Spekulatius

UPS

That would be my recommendation. I don't know why people feel compelled to discuss politics here - this is and investment board. Granted, politics and investment mix to some extend, but much less than generally presumed. Even Munger said, that politics don't matter much for BRK's business, I don't know why it should matter for us here.

DISCK - I think my thesis is broken after the earnings report. Cordcutting increasingly seems to become a strong headwind.

Minority owners probably can't do much. I would have liked to keep this in my portfolio, but it apparently isn't meant to be. I think there is a good chance that they will buff the offer a bit.

I am surprised this is worth 20% more than yesterday for some people after these results. I don't get this new economy stuff. I go back to my cigar buts.

Lilac numbers are crappy. OCF for CWC is down almost 20% YoY. Unfortunately CWC is now 2/3 of the company.

Opel has been a dog at least since the early 90's and possibly before that. At some point, calling it quits is the right thing to do, but apparently not easy. Yet, MB has done it and I think this is a very good move for GM. On a similar note, VW should exit the US market and just keep their luxury brands Audio and Porsche. Their Volkswagen business has been making huge losses in the US off and on since the 80's...

I would be worried if I held REV. The equity could become a zero easily. If there is a valid investment case for this POS, I 'd like to see it. It will be interesting to see how City is doing in the same space.

EEQ

+1 - I agree with all the above. Einhorn's preferred stock idea was already floated for AAPL and I think the actionable was very weak there and is even weaker for GM. I think GM did a great capital allocation move by getting rid of Opel, which has been a dog in terms of financial performance as long as I can remember. More buybacks would be nice for owners, but MB goal has to be to keep GM viable and I think a $20B cash buffer is not unreasonable, given that recession can drain many billion $ in cash in a single quarter. Just a reminder that GM was also FCF negative people during the last quarter.

Maybe, these guys with good looking track records were not that good to begin with, just lucky. Since there are so many entering and exiting the field, some ought to get lucky. With investing, it is hard to distinguish luck from skill with investing, a track record of a lucky, but unskilled manager, might look the same this thread track record of is skilled investment manager. I probably takes a along time (> 10 years for sure) to distinguish skill from luck, just based on track records. Another possibility is that some of those with skill over time get fat and lazy and are just not that good any more.

Adherence & compliance are 2 huge drivers of efficacy & can definitely be used to improve efficiency & bolster brands. The question is, is Express Scripts able to influence patients to take their meds correctly? (especially when their relationships with patients are so contentious...) Still waiting for a return call from the ex-company medical officer (starting to wonder if it matters...) Hell yeah, it matters (I have a beginning to the ESRX story but no middle & it's impossible to guess the end without it...) Daubtfulthat ESRX can improve adherence much.What do they know about the patient? they can probably tell if the patient is not refilling his Meds when he should, which probably is sign that he is not taking them as he should, because but besides that....

When secured short term borrowing is costing you between 15% and 22.5% a year and your business is about confidence and making a spread between what you borrow and what you lend, you're done. Agreed. Generally speaking, no financial institution survives this.

The situation is probably different in Europe, but in the US, Amazon is mostly used because it is convenient (even to return stuff ) not because it is cheap. Ecommerce is about 10% of total here and growing probably 20% YoY. Now if you assume that total commerce is growing 2% or thereabout, you can do the math and pretty much all the growth is ecommerce. if you extrapolate this further a few years, retail quickly can become a rapidly melting icecube. 20 years from now, city and town centers could look very different than they do now, with way less retail locations and strip malls. I would guess that many town centers will be redeveloped with mixed used residential /commercial properties, that create meeting points, where people want to go rather than have to go for chores. In the past, malls served that purpose to some extend, but I think they will have to change drastically to fill the need for social interaction going forward.

