Spekulatius

Just asking questions. Even if I don’t like a stock, I don’t short it. I do own a bit of CMCSA and like it more, due to lower valuation and leverage.

I don’t agree with Oddball that an spending cap is a sign of a failing organization. I have seen this several times in my carrier and I think these are just political announcement. In reality, he is probably rubber stamps 90% of these expenses anyways, he just want to increase the hurdle for them to be present. In my experience, these two of things tend to go away quickly and quietly. A couple of things are very strange in this email. 1) Why are they starting the night shift now? It’s not exactly a new idea to run a manufacturing line 24/7. I agree it’s not easy to get a third shift started and the quality of people you can hire is usually not the greatest. Nights shift generally only work when you have already a reasonably smooth operation with the other shifts and that does not seem to be the case now. 2) I am surprised that they shut down the entire production line and sent the workers home. Typically, you don’t want to shut down a production line, you want to tweak it, using the existing workers input and their help to fix it, unless of course the production line is totally broken and needs to be totally reconfigured and the workers are not involved in continuous improvement/ six sigma. 3) When things go bad, you need more meetings not less, to ensure that everybody is informed and aligned. Elon is going against the grain and my experience there. 4 The 10x better tolerance from suppliers is utter BS. Of course they can get that, but at a vastly higher price. Tesla’s finish is not even up to par with their mass fabricator competition, so the issue is unlikely the suppliers anyways. Tesla as an artisanal car maker very likely single source from rmmsot components, so if they fire one supplier, how long is it going to take until they get a new one online. it could take month to get a new supplier online for a complex part and of they would likely have to pay for engineering work, increasing their expenses not reducing the. in the end, there would be no guarantee that the new supplier is better either. Typically you an to select your suppliers very carefully and understand what they do well and what they don’t and pick them accordingly and then work with them to solve problems. Reconfiguring supply chains is not for tha faint of thr heart, but neither seems to be working for Tesla. You really wonder about the retention rate for workers, supervisors and manufacturing engineers in this organization.

What makes you think I would short it? I look at LBRDA vs directly buying CHTR.

I don’t think I would like to work there. I am quite surprised that they are not running 24/7 schedules currently. That is pretty much a standard in the car industry or any other Capex heavy industry for that matter.

Looks like the NAV of LBRDA is about $91 vs a $83 share price- do folks here think that a 10% holding discount is a bargain? I typically look for larger discounts when looking at holding companies (even though this is pretty much a single asset holding company), due to the cost burden at the holding level.

It would be interesting to know why? I suspect because they are really run for employees, not for owners, similar to investment banks.

^ Very good thoughts from Contra123. A belated welcome to this board!

Yeah, reflexivity raises its ugly head. The high debt load doesn’t help either. My best guess is that the 3G model will go to the scrap yard, because it only works short and medium term.

The cost would go wrong. They probably would cost a billion or more a piece. And you can’t decomission them at those scrap yards in India or Bangladesh either.

I agree with above. I think it is fooolish to invest before signs of a turnaround are seen. a the turnaround does not look likely either and if margins keep on shrinking and SSS falling, I don’t see why the shares should stop be falling either. Turnaround are tough, especially in retail. I wouldn’t bet on it, unless you have some clear insight why this one will.

Willing to share some of those opportunities? It’s the first time in 12 years of stock investments that I lose such a big percentage of my original investment and it has been tough to accept the loss and move on before there’s nothing left! There are always tax losses left. I would take the tax losses and move on. If you really think, BBBY is unique, you can buy back after 31 days with the tax losses locked in.

What makes you believe that CHTR current EBITDA is not representative of future EBITDA? I expect to see mid single digit EBITDA, Sam than with CMCSA, which trades at lower multiples. I prefer CMCSA because of lower leverage and lower valuation at this point.

You don’t really pay for phone it’s cable providers, in my case the tripple play offering (with phone) was cheaper than the double play after the rebates. We never used the phone since we were happy with Ooma and didn’t feel like changing.

