Jurgis

Can I just get rich fast instead? I don't know. Can you? If you figured the secret sauce please share. No need to post openly here if you don't want. You can also PM me. ;D If I knew the secret sauce, I'd be on a private island sipping mai tais and not posting on CoBF. But then maybe I am and I'm just trolling you guys. 8) Or maybe I'm a true value investor and I'm way too cheap for a private island. ::)

Dem CoBF investors, grumble, grumble.

Can I just get rich fast instead?

Russian dealers are so 20th century. Just buy it on Amazon FFS: https://smile.amazon.com/Images-SI-Uranium-Ore/dp/B000796XXM/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2X6ULNHYIQ44Q&dchild=1&keywords=uranium+ore&qid=1595350695&sprefix=uranium%2Caps%2C157&sr=8-1

What precautions do you need to take to store/handle uranium? Uranium investments get interesting once you reach critical mass. You have to diversify to avoid the blow up. It is a regulated material so you have to protect and secure it. I would suggest putting it in your right front pocket and at night sleeping with it under you pillow. ;) That should guarantee glowing returns.

What precautions do you need to take to store/handle uranium? Uranium investments get interesting once you reach critical mass. You have to diversify to avoid the blow up.

Same problem here. Immortality could solve it. Or adding some parallel processing units. (Amazon had a huge Kindle sale on Sunday, so my queue increased by way too many books.)

I watched the documentary and liked it. It's not very in-depth, so it's probably more attractive for non-technical people. I still haven't finished the book. I started it and it was boring. Might have to pick it up again sometime.

Can I be Zoya the Destroya?

@Vish_ram touched one big point that I have raised previously: the difficulty of investing into growth stocks is that the ultimate TAM is tough to know. The ultimate TAM is what makes growth investing work. But it is also one of the big risks. For successful companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft the ultimate TAM is way bigger than what you expected when you invested. E.g. if you bought Apple for iPod TAM, it was overpriced (likely), but then came iPhone TAM. Same with Microsoft (DOS -> Office -> Windows, etc.) and Google (desktop search -> mobile search -> Android -> Ads, etc.) and Netflix (DVDs -> Streaming -> Content). This might be the argument why SHOP might have (a lot of?) growth left: they could conquer adjacent TAMs that are not visible right now. OTOH, you don't really know if a company will successfully shift into new TAM. For each Google, Apple, Microsoft, there's a bunch of companies that did not shift/find new TAM and pretty much burned out. Paying high growth price for such companies leads to painful results. This might not be visible now after 10 years of tech bull market, but it might be visible. Let's see how Uber does, for example. Less dramatic examples might be QCOM, INTC. Pretty dead ones might be Fitbit, GoPro, etc. So it's not that trivial to predict how the TAM will evolve. Selling on sales slowdown might seem attractive, but it would have missed you huge returns on Microsoft, Apple, Netflix, etc. OTOH, it probably would have saved you from the companies that slowed down and then pretty much died. Although I do diversify, I disagree that diversification is key for growth investing. If you put your money into Google. Or Facebook. Or CRM. Or Netflix. You could have retired many times by now. So really diversification is - like Buffett said - for people who don't know companies in depth. I also disagree with "Never get too attached to any growth stocks.". Once again Buffett is right: for real growth stocks the time to sell is never. Let me add Akre holdings like AMT to that list. And yeah, AKREX sells very infrequently. And there are other successful growth investors who behave the same. But hey, people are paying for growth now. Valuations are very high. So perhaps this is not the best time to switch to growth or to hold forever. 8)

Thanks Jurgis. True that they have owned some of these names for 3+ years. But some of the names (typically smaller positions are a bit newer including Slack. Yes. The newer positions are much more the "mainstream" growth/Motley Fool Rule Breakers/Robinhood/momo. Which is a possible risk, since Abdiel may have less of a variant perception and the prices they are paying are way higher.

