Spekulatius

I think healthcare is the next vertical that Amazon will try to tackle. Between drug distribution, care services and HMO/ insurance there are quite a few areas where I can see them being a disruptive. The health care venture with BRK/ JPM and the small buys in mail order drugs etc are first steps to figure out how to make something work.

Negative decision from the Brits. Taking my chips off the table at $4.7. The problem with this play is that this company is not viable on a standalone basis. This wasn’t supposed to be that hard.

Thanks for the feedback. I cannot comment on the purchasing part. As a user, I have used the GUI For IT Service and it is head and shoulders above what we had before. I cannot really comment on NOW software overall but I do know that workflow management is one of those things that is really core to a companies business processes, unlike applications like slack, which cover communication amongst employees and can get replaced relatively easily without disruption. I think the same thing about some analytics (which tend to affect only a few employers and something managment just says, screw them and put up) or security (which may become more commoditized). So in other words, if NOW’s products is in a company, it’s almost impossible to get it out gain.

It’s a problem with thesis creep - Tesla was supposed to be bankrupt by now. Expectations were very low going in this earnings, thats why the stock reaction to this beat is so significant.

Despite the fact that the financials are a mess and the execution was lacking, I actually think that the Wework model is here to stay.I believe startups will be paying for networking in these offices and flexibility is enticing for both startups, but also for mature companies that want to have offices in different locations or want ties to the startup culture. The business model requires a lot of cash and probably needs a whole lot of equity to survive a downturn, but I think it makes sense and probably will be imitated with some variations.

Bought some PYPL, and a first lot of CTVA. Bought some SPY puts at the close.

Ouch! Another guide down. I don’t own this crappola spin-off any more. Pre market trades around $9.5: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/resideo-announces-selected-preliminary-third-212500494.html I am not as familiar with REZI, but my conclusion on GTX was that it is a solid, if somewhat cyclical, business weighed down by excessive debt and asbestos liabilities. GTX is interesting due to high margins, a flexible cost structure as well as high leverage (and capped asbestos liability that can be deferred in crisis ), but diesel is a major headwind and not sure they can make up for that with gas. Anyway, whenever I get tempted, I look at Linamar and figure it's cheaper, better in the long run and with a lot more optionality. I agree on GTX. My main concern is that GTX turbocharger business will go away entirely with electrification. A supplier like Linamar can replace lost business, but GTX cannot, and even if they could the margins of any new business would most likely be lower than what they currently earn. REZI issue is margin pressure - I think they are getting commoditized. I will keep it on my watch list, but I don’t think I am likely to touch it.

Ouch! Another guide down. I don’t own this crappola spin-off any more. Pre market trades around $9.5: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/resideo-announces-selected-preliminary-third-212500494.html

If I were employee, I would ask for tequila shots with every lay-off and restructuring. This was one thing that Neumann got right. Reminds me of this scene:

In what world can an enterprise tech CEO with no consumer goods experience transition to become the CEO of the one of the largest athletic shoe and apparel companies in the world? This can't be a positive sign for Nike. John Donahoe is a Meg Whitman type of CEO; full of consulting-based platitudes and not a lot of execution. I don’t care to much about NKE, maybe they want a techie CEO. NOW stock was down a lot because of general weakness in the SAAS group and the CEO transition heightened the concern that the CEO change portents bad results. I thought that the more likely explanation for NOW’s CEO is that he wants to do something completely different. I had NOW on my watchlist since Druckenmiller mentioned it in late 2018 at around $165 as a disruptor. It’s now even roughly at the same price in terms of price/sales relatively speaking, so I thought I dip my toe a bit into this. It’s one of the more moaty business in this space and might be a good value, if they keep growing and improve profitability. They are no slouch in terms of stock related comp, but are a bit better than WDAY.

Well just a simple look into the latest bag holder report should remove all doubt where not to put any money: https://backend.otcmarkets.com/otcapi/company/financial-report/231867/content

+1

It’s always worrisome, if the guy running the numbers decides it’s not worth it.

If I'm an employee, I'm pissed that he leaves a billionaire while the company is on the brink of bankruptcy and my options are worthless. I'm also pissed I didn't get an opportunity to cash out as well I'm surprised that's even legal. I worked for a company a good while ago that got bought out. The chief executives could cash out their stock and options right away because they had a provision for accelerated vesting, the common serfs didn’t . The wheels came off quite quickly after the merger. Some animals are more equal than others.

Bought some NOW AH.

BRK is not in the real estate development business, so it makes no sense for them to acquire this. Brookfield may buy this, but probably would pay up, so selling it to them makes no sense either. I don’t think there are too many buyers around that would pay full price for a hodgepodge of assets all over the US. I think they will need to complete the development and then sell them piecemeal to get full price for these assets. I agree that selling the 11 year old Gulfstream was a cheap jab towards the former CEO.

