LC

What does the board (especially those who are long DELL) think about the two qualitative issues I present: 1. This claim brought against DELL by the SEC that they accepted money from Intel to use Intel CPUs exclusively. Going far enough as having top Dell executives literally calling Intel to ask for money to meet analyst estimates? PDF Here: http://sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2010/comp21599.pdf 2. The recent litigation against Jon Horvath of SAC Capital of passing on insider information from DELL to SAC Capital? What do members who are long DELL think of the fact that insiders disclosed this information? Are these issues in the far past? Or does this culture still exist at Dell? Does it make a difference?

Is it wrong to hope so? I'd like some of my ridiculously cheap limit orders to be filled...

I think the claim that the "first one failed" is relative to your investment mindset. Of you buy a stock based on this indicator and it goes down, then yes it failed. If you buy the stock because you believe it is fundamentally undervalued, then the RSI indicator would be circumstantial evidence that would support your buy decision.

This is on its face a faulty premise. The average consumer is never wrong. If the banks don't make a mortgage, the banks are wrong. If the banks do make a mortgage, the banks are wrong. I guess you haven't heard that the banks are greedy. I liken it to fast food. The greedy fast food establishments are forcing people to eat their tasty fare. They have no choice but to gain weight. It's a terrible thing. I wouldn't go that far. The fault lies with each party's responsibility. If a bank gives me a mortgage and I default, am I at fault for the bank's lost profits? Of course not. They agreed to lend me the money. Likewise, are the banks at fault for giving me a mortgage I can't afford and repossessing my house? Of course not, I freely entered into the mortgage agreement in the first place. I agree. I think Kraven was just using a bit of sarcasm with all of the negative media around banks right now. Like these lawsuits that investors who purchased MBS's and are now suing the banks because the loans turned sour...do your own diligence...you made the investment, now accept the risk. Too much talk of fraudulent behavior by the banks...why don't investors sue these companies for making such poor choices in investments! The only people getting rich at the end of the day aren't the banks...it's the lawyers! Cheers! The bolded is literally the most powerful incentive scheme in the modern era. I'm inclined to agree with you, and frankly I find it utterly disgusting.

This is on its face a faulty premise. The average consumer is never wrong. If the banks don't make a mortgage, the banks are wrong. If the banks do make a mortgage, the banks are wrong. I guess you haven't heard that the banks are greedy. I liken it to fast food. The greedy fast food establishments are forcing people to eat their tasty fare. They have no choice but to gain weight. It's a terrible thing. I wouldn't go that far. The fault lies with each party's responsibility. If a bank gives me a mortgage and I default, am I at fault for the bank's lost profits? Of course not. They agreed to lend me the money. Likewise, are the banks at fault for giving me a mortgage I can't afford and repossessing my house? Of course not, I freely entered into the mortgage agreement in the first place.

Lawsuit filed...I don't follow EBIX so I'm not sure if this is news or not but here it is: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=In%20FDCO%2020120928L37.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR

I don't think it's a good idea. Who knows what could happen in the next 5-15-30 years...I don't think you should be betting your house on ANYTHING. That's just my personal opinion.

Would you mind expanding on this, or pointing me in the right direction to learn more? Is this a broad legal issue or some type of clause in the company's incorporating documents?

I don't think it's taboo: Warren Buffet did it with other Grahamites in his years running the Buffett Partnerships, albeit usually over dinner or at the country club. Doing it over a forum is simply less private.

Wouldn't IB be able to give you access to the Icelandic market? Sorry if I am missing something here...

Interesting...before the question is asked, I personally doubt WB or CM were unaware of these holdings given their meticulous personalities. Thanks for posting Parsad. I was emailed this article from a family member who works closely with the Journal of commerce as well, so good on you for beating me to the punch :)

agree on finviz for free screeners

not sure, but my google-fu got me here: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000119312510044940/d424b7.htm#toc

b warrants are too much leverage for me--maybe there's just not enough people interested in them? I agree with hardincap: most likely not enough volume for the prices to be liquid.

Quick question: What do you mean by "shift investing to 'workouts'"?

Gio, do you have a link to that interview? I would love to read it as well.

\ I do. The only problem is timing the fall. History has shown time and time again that what goes up must come down, the only question is when.

Do you know where to find these old editions? The first 3 and the 6th are widely available either at book stores or online. Here's amazon.ca list for Security Analysis. Thank you, amazon.ca has more options than its US counterpart!

Do you know where to find these old editions?

Additionally, let's remember that taxes in the US were much higher in the mid-1900s on high-income individuals.

High quality does not equal competitive advantage. Now, having a culture or infrastructure which allows your company to consistently offer the highest-quality product in a market is a competitive advantage. Whether that be a corporate culture which attracts the brightest employees, or patents on certain processes/machinery, or the best sourcing of materials, or something else.

Concentrated portfolio!? Are you crazy? Don't you know you have to diversify away all your gains and losses! ;D

1) maybe, maybe not. 2) I don't think KO is that sure a thing anymore either. Judgement day? That's clearly hyperbole. Can you expand on your thoughts about KO?

That's exactly what I'm talking about. A guy can make a profit on it yet it might not be a value trade at all. It might just be a trader under the grand delusion of seeing a future that is just completely made up. But that grand delusion gives him the discipline to sell after a big rally because he believes it to now be close to intrinsic value. I think for each investor it comes down to having an "inner scorecard", or essentially shining the light of truth on your decisions. The numbers don't lie- if a business is undervalued it will show it in the numbers. IMHO that's the true "proof" of whether a decision was based on getting a good "value" or not.

What you're not taking into account is the potential for Facebook to greatly increase it's Search functionality and stealing a large amount of traffic away from Google. Yes but that is unproven potential which is simply conjecture at this point. Has facebook WOWed you with their search function, ever?