Spekulatius

Instead of earnings 'tomorrow', why not get some earnings 'today' and just buy JPM (stock or warrants) or even GS? I think it is reasonable to posit that none of these three banks will be put into run-off in the next few years so the TBV discounts are not as relevant as proven ability to generate owner earnings. Besides - staff morale at BAC (and C, for that matter) is woeful. JPM and GS have better culture, better morale, and significantly sharper, stronger leaders. Both JPM and GS are currently available at 10-11x trailing earnings. I agree. JPM and GS trade at the same PE than BAC, but are much better managed. GS trades at 1.1x tangible book vs BAC 1.0x and I don't feel that such a small valuation difference in one matrix is worth owning a bank with mediocre (at best) management.

I guess I am one of these guys who seem to know less about investing than 20 years ago - all I have learned is humility and a healthy respect for Mr. Market. I am a diversified investor and typically have about 40 stocks in my portfolio. I did not find that my "best" ideas necessarily performed best in the past. I often had secondary ideas where I bought just a small position and those outperformed my best ones, (or those I considered best when I bought in). I like to be diversified as an insurance against my lack of knowledge and more so against my hubris. Being diversified has advantages. I found for example that when I have large positions in a stock, my judgement tends to me less rational. i think what happens is that a large position becomes not only a matter of money, but also a matter or ego (you got to be right) and due to the large stake involved (both financial and emotionally) the decisions about buying and tend to be less rational than with smaller stakes. I view diversification as "cheap" insurance against blow ups ands keep sound sleep at night.

I think continued shift to lower cost index funds and ETF's is a larger risk than a stock market crash. the numbers don't lie, the lower cost alternatives beat what many fund companies can offer and financial advisers and the managers of pension funds and admins of 401k are noticing and slowly moving assets to these low cost alternatives.

The risk is that volume growth in the Marcellus stalls due to low NG prices and less pipes are necessary.

I understand the hockey stick effect with IDR's once CPPL reaches the high spits well. I do think that most MLP's trade on distribution yield rather than the distributable cash flow yield (with the exception of EPD, which has its own following) and CPGX. Just does not look good with s 2.2% yield currently. Also, withholding some of their cash flow (~$150M if I calculated that correctly) is not going to get them very far, given the scope of their projects. I am on the fence on this, on the one hand, I like their growth potential, in the other hand, the risk to the growth (besides the execution risk) due to the NG price locations have increased quite a bit and I think that is what Mr. Market is discounting.

I had the 7% Cap rate from and CS report that is available in Etrade. Looking at this closer, it is an implied cap rate after stripping out some assets (Bergen Center) at a low cap rate of 4.5%, so not quite fair in that sense. FWIW, the CS report in Etrade is worth reading. I still don't think that UE is low enough, but I like their assets and keep it in my watch list. I don't like WPG assets as much and neither do I like the Glimcher management.

I am looking at UE (also a spinoff). What I like about them is that all their assets are in demographically favorable areas and RE space tend to be constrain (Urban/high density). I think they have a decent growth path just refreshing their properties.I think the implied cap rate is about 7% or close to that value. UE also has a lower leverage, which gives them more headroom to invest organically or by acquisition.

CPGX will be a great business as long as CPPL cost of capital remains low (a 4.2% distribution yield for CPPL is very low nowadays). If CPPL cost of capital goes up, the growth rate for CPGX will slow down and then a 2.2% distribution yield is way to low. I think I would rather invest in something like KMI at a 6% yield right now, full well understanding that the growth rate will be lower, because with a 6% dividend yield, not much growth is needed to justify an investment.

A mall with a 6% Cap rate and NOI growing 3% annually (the latter is rare, but growth is still possible for good mall assets) is equivalent to 9% Cap rate asset and stable NOI. I also think that the former is easier to manage than the latter. I have looked at CBL for quite some time and WPG recently as well, but I feel like those are melting ice cubes. B-malls are not only endangered by A-Malls, but also very vulnerable to Amazonification, since visiting them has no entertainment value and they lack the showcase potential. Considering the downwards potential and the leverage, I consider the risk reward ratio not that attractive.

Right. You don't have to apologize. I know this. It has been reflected in the price differential too (at least in the past, I have not compared today). The valuation differential between STRZA and DISCA has shrunk quite a bit. I did purchase some more SNI and DISCK yesterday. The cord cutting trend as well as the reduction in TV viewing time is something to watch for. The risk is that these media properties are losing relevancy over time.

I think the main reason Redbox is alive is that it is cheaper to rent a movie for $1.5 at the Redbox, than to download it for $6 via broadband. This is attractive not just for poor people, but also for stingy people like us :-). I think the price raises are starting to hurt.

With "this guy" controlling it, the stock seems in-investable.

Because a lot of larger accounts were held by Russians and it is always a good idea to screw foreigners rather than the own constituents.

Because the Greeks know too well that the situation is still precarious and would probably withdraw a lot of funds and starve their banks of deposits. It will take a while to get the confidence restored.

