oddballstocks

Sometimes you get in too deep. She actually seems pretty normal to me. I don't think it's possible to understand her motivations or accurately label her. When I first heard about the case study below, they made it sound like he was a decent guy that needed money for his real business. Eventually, everything spiraled out of control and his intentions shifted dramatically after he came in to BIG money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McNamara_(fraudster) Appreciate the McNamara mention. First I love Fargo, but second I found myself going down a fascinating Internet rabbit hole with this stuff. The Feds let McNamara keep some of the wealth and disappear into witness protection. Crazy ending.

This is a brilliant playbook, absolutely brilliant. The American people loved Clinton. Yes, he led during the tech boom and an unprecedented period of prosperity. But the brutal reality is success/failure from external sources is attributed to the sitting President at hand. The US did well with Bill, so why not offer as a token that he'll be back in power? In some part I believe this is the appeal of Hillary. Her husband did well (moral issues aside) and people want something like that again. Of course it can't be replicated, but people either don't get that, or they're hopeful.

This is just crazy! In PA there is a flat tax of 3.07% on all income. There's also a local earned income tax that's universally 1%, although it's worth noting that dividends, capital gains, and business income (s-corp income) escape this 1% tax. So the state and local burden is 4% all-in. It's so much lower than NY/NJ/CT/CA. I've never looked at those since I've never lived there. I've had a visceral sense taxes were higher in the major metros, but had never looked to quantify it. Another PA oddity, retirement income is tax-free here. If you retire in the state and pull from an IRA there's no taxes. I've read stories about people keeping receipts so they can "prove" that they weren't in NYC enough to be taxed NYC rates. Is this something the taxing authority is keeping track of for everyone or just high profile people?

I should probably try to tilt towards that as well since gains in my pension account are taxed 15 pct. whether I realize them or not, so holding short/long term doesn't matter. Still, why is it more import to limit downside risk in your taxable account? Can't you offset future gains with old losses? You can offset gains with losses in the current year, but I don't sell often enough. So that means losses would need to carry-forward, and you can only use $3k of carry-forwards per year.

As someone else mentioned the thresholds for this are high. $416k of income filing single and $466k filing jointly. There are 892,000 people who pay taxes at this rate. Out of the ~300 million or so citizens it doesn't seem so bad. Now granted a large percentage of that 800k might be on this board, but throwing the number out there to give some perspective. Obamacare "surcharge" is called Net Investment income tax . Filing Status Threshold Amount Married filing jointly $250,000 Married filing separately $125,000 Single $200,000 Head of household (with qualifying person) $200,000 Qualifying widow(er) with dependent child $250,000 https://www.irs.gov/uac/Newsroom/Net-Investment-Income-Tax-FAQs Interesting, the threshold is still very high unless you live in NYC/LA/SF/DC. This is a really interesting bar chart: http://taxfoundation.org/blog/how-many-taxpayers-fall-each-income-tax-bracket I understand that for most NYC (or California) board members $250k is probably your starting salary and you're getting walloped. But for the large swath of us outside of the NY it's a salary reserved for doctors and executives. A friend worked in mortgage origination a few years back, he said at the time there were less than 30 houses in our county assessed for over $1m. I'm sure the number is higher now, but just putting it into perspective from someone in a "normal" metro area. There are 2.8m taxpayers that pay the Obama surcharge. Out of 300m people it's less than 1%. I get that taxes suck if you make a lot of money, and that most on here make a lot of money. But again it's a very small percentage. Most taxpayers are in the 15% bracket, where there are no taxes on dividends or capital gains.

I don't like either, but I have noticed conservative friends who formerly hated Trump trying to justify to themselves why a vote for him might not be so bad. It's an interesting transformation to watch. They don't like him, but he's not the party candidate and they can't imagine ever identifying with another party. So they are working on rationalizing this to themselves. My gut says Trump wins.

As someone else mentioned the thresholds for this are high. $416k of income filing single and $466k filing jointly. There are 892,000 people who pay taxes at this rate. Out of the ~300 million or so citizens it doesn't seem so bad. Now granted a large percentage of that 800k might be on this board, but throwing the number out there to give some perspective. Personally taxes do change how I invest. I invest in domestic stocks and special situations in IRA accounts if I think there is a chance for a short term gain. In my taxable account I buy stocks that will take at least a year to re-rate if not longer. I also look for a greater margin of safety with my taxable stocks because I want to eliminate downside risk. I realized about three years ago that these simple heuristics for my taxable/non-taxable led to my taxable account outperforming. I was more willing to take a flyer in an IRA. Since then (outside of special sits) I invest my IRA like my taxable account.