Bro, its Howard Hughes, of course they gotta have planes! More as this sets in, two things here stand out as questions and observations... 1) Cost cutting and noncore asset sales(such as toys like the Gulfstream) indicate there s been a lot of unnecessary spending going on. I haven't followed this super close, but Im surprised they had this much waste to purge from the system. Especially given the shareholder base. But I guess where there is a lot of value, theres people realizing it, in one form or another. 2) This thing is supposed to be gushing value, from all over. So kind of incorporating the above, its surprising that after running a process this is all they are able to do.~$2B in asset sales and some cost cutting against $9B or so EV is nice, but definitely not screaming theres so much value here they dont know what to do with it all(I suppose this is why we got the selloff). A management shakeup also kind of implies a greater degree of uncertainty around what they'd previously been doing. I did not seem to think this was a concern. At the least, it didn't really seem to ever come up when talking with people about this name. Lastly, I love share buybacks, but given all the development and cash intensive activities here, question whether its the right use of capital at this point. The assets are too much of an hodgepodge to be an easy sell. In a way I am not surprised that this process ended up a bit of a dud (hence sold into the pop after the news broke), but at $100 and change, I decided to buy back some shares. Looks like they had one only one potential buyer after the DD and this after contacting 35 different buyers, if this account is correct. https://twitter.com/coredentaldds/status/1186391149000511495?s=21

Isn’t the growth in deposits for the larger banks mostly from acquisitions (during the GFC) and not organically? The organic deposit growth doesn’t look all that impressive to me.

Bought back some HHC AH. I also added to WED.V

The “ in between” situation seems to me much worse for the Brits than either to stay it go.

The banks may not want to take every credit risk out there - but they are happy to fund those who do for a price. The big banks have huge funding advantages and while they may not play in every part of the financial services business, their central role in deposit gathering and payment clearing as well as their integration with the transmission of interest rates to the broader economy makes them pretty bullet-proof. Does that make them great investments relative to every other stock, I'm agnostic about that. But they are not "melting ice cubes". I'm pretty sure about that. wabuffo The problem with abandoning mortgage origination (and servicing) is that banks are not customer facing any more and provide a commodity service to those that are. I am sure providing wholesale financing is profitable, but at that point, they lost part of their brand and data/knowledge about customers. Brokerage (at zero commissions ) is a service banks provided to increase customer engagement and as a path to upsell wealth Management services etc. They were never good at it and if the Wells Fargo advisor GUI is an indicator for industry standards (that’s the only one I know), it was functional but bare bones. The zero commission trend for the brokerage become an issue with Robinhood and perhaps IBKR announcing lite with zero commissions. Now that you can have zero commission with all the main brokerages with much better service and GUI’s, I think the banks will be having a hard time keeping assets and hence lose another way to acquire and cross sell to customers. It’s not going to kill them but things like this are slowly chipping away at their franchise.

I don’t think it’s quite as simple. Look for example at mortgage origination. WFC had a huge part of the market - ~27%. I think right now they have 10-11%. Focused players ate their lunch. I think asset management will go down the same route. Why hold assets at JPM, Merrilledge (BAC), JPM, when Fidelity, Schwab etc offer zero commissions and more interest on cash and a better platform. I personally just moved my assets from WFC to Fidelity and I don’t think I am the only one. Payment is another one, where Visa, Mastercard and other tech savvy players take. It’s and pieces from the banks. Mortgage market shares for mortgage origination (PFSI long thesis): https://www.valueinvestorsclub.com/idea/PENNYMAC_FINANCIAL_SERVICES/6907838692 The advantage of the big banks is that they can win share from smaller players, who have are much less tech savvy. I do agree it will be a slow bleed, but I think the banks will lose large parts of ancillary business over time. I do think the process is slow enough that it does not negate an investment thesis is the large bank stocks, especially given the current low valuations. <typing corrected>

Same here. I suspect the pot. SEC action may scare some investors away from dark stocks and cause some selling. I am happy to oblige and provide liquidity if the price is right. Not much public information out for NSYC, though from the Seeking Alpha post in Feb, 2019 it sounds very interesting - especially at a market cap of $9m. I emailed the company to see if they'll send annual reports on request. I don't like my chances, but it's worth a try. I don’t have NSYC’s annual report either, but there is enough information in Eric’s podcast episode to let me conclude there is a lot of value at current prices: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-intelligent-investing-podcast/id1205082419?i=1000429276814

I have owned JNJ before when it as cheap relative to the market and growth had slowed down. I think this was probably 15 years ago. I think they have proven time and time gain that they can restart growth and generate satisfactory results. it’s a bit like Nestle that way. So I think it is a buy in heuristic way. I think at this point (aging bull market) , it will likely outperform the index with much lower risk. The main risk is that JNJ just stalk out, and one likely will be flat or perhaps slightly down, but it is unlikely that one will incur large losses. So it’s a heads I ein, tails I don’t lose (much) kind of situation. I actually think it is a Buffet buy, but he shied away from Pharma and health care overall. The robotics angle is just a free option. It is an indication that they are working with the a LT perspective in mind.

Lol...I can't tell if you're serious. You're not a buyer here, but you'd be a buyer 4% lower? Yes, I am serious. I have gotten two round trips out of this stock from below $25 to above $28 already this year. I think odds are high that the stock will go below $25 again. I don’t mind holding either, but if I get a quick 15% return out of an apparently rangebound stock without news or fundamental changes, I tend to take it. I try the same thing with FRFHF. Call it trading sardines with a value backstop.