Did you read Varoufakis' interview? ( One source: http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/2015/07/exclusive-yanis-varoufakis-opens-about-his-five-month-battle-save-greece ) Apparently he had plan B and was prepared to issue IOUs, haircut the debt and seize Bank of Greece. But he was voted down by Tsipras and co. I agree though: they should have had plan B and they should have enacted it when it was clear that the negotiations are not working. I read this but also take it with a grain of salt. If Tsipras indeed voted the plan down, he bears a lot of responsibility - well he bears a lot of responsibility anyways, because he is in charge. Tsipras pretty much is a big hindrance, he irks everyone he is dealing wit in the EU, yet does not seem to be able to make hold decisions either, always appearing like a victim.

Ah, but the banks won't. Such a nice play. You make the classic mistake of equating a loan from person to person to Greece situation. It is not the same. A country is not a person. You cannot resolve recession with permanent austerity. You cannot take country's sovereignty just because it owes you (try it with Argentina or Venezuela, good luck). To get out of the perma depression, country has to default and devalue instead of extend and pretend. And BTW, if Eurocrats allowed Greece to default and then provided help to it, it might cost less than the whole extending and pretending charade. But actually even for person there are BK rules that might be less onerous than what Germany is trying to impose on Greece. And BTW, do you think that, for example, Detroit should have been cut off the USD when it said that it was BK? Perhaps that was the right thing to do, no? That would have taught it a lesson: "If you default, no dollars for you, make your Detroit-drachma currency!". I feel bad for the Greek people but they really brought this to themselves. How could they go into a negotiation with a pretty much binary outcome and not even have plan B (exit and introduction of the New Drachma)? Their government was not prepared to do this (not even an attempt was made), I they really had not choice but to accept the raw deal? And how the Greeks even expect a better deal, the way their current lead ship was behaving and pretty much negating every single promise ever given? What their government should have done after the referendum is to prepare for an exit from the Euro and then let it go head or tails. I think they may even a deal to sweaten the exit by the EU (who are more or less glad to let them go). An exit from the EU and the Euro would have the Greeks decide their own destiny, they could chose to default in a restructuring of by inflation. It would have been tough too for the Greeks but with a better chance of recovery in the long run. As it seems, they were not willing or able to do this, so now lose control of their own fiscal policies. They may be mad about the German now, but really should be mad about their own government, which apparently likes to gamble without holding even cards in the hand, not even weak ones.

He bought Berkshire and learned his lesson. Better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price than a fair company at a wonderful price.

Sharper, care to put your money where your mouth is? I would be happy to bet $10k against this assertion. I agree. I think Sharper has a strange way to look at the issue. The Greeks are broke and their banks run out of money, but that is their problem, the rest of the Euro zone is pretty much ring fenced at this point. I guess the question is if the ECB will keep Greece afloat until they finally exit or not. If not, Greece needs to switch to the Drachme within days, not weeks. Then they can print as much money as they want to pay there bills, it's just a matter of how much you can buy with this stuff...

I the reason not to buy it at 1x book is that it can be bought lower at times. I bought it at 0.91x book a year or so ago And that was when book was lower. As Jurgis mentioned, this is a slow compounder - you can read their annual reports- they are happy with 8% compounded. MKL and other comparable shave been compounding at low double digit rates and over time that makes a huge difference. I think Y is extraordinary conservative and many be a good stock for conservative investors (I still own some) but there are most likely better (higher return) opportunities out there. I for one would buy such a stock only when it's definitely cheap.

I don't think 3D printing is a technology to produce high spec parts (like forged parts,structural parts, high strength alloy parts), since it will be difficult to achieve the same physical and mechanical properties, plus quality assurance would be impossible. 3D printing may work for low spec, non critical parts that are needed as one offs or in very low volumes.

Terrible quarter with Sales down more than 9% and profits going to almost nothing. LE looks way overvalued to me: http://investors.landsend.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=916441 Fools gold, just like the other stuff that SHLD has spun off so far.

How about FLR - same business than CBI, clean accounting and great balance sheet (net cash) but not as cheap in terms of PE. If you look at metrics with EV rather than market cap in the denominator, the valuation compared to CBI is fairly comparable.

Yes here it is: https://www.proxydocs.com/0/000/888/926/hanover_foods_corp_05142015.pdf

If the project stalls, it's not doing anybody any good. Furthermore, if they do this, the reputation in the industry will make developer think twice to work on Sears anchored malls. Reviving a dying mall is difficult enough, it seems near impossible if the key stakeholders don't work together.

It looks like WPG overpaid for Glimcher, they paid an ~6% Cap rate for their B-Malls, which is too high imo. The bad capital allocation may scare away buyers of this stock. The combined company will be more or less run by the former Glimcher management, which I don't consider to be top notch either. While I agree that this is cheap, they have a lot of low performing Malls that need to be fixed, or otherwise may become worthless in the changing retail environment.