Oddball since I listen to your podcast I have some context. You seem like a nice down to earth guy on the show. Much different vibe with your content at least lately. I remember the early forum oddball which was less brash and with less rantish behavior. This could be some branding here. Since you are kind of internet famous now in this small circle. Are you referring to what's on the blog? I haven't posted as much recently. Although and I mentioned to someone Friday I'm writing more than I ever have in the past. It's all behind a paywall not. Sorry if I come off as rude or whatever. Can you point me to a few examples? If this is regarding the SFB Bancorp thing I feel justified on that. I get a sense of injustice when an 8% owner of a company treats it as their private piggy bank. To me that is wrong and it needs to be corrected.

The points about shorts are good. You are playing with fire there. Legally it's probably fine, but it's like going and telling body builders that using steroids is illegal. Sure it's true, but they can pound you into the ground before anyone comes to help. In terms of brashness/rants I'm not sure what you mean. I am a very to the point person. In terms of the risk to this I think there aren't many. On the other hand I have had a number of items I casually mentioned to my lawyer thinking they were no big deal and he started to hyperventilate. Specifically contractual issues or employment issues. It's good to run things past a lawyer. I've come to learn that I as a layperson think is important are issues the law doesn't care about. But things I am blissfully unaware of and disregard the law cares very much about. Employment law and contract law are two areas where whatever a lawyer charges you is worth it.

What's the liability? That you touted a bad pick? People are responsible for investing in their own. The WSJ isn't liable if they say xyz growth company is hot, you invest and lose money. It's the same for any writing. Where you can get into issues is if you are already managing money. Then you have some compliance to watch out for. Check with your regulator. As to why people write? Isn't it self evident? Some want interest in the names. Others like to brag about what they found. Some have the burden to teach others. Think of writing online like a digital business card. Prospective clients and employers can see the quality of the work and ideas before they hire/buy. We need to stop seeing liability everywhere that it doesn't exist. You can buy a cheap umbrella policy and a cheap E&O policy if you're worried. Not to be brash but I write a lot and this is the sort of question my lawyer would laugh at if I asked. There isn't a reason to worry, and if you want to worry someone will happily see you insurance to soothe your fears. As a separate aside there is a carve-out in the investment company act for newsletters and non-specific investment advice. Blogs would fall under that. If you are giving out personalized investment advice based on people's income/personal situations then you are on thin ice and might need to register. If you are tossing out "IBM is a buy at $50" that is exempt.

Keep dreaming. My guess is most of that is under lock and seal. Rumors were swirling that Buffett suddenly became a champion of higher taxes because he cut a deal with the Treasury to grandfather early partners in. There are allegations of dodgy partnership situations where if a dividend were paid or if the person died there could be serious tax (if not legal) consequences. And that Buffett "solved" this problem by cutting a deal. My prediction is everyone will be shocked at what comes out once Buffett dies. I'm suspicious when the only person talking about how great someone is is themselves or their groupies. My guess (educated and somewhat informed) is there are quite a few skeletons in his closet. Of course this board will say I'm wrong, he's a saint and disregard all of this. But maybe in 3/5/10 years when he passes we can revisit my predictions.

No, the reports are in French.

Yeah, Bonal is interesting for sure. I've written about them in the past. I know someone who inquired about buying the company outright. There are some family politics that prevent it. You need to be prepared to take advantage of crazy price actions. If it drops suddenly on no news, buy. If it suddenly increases then consider selling. I've made money in some flat stocks this way. I made around 50% on Titanium Holdings doing this, the stock hasn't really budged, except extraordinary days, you buy and sell those and do well.

2.7% annualized since 2009 was down 41% last year

Can't comment on full-time vs part-time because I don't have an MBA. But I do know that there are quite a few funds in Toronto. Get a hold of the Big Dough list for Toronto, you'd be surprised what's around.

What about this: "You've collected a set of businesses that reflect your upbringing in the US in the 1940s/50s, what era do you expect your successor to continue to build the empire from?"

Wow, what a way to paint with a very broad brush. From this thread I'd argue just the opposite. There are quite a few who've discovered that a spouse (and kids) are worth more than dollar amounts or opportunity cost.