https://whalewisdom.com/filer/abdiel-capital-advisors-llc#:~:text=Abdiel%20Capital%20Advisors%20is%20based%20out%20of%20New,and%20a%20top%2010%20holdings%20concentration%20of%20100.0%25. Looks like mostly software/cloud growth portfolio. Not surprising that they did well, although still kudos for 50%+ annual (if true). If they were a mutual fund/ETF, I might invest with them. Although likely right now is not a great time with growth names trading in the stratosphere. Edit: I took a brief look at their portfolio. I have to say additional kudos for investing in AYX and APPN years ago. Both of these are not your standard recent-startup-hyper-growth-gonna-conquer-the-world companies. Both have been established long time ago and apparently only recently got into (hyper)growth phase. IMO such companies are difficult to find: most old companies don't just start (hyper)growing, so the natural tendency in the growth universe is to discard old companies that have not done much for years. Noticing that old company is at inflection point can make you the 50%+ annual returns. 8) If this was not a fluke, then Abdiel seems to have done good DD. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alteryx https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appian_Corporation

Santa's Secret - below mediocre Lemon Cayenne Cleanse - I kinda liked this one. Not a definite "buy again", but a maybe Organic Cream of Earl Grey - not my cup of tea (pun intended). Can't say it's bad, just not my taste.

INTC is still dominant in servers/cloud. I've seen pretty zero AMD on Azure. And for CPU (non-GPU) AI/ML/NN workloads people optimize for Intel chips/instruction sets. Of course, the risk is that this could shift to AMD too if price/performance becomes significantly better. Disclosure: no position.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/reopening-psychological-morass/613858/

$2.99 on sale today at Amazon. https://smile.amazon.com/Checklist-Manifesto-How-Things-Right-ebook/dp/B0030V0PEW/ref=sr_1_2?crid=6O58AQ6LHCMF&dchild=1&keywords=checklist+manifesto&qid=1595187527&sprefix=checkli%2Caps%2C177&sr=8-2

Yes. You succinctly captured the American spirit of individuality. As an outsider I had never realized it quite as starkly before this virus revealed it. Not all Americans are assholes. Although CoBF has a share of them.

I bought a large collection of weirdo teas from their ongoing sale. So far: Pomegrateful - OKish, not something I'd buy again. Hot chocolate - OMG, that the heck is this thing... just say no. Might have to get @merkhet's address and send him all the ones that I could not drink... ::)

Civ VI was available for free for some time on Epics Game Store. I missed it. I guess I was not that interested. ::) I may have mentioned that I started investing in stocks because one day I realized that instead of spending time trying to win in imaginary world, I could spend time winning (making money) in real world. And the rest, as they say, is history. ;) I still play. But not strategy games. They take too much time IMO.

Pattinson's is ~5 times larger. And yeah, interior/etc. ages/dates to the time of build. Unless you refurb. Which value investors would be too cheapskate to. ;)

Great observation. I guess when you make money on momentum, momo begets more momo. So more monkeys running the same strategy actually leads to better performance and can allow the monkeys to get really wealthy. I guess when it doesn't work, it unravels pretty quickly as well. Conclusion: monkeys that collaborate build a better civilization faster than the other monkeys who pretend that they have built a civilization but really just read books internet forums and write analyses that no other monkey reads.

Jim Pattison has a yacht: https://www.superyachtfan.com/yacht-nova-spirit.html Charlie Munger has a yacht. https://channelcatcharters.com/about.html Although it is a cheapskate yacht really.

Value investors suck? Old news.

Thanks. Bought it.

Well, looking at M* numbers they had 0.44B revenue in 2010, 0.66B in 2016. Pretty much no growth. Then they bought BATS ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cboe_Global_Markets ) and revenues jumped to 2.23B in 2017. And then their revenue went pretty much flat again. 2.5B in 2019. So really saying that earnings went up 5x is misleading. They did not grow organically much. Now, with 0.63B FCF and assuming 5% growth going forward, you can expect about 11ish% return based on DCF. That's really not bad in this market. And the business is not that bad. That's assuming they grow and don't go total flat or into a decline. What is your growth expectation of their business? I started this post 3 hours ago and did not read what Schwab711 has written. So any similarities are clearly coincidental. ::)