matjone

I think my lack of skills puts me out of the running on this one. I don't know anything about trolling motors or running an internet business so I'd have to hire someone to do it, and I bet I'd have to pay them more than 15k/yr. And I bet I'd still have to spend several hours a week dealing with it. If I could go in as a silent partner with someone with experience I might go in at some extemely low multiple of earnings.

I know a lot of people in the same situation, and I think a lot of them aren't too concerned with getting them paid off. If you can take a second job, move in a studio apartment and eat rice and beans for a couple years to get out of debt you can get motivated to do it. When you have to do it for 10 or 15 years most of us are just going to say to hell with it.

Yahoo has the PE for GREK at 8. Morningstar has it around 9 something based on forward looking earnings. Who's right?

Even though I don't know Giofranchi, I find myself rooting for him and wondering how it went. It's almost 11 PM in Italy. This date has to be winding down or already over, so I expect to hear something soon.

For some of these that don't report to the SEC but do post reports on their website, I am thinking of tracking them with changedetection.com. Anyone tried this? Or do any IT people know if this will work reliably?

I spent some time teaching in a pretty poor neighborhood. I think the lower class has been in a downward spiral for a long time. Poor people can't afford to send their kids to good schools, those kids grow up and can't compete for good jobs or send their kids to good schools, and so on. I have the feeling we're going to see some major unrest over this before it gets better.

I am not sure what quotes you looked at but I have seen a couple. I remember him saying he would buy net nets, but that he'd also buy a quality company if it was the right price, and also do some arbitrages. I remember him saying it wouldn't necessarily all be in stocks. Geoff Gannon has a post about what types of things he did during the early 50's before he started the partnership. He earned excellent returns back then http://www.gurufocus.com/news/169950/how-warren-buffett-made-his-first-100000 There is some stuff in Snowball about this period as well. The union street railway example is a good one to illustrate how he'd outperform the basket of net nets. Graham and Schloss probably would have seen something like that and bought a couple percent position and lumped it in with other net nets that weren't as attractive. Buffett dug deeper and saw that this one was better than the other ones and loaded up on it. I think Packer is right about concentrating, IF you know what you are doing. If you don't you are going to go broke, which is most are scared to try it. I think that most diversifiers probably at most times have one or two or three holdings they are excited about, but they just bump them up to 5 or 10% instead of 40-60 like Buffett. I have been thinking about this recently and had an idea. I think an investor who has followed the diversified Graham-Dodd/Schloss way and done well and become competent identifying bargains might benefit from starting a separate account with 5% or so of his capital and devoting it to a concentrated strategy of 1-3 of his best ideas. The rule is, once you start the account you never add more money. After a few years the market is going to let you know whether you were as smart as you thought. If it turns out you weren't, and the account goes to zero, that's fine - you stick with the old way and still do alright with the other 95% of your capital. You'll always be 5% poorer, but that's probably not going to make that much difference in your life. But, if it turns out you were really that good, you could end up a lot richer over a decade. If you do 50% like Buffett then your concentrated account is going to dwarf your diversified account in 20 years.

Parsad, did you do the same thing you did with bank of america and go all in in your personal portfolio on this one?

I've been looking at some stuff on the internet. The universities in the midwest have a ton of info. One important thing is that non-land costs don't seem that dependent on yields. Using corn as an example, in IL good land in the central part of the state yields close to 200 bu/acre and poorer quality land in the south yields 160, but the non-land cost for good vs. bad land is only about 10 bucks (563 vs. 552 per acre). This makes sense. A lot of the costs are really per acre rather than per bushel. Whether it's good land or bad land you only have to plow it once, spray it once, etc. You will have a little more cost for hauling it to the elevator though. The price for corn is about a dollar higher in the south which makes up some of the difference, and operator and land return (basically profit to be split between the farmer, landowner and taxman) is only 14 dollars higher for good land vs. bad (409 for high productivity land vs. 395 for low productivity). The strange thing is, from what I've seen, land is about 10k/acre in central il, and only about 5k/acre in southern IL where I'm from. 5k extra for an extra 15 bucks profit? Cash rents are about double or more in the more productive counties too. There must be something I'm missing.