This is an even more absurd number than the wedding cost. Consider the median family income is $50k and the average family has 2 kids. That means on average this average family will pay $500k to raise two kids over 20 years (kids 2 years apart). That means 55% of a family's pre-tax income goes to raising kids, or 74% of their after tax income. Does this even make sense? I think this is another case similar to the wedding cost where many people have get help from friends/family. Childcare is extremely expensive...but many people either chose to have a stay at home parent (opportunity cost) or are gifted free services from a grandparent or other family member. Just because there was no cash exchanged doesnt mean that it didnt cost something. Also, not sure where you were getting to 41k/year. 250 / 20 = 12.5k per year per child. This is easily doable and not at all skewed by affluent. Ah, the $40k a year was three kids, $750k/18. It's really $500k/18 for two kids. You're right though, child care is expensive, but there are a lot of people who help out. My mother-in-law watches my niece and nephew a day a week, the other grandmother watches them another day. My brother-in-law's childcare cost is reduced 40% from this. The grandmothers will claim it costs them nothing and they get to see their grandkids, but there is a cost. It's lost flexibility or opportunity cost or whatever else. Shalab - wow, $40k a year for private school. That's significant. I guess if a private school guarantees that a kid turns out well then maybe it's worth it? The most affluent school district in our area sends almost 100% of their kids to college and also has a crazy heroin problem, something I don't quite reconcile. Pedigree matters for a lot of professions, if you want your kids to be a top doctor, or top lawyer, investment banker etc then the right private school to prepare them for an Ivy League college is necessary. It all depends on what you want in life for your kids.

This is an even more absurd number than the wedding cost. Consider the median family income is $50k and the average family has 2 kids. That means on average this average family will pay $500k to raise two kids over 20 years (kids 2 years apart). That means 55% of a family's pre-tax income goes to raising kids, or 74% of their after tax income. Does this even make sense? How does one spend 74% of their after tax income on raising kids when they're spending 30% of their gross income on rent or their mortgage? I have three boys, I have no idea if they're more or less expensive than average. We use a bit more electric because they don't turn off lights, they eat a TON of food (I'm scared for when they're teenagers), and they need clothes. They eat up shoes like crazy and can destroy clothes fairly quickly. I think the record was having a new pair of jeans a few hours before there was a hole in the knee. But the additional food/clothes/lights/toys don't cost me $13k per year. If it did I couldn't afford them. I think these studies are skewed by the affluent. My kids go to public schools, my cost is my tax dollars. We have friends who are sending their kids to a private school, it's $9k per kid per year. Over 18 years that's $162k to send them to a private school that may or maybe not be any different than the public school. This family also pays for a nanny, I'm guessing she sucks up the other $4,800 per year they'd need to spend to hit the average number. So if you send your kids to a private school and have a nanny it's possible to hit $250k. What throws me for a loop even more is that when you think of averages the less affluent have more kids. In theory the cost should be skewed low. If one travels to very rural areas or into poorer urban areas the average family size increases dramatically, and these people are raising kids on very little. I guess it just goes to show how much more the top end is spending that the average is still so high. I know for a fact we're not spending an additional $41k a year to raise our kids...

The only way you get wedding for 10k all in when doing it at marriott is some combination of (a) smaller than average guest count, (b) cutting corners on other venders, such as invitations, photos, limos, music, and florist, and/or © dry wedding. Ours was >50k all in for around 150 people. I think the cost is a function of (a) guestlist size, (b) bridal party size, and © quality level. At a given quality level (like a hotel like marriott), the cost is affected by your guestlist size obviously, but less obviously by bridal party size (which affects transportation costs, rehearsal dinner, gifts for bridal party are customary). Venue - ~25k for around 150 people with a bridal party of 19 (8 groomsmen + 8 bridesmaids + 2 flower girls + 1 ring bearer). Dinner around $45 per person pretip/tax; Alcohol open bar + wine with dinner another $40 per adult. Passed Appetizers, tent, valet, etc all makes up the rest. We were at a yacht club, but in my experience all of the major hotels were around the same price point when you broke it out per person. Photographer + printed photos - $4k DJ - $1k Gown + Tux - $3k Florist - $1.5k Transportation - $1.5k Rehearsal Dinner - $2k Bridal Party Gifts - $3k Church donation + Priest donation - $1.5k Wedding Rings (not even counting engagement ring) - $4k other odds and ends make up the rest. I offered eloping or destination wedding as options, but we didnt do that. Additionally, if we're going to host guests were not going to serve bad food or cut major corners (the event is a reflection on you, you're better off not having a ceremony at all then hosting an event that isnt up to the standard levels customary with your socio-economic family/friend group). Luckily for us the cost was manageable and represented around 6 months of savings at the time, and we received a large amount in gifts from our guests too, which was helpful. I would reiterate my prior post...if you are spending more than a year's worth of savings (or worse, going into debt), its not a financially smart idea. You're better off not hosting a reception or doing a very small reception. Interesting points. I have no idea how many people we had, 150-200 I think. I'd have to ask my wife, it was medium sized. There were appetizers, dinner, booze, the whole deal. My wife and her mom purchased all the flowers at Costco or somewhere and built everything themselves. They did a lot of the decoration themselves as well. Limo was free, my wife has a relative who owns one. I think we tipped the driver, a family friend a few hundred bucks. I didn't put engagement/wedding rings in this. I seem to remember paying $3k for my wife's ring, then another $1k for our wedding rings. They're gold, they seem nice, who knows, it was 12 years ago. I'll say this on hotels, I'm fairly confident the cost has risen. We held our Microcap Conference at a Marriott in Philly in November. The costs over what we paid in 2005 for our wedding have increased significantly. Some of what the Marriott wants now for things are bordering usurious. My brother and his wife paid for a lot of their wedding, they didn't have much money. They purchased booze at a discount through a distributor and rented a nice gazebo outside Cleveland. They had about 100 people, very nice event, and it was a few thousand dollars. A friend took pictures, they hired a catering company for food. It can be done. I think the biggest determining factor is the expectation of those who are coming. My family, my wife's family, and my brother's wife's family are all low key middle class families. Not upper middle class, just middle class, and everyone attending was expecting something in that range. I went to a wedding of a college buddy right after graduation. His dad was an investment banker, he was an investment banker. The wedding was in Naples, FL, at some posh yacht club, the band alone was $10k, food was a seafood buffet with caviar, lobster tails and anything else you could imagine. It was out of this world, I can't even imagine the cost. In terms of expectations this is what most of the guests were expecting. My college buddies and myself were blown away, most of the people there (bankers, friends of bankers) expected something like this as a baseline.

