Spekulatius

Damn it! How nobody thought of this before? Shoot, let's nationalize the entire economy and stop worrying about bankruptcies or bailouts. Problem(s) solved! You wanna run for President? I can’t run for president, because I am not US citizen and not born here anyways, but thanks for thinking of me. Also, I don’t know how you get the idea that ai suggested to nationalize the whole economy, Inusut suggesteddp the revolutionary thesis that if everything works just fine for virtually anyone, but a few speculators, the current status quo is very likely to persist, why would it not?

What else is the US postal service is going to do other than getting involved in e- commerce? I doubt that sending Hallmark cards is going to be a growth business and the days of junk mail are counted to as its is replaced by junk email and junk targeted ads very quickly.

Oracles tax rate was 18.9% in 2017. The cloud business has not much to do with retail either and I don’t really think that ORCL is competitive in the cloud business.

These times were crazy. You could by lower investment grade bonds for mid teens yields, if you looked around. Also, the financing side is one of the issues with Malone, he runs hothead entities he controls with fairly high leverage and not very “creditor friendly” with this assets shifting around and deals. Few people care now, but when credit gets tight, the remaining bond buyers will, IMO.

For those that like history, I can very much recommend Barbara Tuchman books. I listened to the Audiobooks “ Guns of August” (how WW1 begun and was fought early on) and “March of Folly” (Samples of Folly from history ) which I feel should get a new edition with a chapter on how Trump runs our country, especially how he starts an Trade war. I also read “A distant mirror” about the 14 century and liked it a lot. What I like a out her books is that the very much regards history through the then contemporary eyes of the protagonists who lived in these times, but also draws (somewhat opinionated) comparisons to present.

. Hey it's me - someone who understands how CRTs work - turns out they don't really. They are essentially giving money away to their buyers at risk premiums that do not align with the risk actually being taken, which of course is up for debate on how you model it (by design), but the former CFO of one of the companies now issuing them wouldn't be doing so if he were still in charge because, as he notes, you're giving away too much $ for the amount of risk being mitigated. The problem is that no one can tell because the market has only been going up. As Rosner et al have noted - CRTs are counter-cyclical. Meaning that when the cycle enters a downturn no one who is currently buying them will continue to do so. So then all the risk will flow back to the GSEs and they will have already given away the amount of capital they should have kept in the equity position (the set up pre-conservitorship) but since these guys are all self serving frauds that were put in by all the people trying to cover this up and give the market to the banks, they go along with it because the need to get paid too. And if they're willing to strong arm the BoD in 2008 into essentially a mob loan, what's to stop them from pressuring their current mgmt (who was replaced by the frauds) to do whatever they want. Which will further work to their ends of blaming the GSEs for privatized losses in the future when no one buys the CRTs in a downturn thus giving the gov't (but really the banks) ever more ammo to claim that the GSEs are a failed biz model or whatever horseshit they're going to say. And most people, including the politicians won't know it or won't admit they know it because they're getting paid too. So yeah they're a scam and the people buying it won't say it becuase they know they're getting paid and the people selling it want the GSEs to fail long term so they're pushing it hard. And no one anywhere is scrutinizing it because all the 'research' on it is coming from where? oh right the banks selling them. So la la la the fraud continues. Have a nice day. I think the GSE’s work better under conversatorship than as private or private public enterprises. Their capital levels (essentially zero right now) don’t matter and if they make losses in a downturn, they have an infinite credit line from the Fed that they can rely on. So there can’t be a run in the bank. Problem solved. Keep things exactly the way they are, in this case the limbo status is the best case scenario for all stakeholders, except the shareholders of old of course

Somehow these numbers don’t add up. If ALLY has a 12% ROE, they can really grow faster than 12%, without increasing their leverage, much less purchasing 4% of their shares every year.

I don’t know any Profession where it is Ok to underperform for 10 years and I do not know why money mangement should be different. It‘s as simple as that.

Points mentioned above are well reasoned. I would say that way to invest in the BAM complex is BAM itself not the investment entities, because in the end the fees will make the difference. i don’t think they are playing nice wth GGP. I had some GGP shares a while, but sold in the news of BAM taking over GGP. If I owned them now, I would be pissed. Exchanging GGP into BPY is a bad deal for two reasons 1) No chance of anothe suitor or liquidation 2) With BPY owning GGP assets, there is now and additional layer of fees to run and own these assets There is a lot of reflexivity in BAM‘s business model, which works both in positive and negative feedback loops. some. Some of the peers like Macquarie got hit by this in the 2008 meltdown, BAM got spared, due to being more adept and maybe a bit of luck too, but that is mo guarantee that they will come out Ok next time.

There aren’t that many suitors that could take out GGP with an EV of ~$33B. SPG could do it, I don’t think they are interested. I agree on avoiding these yield vehicles. BAM’s incentive as a GP is to make them bigger (hence the GGP takeover) more so than making them better.

US cavallery is rolling in: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-just-took-charge-232702543.html

Doesn’t Mr. Big already has effective control? I don’t think he would give it up, BH is his golden goose and he will own most of it and squeeze existing shareholders out. I bet he would fight any changes or offers harder than Cracker Barrel’s management did.

Your comment is very misleading. On a dollar basis yes, but the letter was clearly noting a per share basis. Only a small amount came from issuing stock at .05 when book value at year end was .0482. It amounts to about $166,000 of the $2.3 million increase. Yes, you are correct, the secondary was only slightly above book at that time.

Yes, it’s not hidden. Nefarious stuff is usually hidden in the footnotes. I still wonder why they do it. It does not look good.

Consolidation is required , since it is a related party and BAM is the GP. However, I don’t like they mark IFRS or quoted prices, whatever is higher apparently.

I agree with Oddballstocks that smaller companies shareholder meetings are much more rewarding. in these meetings, Managers often will engage talking with shareholders and make off the cuff remarks that can be quite enlightening. one also get a real impression on how management thinks. You also got to meet other investors and learn how they think of the fact that they own this stock alone may be telling.

If the value is there, you dont need a takeover thesis to make the stock work. If you need a takeover thesis to make the stock work, it’s not a value stock. Just my opinion.

Did anyone notice that they use IFRS valuation for BPY and quoted values for BEP, BIP and BBU? IFRS value is $4.5B higher for BPY than in quoted value, for the other entities the quoted values are higher. Sneaky accountants....

Chemicals and particularly their markets (fertilizer, constructions tubes) are cyclical, especially with respect to margins ). I think most chemical companies in Europe expect a down year in terms of profits for Y2018.

This is a complaint website. The rating is meaningless, even the highest rated Lenders (credit unions etc) are rated 1 1/2 stars. That said, it seems like CACC is extraordinary quick to repo the cars.

A lot of the it book value growth came from issuing stock above book value.

By that logic, why vote for Christine N. McLean? She is Prem's daughter. Because I didn’t know that this is the case, otherwise I would have withheld the vote for her as well.

I highly doubt that Siemens needed a bit of change all of a sudden.

Got my Proxy and voted for all Directors but Benjamin Watsa. I hope more people do the same , so they at least get the message.