but even his own stated, not verified, record with permanent base of capital does not support his claim. I was going to point that out then I saw some one already did it. In some other thread, there was suggestion to limit the number of people to keep the discussion civil but as long as Parsad doesn't mind extra work involved with having extra members, I think it's a bad idea. No need to make it a closed group other wise no new member, who might add great value to discussion, will be able to join us. As Partner24 pointed out - If we remain vigilant as a group, 90% job is done. For the rest, Parsad can use his judgement to moderate, private message or outright cancel the membership. But remaining vigilant also include not going over board with counter argument even if counter argument is very sound. Same point can be made in better way. I am not preaching by long shot because collective wisdom of this board will most likely reach to right conclusion most of the time but some time heated counter argument, even if right, goes too far.

I think you can ask them to run a lemonade stand and then use the book "The Accounting Game : Basic Accounting Fresh from the Lemonade Stand" to fill all numbers to get familair with financial statements. Check out the book, it's easy and fun. I feel this is one of the best book to get started for a high school student. Most of the books are too dry but this one does the job very well by explaining, how the basic numbers fit into different financial statements by building the statements with real business example( which is very simple) slowly. I simply loved the book when I read it for the first time. Lemonade stand business can be substituted by something else as well. My Two cents... -Rohit

Well, I don't have any list but I do know few people personaly who are trying to buid a school in remote area in Jihur,Ethiopia - where kids have to walk more than 20 miles if they want to go to high school. I was helping them with a presentation for fund raising recently. Most kids there don't even get to finish primary education. They have to work to support their families. Some who are fotunate enough to finish primary education, face lots of trouble to get even basic high school education due to nearest high school being 15 miles apart and no reliable means to travel. Any of you interested can check their website. http://www.jihurschool.com/

Goverment is needed in certain sections for sure but I don't think they are very efficient in getting biggest bang for money. I wouldn't tax to such an extent that no one can afford Mercedes. It will simply kill any incentive for anyone to work smarter/harder. In my opinion Government should stick to providing essential services which helps the society( like fire fighters, police etc). If the government can provide an environment to their citizens where they can unleash their potentials, the job is 100% done. Despite all the problems , USA has done well due to having a decent system in place which allows regular Joe to do something if he wants. I think in Afganistan , you will have equal percentage of talanted kids but environemnt is not helpful . Many potential engg, doctors, poets and others grow up seeing only the guns and bullets. Thats the main reason, I feel optimistic about the future of USA. For couple of thousands year, China didn't provide an environement where talent can be unleashed. Slowly they are moving in that direction and as results many good things will come to this world. Different time scale but similar situation with India. Most places in Africa never had any decent system for an extented period and sadly I don't see any progress also.

In my opinion, you can donate the money but all donations don't have same overall impact. Point can be made for spending instead of donation to create more jobs but there are needs for specific projects which benefit the the society in very big way. Trick is to spend the money for something which has bigger impact. Example - Mohnish is not donating money for opera hall etc but he has taken the initiative to target kids from poorest section in India and train them for IIT entrance examination( Some one who doesn't know - it has less than 2% acceptance rate and MIT/Stanford has more than 10% acceptance rate but you pay nominal fee to study there ). His foundation does select bright students only but they won't get the oppurtunities in normal circumtances even though they are bright. Results have been fantastic. Big percentage of selected students make it to IIT and other top schools. These successful students act as role model for other kids in slums like environemnt. Some of the selected students get involved in guiding other kids and they are also expected to contribute money when they earn. Hopefully it can become a self sustaining system where some smart kids from poorest section gets best education. Yes, spending the money instead of donating does create trickle down effect but some section does need direct and immediate help. Few identified areas will provide biggest bang for money and channeling the donation in those areas is more effective if you consider whole world's population as one unit. One million dollar can save the life of thousands of kids in africa but it might not help even hundereds in USA. Same money but manifold results. I don't know too much but it seems Bill gates is trying to use the money smartly as well. Its a very big amount and smart use of it will make a very big impact.

Oh no. We have much better candidate :D Brian Bradstreet wouldn't even come close.