Not sure how the average is so high. Here's our experience. We were married in 2005, had a nice wedding at a little chapel on the campus of the school we graduated from. I think this cost a few hundred dollars to rent. Then we had a reception at a Marriott about 20m away. I think all-in it cost around $10k, my wife's parents picked up the tab. I think my parents pitched in some for the open bar. Is it a lot? Sure. Could it be more if we would have saved it? Nope, when we got married that $10k would have washed through our hands like water with zero return. The wedding and reception were great, a very memorable event. We went to Jackson Hole for our honeymoon. I have no idea what it cost, probably a few grand. Was it worth it? I think so. You can hoard money to your hearts content, but so what? You have a pile of money and die and that's it. I like to save and invest, but have no problem spending it either. We just dumped a bunch of money into renovating our pool. Would it have been cheaper to buy a pool pass each year? Yup. But the community pool isn't in my backyard either. It doesn't make financial sense, but who cares, there's something to be said about enjoying life. Sanjeev, I'm 100% with you. Anytime you can be with friends, or family spending time it's worth the money spent to do it.

I take it from your comment that I'm off the mark and Scion has done very well. In that case I stand corrected. Thanks Nate. Just the opposite.

I'm aware of what the numbers are, I won't share them. But it's fascinating to see the direction of this thread vs reality. There is an extremely large divergence. I think it speaks to that point that many times speculating is just that, it's speculation, nothing else. I wonder how much conjecture and narrative has been created and believed on this board and those "in the know" have read it and shook their heads thinking "they really missed it."

Here's a completely different angle on this... The BOD is filled with politicians and ex-military guys. Her dad is in the CIA. Is it possible that the story we see here isn't the 'real' story of the company? Is there a government/military industrial complex type tie-in that isn't public that we don't see? The only oddity or inconsistency to this story is if this were true then why go after VC money? Why not fat government contracts? Maybe whatever they're developing hasn't been proven, but once it is the contracts roll in?

Why? I posted a few months ago on Craigslist looking for a videographer in Toronto, I received a LOT of responses, was your son one of them?. All hungry film makers looking for work. Most had terrible pitches, bad portfolios and nothing to show. A few had really nice portfolios, it would have been easy to select one. We ended up going with someone who came recommended from the hotel we're working with. But regardless, these guys were out hustling trying to find work. I have a friend who's a filmmaker in Pittsburgh. The guy is naturally funny, he and a friend started making this series called Pittsburgh Dad on YouTube as a hobby. They wanted to work in their medium. It was a big hit (https://www.youtube.com/user/pittsburghdad) and it pays for them to do it full-time. They're not making hedge fund money (but then again who really is outside of a few guys in NYC overrepresented on this board), but it's a really good salary and they get to do what they want. This will sound harsh, but if your son is going to school hoping to just get a good film job out of college due to his degree he's going to be out of luck. There are a lot of very talented people who aren't waiting for a degree, they're out making films right now. I think that's what your son should be doing, he should be making movies, posting on YouTube and building a brand. Film doesn't care where you went to school, just the results. You need to seriously evaluate his talent, but it might be a better investment to stop sending checks to NYU and instead use that money to seed him. What if he used his tuition to make films? He'd have a huge head start.