Well, if ESRX mad acquired a business for $4.7B that made $2B annually ten years later, they got a pretty good deal, imo. Since the business has twice the margins than the remainder, it is clear that Anthem wants to renegotiate. There is no "high ground" in a situation like this - ESRX would need to provide value and I Anthem think they can get a better deal going elsewhere. I bought a few shares in ESRX about 1 1/2 years go, but grew increasingly concerned by the contentious customer relationships. This made me think that ESRX franchise is not as strong as they claim it is. I also think that this PBM business is a layer that should really be integrated in the insurance operation, the way it used to be.

Oh, I agree it's not a fad. It makes long-term sense. But you have a congregation of capital of enormous size going into them. When a correction happens it will be bigger and faster. The recovery will also be quicker. Cheers! Many things begun by smart people and end up being done by fools in the end.

So ESRX loses16% of their revenues, but 31% of their EBITDA, which means that the margin on their Anthem business was twice as high than that of the remainder. Losing 31% of the EBITDA will certainly hurt - I am guessing net in one should be down at least 40%, in that light, ESRX share price decline has actually been fairly moderate.

The fact that most of the world looks like that, does not really make the situation any better. You can't justify a bubble without similar bubble somewhere else. Something gotta give at some point and it won't be pretty. FWIW compared to Canada, housing in the US appears to be quite reasonably valued.

If it's cheap ($50 or less) , I go to Amazon and call it a day. if it is a more expensive item, i search online using google and go to slickdeals.net to find a deal on it.

98% retention rate does not matter, if you still lose your largest customer which accounts for 18% or your revenue. It is interesting that Anthem won't even talk about them with respect to a contract extension. This may be a watershed event. I owned this ago years ago, but sold about 6 month ago, as I felt their customer relationships get more contentious.

Someone in this thread said it better than I could - SHLD is just like a bundle of money that is on fire. What matters is no how large the bundle of money is, but if the fire can be put out. If you own SHLD, you are betting that the fire can be put out, before all is gone, despite no evidence during the last 10 years that it can be done. Another rule I live by: Beware the CFO leaving, it is worse than the CEO leaving, often far worse. CFO know the numbers or issues, better than anybody else, and they don't like leading a company in a bankruptcy in their resume generally.

It's going to pop. the reason may not be known and it does not really matter. These bubbles are reflexve, due to positive feedback mechanisms. Prices rise, because prices rise and the inverse logic applies as well. Interest rate rises or government interventions may do it. Once prices stop to rise, the marginal buyers (Flippers etc.) will be gone, the natural buyers won't feel buying pressure any more and hold out, and prices start to fall. It will take a while to show up in numbers, but a change in buyers perception can change in a month or two all of a sudden. I have seen this happen several times in different markets. Real estate is one of these things that feels like a better buy to most people, when it's expensive and getting more expensive.

Money is fungible, how would you determine where the Dollars for a specific expense is coming from? The whole idea makes no sense to me, unless you talk about money laundry.

I guess the same could be said for AMZN and GOOG. And that’s why I keep each of them a small position (3.5% AMZN, 3.5% FB, and 5.5% GOOG). Taken as a whole they are a meaningful part of my portfolio, but I guess the risk all three will be dislodged by new competitors is small (at least for the foreseeable future). Cheers, Gio AMZN would be hard to dislodge, imo. First, this is not a virtual company, since they run a substantial distribution infrastructure. Then they are willing to forgo profits seemingly indefinitely? Who would, much less could dislodge them ? There is only Walmart who can match the infrastructure and maybe beat them on price, said if they get sloppy.

Biggest risk is that someone develops a better mousetrap out of nowhere. Since such a business is asset light and mostly supported by network effects, it's hard to do, but once a competing business gains traction, it could grow very quickly, since you can rent out the server capacity as needed. Network effect are hard to overcome, but again, if the user would allow an alternative software to tap into their FB user contacts, a user could reestablish his own network very quickly. I think the question with FB is not how long it is going to grow, but about the longevity of it's dominance. In the past, large business, once they gained scale where dominating based on a mix of physical presence, brand, technology, scale, distribution etc. Now, a lot of these factors above are not issues any more in this asset light world. Just as FB grew quickly, a competitor can potentially grow just as quickly and dislodge them.