LC

Well, I think that in many cases they strive hard to introduce discipline in the companies they target. And business is giving to customers a product or a service that conveys the best value for the least dollars. To borrow from Malone: it is not rocket science, it is discipline. Therefore, yes: if I understand their rationale, I am willing to follow them. It could be financially very rewarding. Lol ok. Seems like you are very good at 'borrowing'. Well I hope you 'understand' this situation better than how you 'understood' Valeant. What a joke. I had about five responses to this all typed up, but decided to delete them all. But there's a saying about good men doing nothing, so I'm posting just to echo Dshachory's comment above.

Anecdotally it seems that MC pretty much lost most US. I always try to have at least one MC just in case (haha) some place does not take Visa. Through years, pretty much all big US banks switched to Visa usually without even telling me. I've got Barclays MC, but that's pretty much it. There might be smaller US banks still offering MC. Really? My citibank and capital one cards are both MC. And they are both recent (<5mo old).

No problem! ;D

I was just saying u guys bill more per hr than I do.

] Except that someone else on this very thread (many many pages back) already alluded to a network of Valeant-controlled pharmacies with chess names, effectively guaranteeing that more & more names will see the light of day; the poster implored us to "wake up from [your] slumber". This isn't new. New to me as I just periodically stop into this thread. It's kind of like going to an occasional Monster truck rally and/or WWE match. I really enjoy the chess terms. I haven't seen the term zugzwang in years. I gotta give it to Ackman/Pearson/whomever else...this is really great entertainment. Next they can move on to Go: http://senseis.xmp.net/?GoTerms Heck, Ackman should already be familiar with "Tesuji". Seriously, VRX is way too over-complicated to figure out with a degree of certainty, even to make a calculated guess. I feel it's not worth my time...and if it's not worth my time, it's definitely not worth your guys time.

perhaps sales/sqft? strategically located stores imho are still valuable. they legitimize the brand. but i agree the traditional mall model is dying.

I haven;t read Damn Right yet. Can anyone provide a brief synopsis? Is it worth it to someone having read Charlie's Almanack? I couldn't find a thread here.

I agree MP's deals need to prove their consistency. It's like a loan portfolio. Are they seasoned? Haha. I wish more data was released regarding this. Also the recent media scrutiny only puts a magnifying glass on the situation and adds to the pressure to meet numbers.

Salix's sales team is/was ranked the best in the GI space, I agree. That doesn't mean you can't fire them. Or half of them. Knowing he was going to keep them on, I didn't expect MP to say anything differently. Although, this was funny: Lower, higher, or just the way it is! That's what I tell people who ask where Alibaba's stock price is headed.

Iconix also spent a massive amount on acquisitions when amassing their portfolio, a large part funded with debt. They also tout non-GAAP numbers (but I guess everyone does these days). With Valeant, I have no idea what their sales distribution really looks like. I make an assumption: the sales channels span the gamut, from sketchy captive pharmacies playing really close to the line, to ultra-transparent purchases from highly regulated customers. I'm not trying to extend this to the entire portfolio, but does anyone know what % of sales are "close to the line" vs. arms-length? I don't, and I'm not sure I trust management to guide me. I mean, wasn't the pitch pre-salix to slash R&D and sales, and just shove these specialty drugs into their sales platform? And boom, magic happens? That's what it sounded like (to be overly blunt). Then they caught flak for that, and so the story gradually changes. No more slashing of the sales team (salix), no more price-gouging, etc. In my humble, uninformed, probably-too-conservative-for-this-market opinion...These guys are deal makers out to make a buck. They're not doing it by improving the industry or providing novel solutions to problems, or by raising the standard for everyone else. I doubt there's a real moat here, but they are good at squeezing dollars from assets (some assets sketchier than others) in a multitude of methods (some methods sketchier than others). Pearson is an ex-McKinsey guy. He knows how to squeeze and how to game the system to make money. That's my 2 cents.