I grew up on a corn and soybean farm in the midwest in the 80's and saw a lot of farmers go broke. I came away with a perception of farming as a field in which you borrow a bunch of money, and if the weather or grain prices or anything else God throws at you don't turn out like you expect, you're sunk. So I crossed farming off of my list of career choices and came away with little knowledge of the financial side of farming. Now that I am older I've come around to the idea that there is probably a right price for anything, including farm land. I still have no interest in being a farmer, but I am thinking that the ability to value land is a skill that could come in handy during the right conditions. I think a lot of people buy land as a store of value that keeps pace with inflation, and are willing to accept low or no cash flow returns. That is fine, but I am not interested in that game. What I am looking for is a way to estimate what the cash flow from owning farm land might be, so that when the time is right and good deals are available I can identify them. Does anyone know what kind of numbers Buffett was looking at when he bought his farm in the 80's? Or what kind of numbers all the people who went bankrupt in the 80's were looking at when they bought theirs? I have been searching and reading about this on the internet, but I always appreciate the chance to talk to someone with experience. Are there any other board members with a farming background? Are there any who have experience investing in farm land who would like to share their knowledge? If you would rather discuss via PM that would be OK too. Like I said, I have little knowledge to contribute, but I can entertain you with tales of my misadventures in farming. Thanks in advance,

I like IB, only problem is the lack of access to certain markets. Fidelity has access to a lot of european markets that IB doesn't. I don't want to pay that high of a commission. I guess it's one of those cases where you need to have money to make money.

I have an IRA that I was switching to Fidelity, but I have been told that the commission for trading on a foreign exchange is about 130 bucks on the low end. This is a lot more than I'd like to pay. Does anyone know of a broker with access to foreign exchanges that charges a more reasonable rate within an IRA (Other than IB)? Thanks,

Thanks for that. I own some of those. Here's the spreadsheet I have. Keep in mind there are probably errors from hand entering. jap_net_net.ods

Is anyone still buying these? The deals aren't what they were a couple years ago, but I am still finding some things. I just bought Co-Cos Nobuoka and Global Food Creators.

What do you mean weeding people out? Because prices going up and value getting harder to uncover? Or because of a crash hitting? What kind of adaptations do you think are needed?

I had the same question, but I don't think they are required to disclose it. As for your other question, some brokerages will mail you reports if you have a share, so it is more convenient. Otherwise you have to set a reminder on your calendar to look for the report. I hope they are buying back shares.

If you are trying to guess price movements, I would guess they will probably go up more before they go back down, as long as there is no calamitous event to spook everyone. If there is no such event, you'll get the psychological effect where people are afraid they missed out, so they put more money in, which drives up prices, which leads others to do the same, and so on and so on until it goes the other way. I think you have to be a special kind of person to play that game though. I am guessing you are asking this question because you are wondering if it is time to take money off the table. At least I know I have been wondering that. I remember a lot of the first part of the intelligent investor was about current market levels and bond yields. I wonder what Graham would be writing today? My guess is he'd be telling us to lean towards stocks since they yielded more, but be prepared for a drop. Looking at Shiller's spreadsheet, the s&p is at 19x the highest earnings it has ever achieved, so a little above 5% earnings yield, and treasury yields are at 2.6%. One thing he never said was to take money out of stocks and bonds and move it to cash. I am probably being audacious by going against the master, but one way to look at it is that the lost opportunity cost of sitting in cash is fairly low right now if you are just figuring it by looking at yields.

I think the thing is to build a library of them over time. I've been experimenting with a new policy: when I sell something, I usually keep 1 share. That way I can keep track of them, and over time I might have a database of 100's of companies that I know something about, and I can buy back again when they get cheap. As long as it's only a couple percent of assets, I think the pros of this might outweigh the cons.

I wish I had known about it a year or so ago when it had a lot more asset protection. It is still under NCAV and it has generally been profitable, so I bought some.

The thing to do is to do what makes sense to you. That could be indexing, buying net nets, buying great businesses, real estate investing, putting everything into a business that you run, buying distressed debt, or any one of a hundred other possibilities. There isn't any one right answer for everyone, but I believe there is a right answer for each of us. And there is no rule that that answer can't change over time as you increase your knowledge. What makes sense for me is following Graham. I like to think that I am fairly smart, but I am no genius, so the thing that makes sense for me is to buy balance sheet bargains and stay diversified. It has worked in the past and it has a logical basis. I probably won't ever be rich, but hopefully I can keep from losing money, earn decent returns, and sleep well.

Yes, thank you

From time to time I will see a table on market PEs broken down by country. Is there a place online that keeps table like this and updates it on a regular basis? The ones I see are from a year ago or more. Thanks

I actually didn't read the article, but I like the point you bring up about the government keeping the money. It reminds me of car insurance. Before they had insurance, you'd get hit by another driver and have to settle it in court. So the solution is to make everyone buy insurance. But if you are hit by someone and you aren't insured, they fine him and keep the money for themselves, and you are still paying the damages yourself.

So basic value investing won't work anymore? If so, I am probably screwed because I am too dumb to do anything else.

I agree, terrible role model, but still somehow a good person. He is using all his money to make the world a better place, so in a way his whole life was spent in the service of others, and now he spends a lot of his time trying to teach people how to avoid mistakes and live a better life. If you read up on his childhood you can start to understand why he ended up the way he did.