LC

Well if they're firming up a deal finally, wouldn't they slow the IPO process in case they can finish the deal, then they wouldn't need to go through with the IPO?

why is negative equity such a huge risk? they're making real cash and returning it to shareholders. numbers-wise this reminds me of DTV, which also has negative equity and some risk-averse investors betting big on it. isn't making loads of cash with no equity better than making the same amount of cash with lots of equity? i have always thought that businesses that can throw off cash without tying up a lot of capital were quality businesses. Well, the reason for the negative equity has been buybacks at high prices. So not a great capital allocation decision, but their majority stakeholder wanted liquidity. But I agree, I have no issues with negative equity per-se, as long as it is the result of good business earnings/cash flows. The issue here is the leverage...they cut the dividend presumably to help cover the debt/interest payments.

Hey, congrats to you both! It is pretty astounding how many accomplished individuals are members of this forum...thank you both for all the insights in your posts.

Ferrari is worth 5.5 per share on spin off. The rest is just a call option. Actually, if you believe Chrysler is also worth more than 2.6 per share, Alfa and Maserati are just call options. Generally how I view the situation as well. Bonus points for Brazilian capacity, any turnaround in Europe, etc.

I think he's done a good job of streamlining the operations. Not the best in terms of capital allocation (not terrible either: there's something to be said for not screwing things up!), and I'm not sure how he will do at growing the business, though.

That's awesome! Congrats on finally being offered a great price to buy something worth following for 20 years.

Bumping this. The CFA conference is on 43rd between 5th/6th...Packer suggested ~6:00 pm on Wednesday evening for a board meetup. I made tentative reservations at Triomhpe on 44th between 5/6 at 6pm on Wednesday, if anyone in the NYC area would like to join this Wednesday at that time and discuss stocks etc, please reply in this thread or PM me and I will make sure we can accommodate everyone! Heck, it's a chance to glean some of Packer's smart insights...cmon guys! ;D

Is it regulation or slowing demand for credit? He mentions they have .80$ in loans for every dollar of deposits...down from 1:1 pre recession

Where did he insinuate that re: overvaluation on the cc? I just read through it, I didn't pick up that flavor... I did get a hint that distributors think volume will slow down in 2014...also, the Q&A with Sophis Investments was a great read re: buyback policy.

So the margin interest + cost of the put is the total cost of that leverage?

Boy, Bruce really should think about a career in politics.

Sounds like a way to shift old assets into the gov'ts hands while privatizing the ability to write new mortgage insurance...probably to AIG as has been mentioned as they're one of the few companies with the scale to do so. IMHO not a serious proposal: if the gov't takes them up on this I will be pretty upset as a taxpayer over such a fleecing.

I agree. The only sensible result of QE I have seen is to inflate away debt or refinance at super low rates. Supporting the market or providing credit for economic growth is IMHO a more speculative perspective on the situation.

I don't think I can attend the conference, but I would love to talk shop afterwards.

You might be moving enough volume to trigger some of the more potent momentum algos. Not sure about Vanguard or Fidelity...but if that were in fact the case, what a compliment!

Given the risks associated with operating an online store which has been this publically advertised, as well as my own lack of knowledge, the most I would pay is about 75k

Thanks Luke.

Oh boy, some of these are really funny: Will the firm explore new markets, like selling candy-backed securities to babies w/o disclosing the lack of chocolate in the bonds? Heck, I think it's good for people to release their frustration with the financial industry. And I guess since JPM has been the government's whipping boy of late, they just decided to throw caution to the wind and open it up to the general public as well?

you need to stop publicizing these! ;D

I think the second there is one accident involving self-driving cars, we will go back to buying insurance. And given human nature, there will most definitely be an accident...(and the obligatory lawsuit naming Google as a defendant).

I think people ultimate make their own prospects and I think running away from your problems generally compounds your problems. I generally agree but I think there are exceptions. Sometimes you are born into good prospects (Buffett being born in America) and likewise sometimes you are put into an insurmountable situation. Now, if the question is choosing to take out hundreds of thousands of debt...that is a whole other issue. So what are her insurmountable odds? She lives in the richest country in the world, she's healthy, she has shelter and food, she has a source of income however meager it is, and she has huge debt that will probably leave her with negative net worth for a while. Right now, she just needs to increase her income enough to where she can start chipping away at that debt a little at a time. I assume zero prospects...Im not sure what her situation really is. I was speaking more in a hypothetical case, not specific to this woman.

I think people ultimate make their own prospects and I think running away from your problems generally compounds your problems. I generally agree but I think there are exceptions. Sometimes you are born into good prospects (Buffett being born in America) and likewise sometimes you are put into an insurmountable situation. Now, if the question is choosing to take out hundreds of thousands of debt...that is a whole other issue.

If I had that much debt and zero prospects...I would probably leave the country as well. Morally suspect, but otherwise you are guaranteed a life of constant financial stress and poverty. That is no life.

Samsung came in and copied apple to the greatest extent and with the lowest costs. Eventually as you say the other tier 2 players dropped off. Where is the moat, and what is there to prevent another player doing to Samsung exactly what Samsung did to Nokia, blackberry etc?

Also remember that there are devices which you own that other people see (iphone, car, clothes) and items you own which other people don't see (dishwasher, furnace, etc.).