Definitely turning into a soap opera. I agree with your question. My issue is how the heck am I supposed to know? These guys play pretty fast and loose (or so it seems). How can I get a sense of where true earnings power is? Can I trust the revenue line? How gutted is the SG&A line? And the crazy low tax rate, is that really going to be sustainable? Where are the skeletons? The counterpoint is that "well at some price low enough it becomes attractive". Maybe so, but how the heck can you figure out where that price is without any sense of earnings power? LC, as I mentioned above I've been on the sidelines. However, if you can't figure out a fair price, true earnings etc it belongs in the tok hard pile. I'll admit I've been intrigued given the names of so,e investors who are so heavily invested. I'm in the same place: I threw it in the too hard pile when they were "revolutionizing" pharma by slashing useless R&D from companies they purchased. Screw the other investors involved. On one hand, Valueact etc. are involved. On the other, Munger is holding his nose. So that's a wash. What's more likely, a "revolutionary" idea (that none of the other really smart people in an industry filled with really smart people have ever though of), or perhaps they are just buying near-death assets, slashing every expense possible, and shilling as much of the product though a really sketchy, captive sales network? Part of Valeant remined me of that company Iconix Brands. They buy really crappy fashion brands (i.e. "old news" - think Joe Boxer, Ecko, London Fog, etc.) and push the product through crappy retail chains. Except Iconix trades at 6x earnings and Valeant trades at 52x earnings.

can we just delete this thread?

Definitely turning into a soap opera. I agree with your question. My issue is how the heck am I supposed to know? These guys play pretty fast and loose (or so it seems). How can I get a sense of where true earnings power is? Can I trust the revenue line? How gutted is the SG&A line? And the crazy low tax rate, is that really going to be sustainable? Where are the skeletons? The counterpoint is that "well at some price low enough it becomes attractive". Maybe so, but how the heck can you figure out where that price is without any sense of earnings power?

The most sensible thing posted in this thread to date.

kraven is a user here, who (and i feel i can quote this), fervently believes that "anyone who dares call himself a value investor in the footsteps of graham and buffett should be reading AT LEAST 500 pages daily, of only the most tediously informative material." other activities such as: eating, sleeping, bathing, spending time with your family (aside from a predetermined 30 minutes during federal holidays), or doing ANYTHING else is simple counterproductive. if you don't know how the latest soybean harvest in the Jiangsu province will impact the cost of freight in the southeastern US, you simply shouldn't be managing your own capital and better leave it to the true geniuses working at kiewit plaza. just kidding of course :D

how much stock do you guys put in them? do you listen to them at all? i feel like it's just a pony show put on for both parties and not worth the brain damage trying to delve through all the cryptic nuances of canned management responses. i've found value in them for really small, off-the-radar companies and something like Fiat. in both cases management doesn't seem to give a #&(# and is willing to be blunt and candid. the common thread being when management has no incentive to add layers of nuance to shade the truth.

Dazel, are you a new FCAU shareholder? I'm curious how long you've been an owner. I've followed your comments in other threads (Pico, Altius, etc.). What got you interested in Fiat?

Reminds me of ocwen/altisource. Sub-company with shady practices overcharging clients? check Main company billing sub-company at inflated prices? check Bill erbey still walked away rich even after their stock was decimated. Sounds like valeant found a way to squeeze a ton of cash out of insurer's pockets, at least temporarily. Are people still under the impression they are revolutionizing the pharma industry? edit: here's another post i made in the ocwen thread:

Thank you marlin

it depends on each brand. before selling sub-100k cars, maserati as a brand was not in a similar position as LV was when it started selling bags in macys. i think pushing product helped get their name out there to more casual car buyers.

I'm actually upset they did not select ENZO as the ticker

A line in GW's one-pager got me thinking, what other companies produce appreciating assets?

Why would he do that? He has said he believes the entire industry needs to rationalize. Why de-leverage in that kind of environment and put your capital at risk? To rationalise the industry, doesn't Sergio need capital to takeover, say, VW? Or VW needs capital to takeover FCAU. I think he wants to sell and get himself and the Agnelli's out of this business. Remember, he wanted to retire but was convinced to stay on. The guy has bee n wearing the exact same outfit to work every day. He is a machine, but eventually the pace wears out and you need a break. Keep the gem (Ferrari) and let a long-term operator handle the rest. Spell out the roadmap (as he has done during investor calls) for whomever that operator is.

Why would he do that? He has said he believes the entire industry needs to rationalize. Why de-leverage in that kind of environment and put your capital at risk?

A lot of people think they know enough about a certain idea but really don't (myself included!). We fool ourselves because we fall prey to the same psychological misjudgments that we profess to know like the back of our hand.