I've always like you Ragnar - but now I am bitter and envious. It takes me hours to read through many annual reports, probably due to my inadequate pace of reading - so anyone that can do it in 15 minutes has my eternal envy. On a slightly more serious note, I appreciate your post and you thinking through the nuances of reporting and evaluating businesses. In the previous generation of investing it seemed that we could find and buy more companies based on simple low valuation metrics like P/Es and such. But now nearly every low P/E type company has earned their low P/E. I have found that most of the value investments that we make now are more in the camp of "this doesn't exactly look cheap based on the raw numbers, but the numbers are missing the point." The low P/E companies have mostly been considered by all of us value investors and had their market price driven down to a low P/E because that is the accurate value for the business now. Anyway, in this new-ish reality for value investors, I find that the questions I am asking myself about our investments and the analysis is more complicated and involves more behavioral elements. This makes your comments Ragnar very resonant. When any of us CoBFers and other value investors are looking at a company and are asking hard questions - like "do the current operating numbers really reflect the true long-term value of the business?" And distinguishing between those companies in which the numbers are not currently great but deep qualitative analysis indicates that the current numbers may undervalue the longer-term prospects of the business and those companies in which the current struggling numbers accurately reflects a business having issues which impair its valuation is one of the main tasks I find I'm having to engage in - at least with the market circumstances such as they are now. I agree with NBL that it has become more difficult to find truly undervalued businesses and most business that are cheap based on readily available numbers are probably valued correctly. The world has become more “intangibles” in how business is conducted and those intangibles are harder to evaluate than book values, PE ratios and balance sheets. In addition, I believe that the business environment changes faster, probably driven by technology changes, so any valuation projected in the future become uncertain to a larger extend than in the past.

15 % of the fund is probably not enough overlap to justify this calling double dipping, but this would be different, if the majority of the fund’s assets were invested in PDH. Then those entities start to become more like the same legal entities and can you really habe two jobs within one organization? Then, there is an issue with the control pyramids when you have circular ownership in related companies, which means that with small amount of capital (which isn’t really your own, if you run a fund) you could control a company, similar to what Mir Big does at BH, or the way the conglomerates used to be run in Italy. Those arrangements tend to yield poor results for minority shareholders.

We only know a fraction of what is going on in any company. As an investor, all we can do is put these scraps of information into context and make an decision whether we like it enough to invest or not. SYTE is not different in that regard than any other company. Investors have no choice to make a judgement based on the incomplete information. It is Managements job in a public company to communicate as clearly as feasible so that investors can make a somewhat informed decision. I also think that if someone does not like, that the public holds their feet to the fire, they should not run a public company, but stay private. Then they can do whatever they want with their company.

Medicocre quarter at best. I see one time gains tax of $1.6B, partly offset by $0.67B in litigation costs. This does not look cheap, considering that WFC likely will tread water for years. I think they will have to invest more in their online platforms for both brokerage and banking. Both look really stale and are clumsy to operate.

I think BofA has the best online experience from the large banks, Wells Fargo comes last, IMO. I actually like the experience at the branch with Wells Fargo best, but that is becoming less important. When short term interest rates are becoming significant, I think newcomer like Fidelity and Ally become competitive, because Fidelity offers money market rates.

^ Simple, he works for the owner, the treasury. I think he sleep very well. And with the full backing of the treasury, there is no issue with soundness either, their rating is the same than the US sovereign. If they ever generate a loss, they will get the cash to plug the hole, in exchange for an IOU. Same than with social security.

Building a refinery is very expensive and I think it is actually more dangerous to transport refined products, even in a pipeline, because they are more volatile and flammable. I agree that every solution should be discussed.

A hole in jeans is a fashion statement that makes jeans more valueable. So I smell win-win solution. 8) Exactly! Also , you can pick a different spot to sharpen your blades.

Bookings are falling off a cliff. Solitrons products look like offerings from the nineties, which is probably one of the biggest issues with this company.

It’s a big difference if something is already there or if you build something new. Also keep in mind that while there are tankers in the Bay Area (Richmond) and LA to supply refineries, Offshore drilling pretty much stopped after an oil spill near Santa Barbara. Local residents cannot always stop new projects, it they can fight them with tooth and nails - sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. I am not saying it is right or wrong, but there is solely self interest at work, and I have to say, I can’t blame them. I am fairly sure that most board members would do the same if they were in the same situation, I don’t have the impression that most here would put community interest before themselves, not if they work in the financial sector for sure. 8)

It’s seems to me that investors in SYT get a fair disclosure and as of now a fair price for their equity $0.11) if they chose to exit. That’s better than most Microcaps for sure I don’t like SYTE and how it is structured due to the high cost burden (600k annually) and a high likelihood that the HVAC business will turn out to be a failure. I also don’t see, why owning a fund or several funds within a C-Corp is a good idea, it certainly isn’t tax efficient. In my opinion, the smart play from a risk reward perspective would be just to invest in Alluvial as a LP and be done with it.

A refinery is way dirtier than a pipeline and even nowadays, they stink to heaven. People who have been to Bakersfield , CA or New Jersey know. I think Richard makes a good point about the piplinene not being in the self interest of the local population. BC and Vancouver are wonderful places and a spill would be tragedy.