Big Applause for Sanjeev. Ability to overcome the consistency bias (which most of us have) is not so common specially when you make a public comment. No if and buts , Sanjeev expressed himself quickly and clearly after Big Liar decided to show his true colors. I agree that a sale begins with a No ;D ... Made me laugh

Today , I noticed the same issue in morning but I don't think its a pure coincidence to get this trouble again if you rolled the data base back correctly. You are right that we never had any issue and last 10 days or so we started having this issue. I might not be related but I also don't believe in coincidences too much.

"I’m just saying we don’t have enough evidence to say Buffett isn’t doing it by chance" Some one else might have more statistics but a person accumulating 50 odd billions by taking series of decisions during past 30-40 years and then you state that it doesn't give evidence about his investment skills? How much more evidence anyone will need to be convinced that buffet is not simply lucky but has skills to reach where he is today? I can understand the luck argument with founder of a Tech/Oil company hitting big but with buffet...... Soro might have larger decision set but Taleb being not convinced with Buffet investment skills proves only one thing, the Economists should stick with economics. Another example of not staying within the circle and as result sounding clueless.

I strongly feel that there should be government run basic health insurance plan but government shouldn’t subsidize it rather run it as non-profit. Now due to all the in-efficiencies with government involvement, private insurance plans should be able to provide better value for money and still make decent money. I totally agree that insurance industry is dominated by one or two players in most states so if any innovation is needed it’s the competition for reducing the cost. As Eric pointed out, we are not going to see any innovation in this because there is nothing to innovate. I agree with Myth465 about everyone having basic option at reasonable price. Need for health coverage is almost as basic as education and here people will still pay for it. People still send their kids to private schools but at least free schooling provides basic opportunity for everyone. Same should be true for basic health coverage. Government and private coverage should co-exist and people can choose their plans based on cost and coverage options. If some insurance companies are forced to take less profit or disappear who cares! Taken together they are not adding much value anyway. As long as government doesn’t subsidize it, in my view it’s no brainer decision for greater benefit of society.Even if there is some waste due to little bit subsidy, its worth the price. Fighting all over the world without having any tangible benefit, we can spend so much money but for something as basic as having health covergae for our citizens we can't see government spending any money. Logic seems weird to me. ??? I will still prefer if it is run as non-profit.

Thanks for posting. It was very good read.

Interesting read. Thanks for putting this together.

;D ;D ;D

Thanks for the info. It always feels good to see them doing well! I knew about Ajit Jain going to IIT but not Prem before coming to this forum . I grew up in small places with no electricity and I personally benefitted from that system so it feels good to see other's doing well, although they are very senior and its unlikely that I will ever meet them. What Mohnish is doing with his foundation is also fantastic and inspiring, because its the biggest bang for his donation. So its not surprising that I end up putting my point across whenever Mohnish is being criticized for no good reason :) It is not surprising at all that they didn’t know each other during their undergrad. There isn’t much interaction among students at different IIT’s and often they compete among themselves for job prospects or higher education scholarships. Although IIT’s follow similar process and take students through common entrance exam, they operate independently and there is hardly any interaction except during some sports or music competitions.

I personally think that performance comparison should be done among the funds who don't use leverage. We want to see which firm did good job of allocating the capital on risk adjusted basis and leverage can hide the fact . If high leverage is used, the risk is very high most of the time to feel comfortable with any kind of return. With high leverage you can always pick top 10 performers which survived and forget about the rest 90 which got wiped out. Even without leverage, its good to see how they are investing to get the idea of their process. LTCM guys were very intelligent and all banks assumed that they knew how to control the risk but with so much leverage the risk was very high and it caught up with them. I wouldn't trust even buffet with that kind of leverage althought due to excess capital, he had more surviving power to reap the reward, but still... So every comparison should account for the risk involved else we are comparing apple to oranges. If a manager uses some process which can be replicated for next 30 years without putting whole capital at risk only then I think manager is doing investment else its pure speculation which might have paid off few times. I didn't mean to say that Paulson or some other manager used wrong process because I don't know much about their process. If they did it without taking the risk of getting wiped out then its good else it doesn't matter how high the return was.