Gregmal

This is again amusing and an exercise in mental gymnastics. So Tesla equity raise is widely deemed a "smart move". Ok, Why? Because the stock is overvalued. The result? Stock trades higher...

How are you factoring in managment's indefensible past capital allocation? Did anyone ever figure out who was living in the three Houston single family houses they owned? I wonder if management still has a corporate jet fetish? ...owning residential houses, private plane fetish, etc? There's not really going to be a way to get rid of those things, or at least one should assume. However I do think there's been a better effort with respect to capital allocation the past few years, which has a lot to do with the improved share price. That said, "better" here, is like comparing a 10 year old car with a 12 year...obviously not ideal but the hand thats dealt. I mean they still cant even get their financials out on time. Something that probably bothers newer investors, but something that anyone who's followed RCI over the years just looks at and goes "that's RICK". All the said its not like this is trading at 25x...its trades where it does for a reason. But the business does spit off enough cash that should they continue to be serious about buybacks, its impossible not to have it translate to the share price. Probably just as much, if not more so a math trade as it is a fundamental one.

Geez, writser. You must have been really, really bothered. I am so sorry! It s funny how some react when the shoe is on the other foot. I thought for sure you were all better when Viking escaped a performance audit in the "Stocks for 15-20 year hold" thread after claiming to time the market and generate decent returns! But then a day later you're still rearranging your signature and going on long sarcastic rants. My goodness, take a deep breathe. Everything will be ok. Hang in there bud. The first 24 hours are always the toughest. Spek, With regard to Fidelity or another broker, that will be tough. The issue relates(probably) to reporting issues and FINRA crap. If the position is not big board traded, it would be hard to find someone that would take it. Maybe an Axos correspondent? Although if they do accept it you'll probably have to fill out a foreign/OTC securities report. Annoying and time consuming. Fidelity a few months ago would not ACAT in LAACZ or HTLZF when I had asked(although oddly you could buy/sell both in an existing Fidelity account). Which also leads me to suggest finding/asking for your initial purchase trade confirmations. Those may come in handy because these sort of issues stem almost entirely from the firms compliance department and WSPs and are designed to avoid issues with AML and OTC reporting. I'd probably do that for any OTC you own because Ive heard some firms are starting to require proof of original purchase to liquidate them. RBC even now requires it for positions you purchased with them! I also think you've at least got a solid lead in the company's head of legal and if I had to wager, thats probably were your time will be best spent.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3540323-rci-hospitalityplus-6_6-after-10m-buyback-boost This just got interesting again. Especially with the size of the Q1 activity, these guys could do some damage. Buybacks are the only way for companies with limited followings, no obvious go private partner, and significant perceived valuation discounts to do anything about it.

Sheesh, ya this is the shit thats been scaring me with a lot of the brokers. They just dont touch anything that is even mildly at risk of being a potential problem for them. It may not work, but it might be worth contacting IB and requesting that they mail you the physical certificate. Then you can contact the company or its transfer agent and tender your shares via physical certificate and then overnight the certs with obvious tracking and insurance. Otherwise... you're probably in a tough spot.

I would suggest Pure Cycle or Madison Square Garden. Pure Cycle basically owns the MPC and will reap build out dollars; effectively a large string of one off gains that eventually bridge the gap to the highest quality recurring revenue stream- municipal water servicing. It is 15 miles from downtown Denver/4 miles from DIA and is located in basically the only place left to develop in that MSA. You have tremendous 5-10 year visibility. The only thing that stops it is probably a wide spread economic recession, which history has shown us, probably will effect everything else as well, if not more so. Madison Square Garden(if post spin, the sports teams) owns one of a kind, trophy assets. Historically, it doesnt matter what decade you start and what decade you end at, sports teams are mind bogglingly good investments. Even lousy ones. Here you get the best ones, at a discount.

Earthquake will probably temporarily be very good for the company as it creates more demand for the storage units as people get displaced. In the long run, peoples views on Southern CA sours and it will impact value. I think there is a degree of undervaluation where you say "yes, the market maybe silly, but I'm paying $80 a sqft for the portfolio and the market is low to mid $200 for the SoCal and mid $100 for the Phonenix, Houston, and Vegas. At a certain point, it becomes a bit of a non-factor. If your thesis is that NYC and CA will migrate to the warmer climates with lower taxes, I think the Phoenix, Houston, and Vegas are those cities that will become net beneficiaries of that migration. There is an inherent hedge built into the portfolio. Never thought of it that way until you bought up the question. I wonder if management meant to do that. It appears that Houston, Phoenix, and Vegas are the cities where development opportunities still exist and that's why LAACZ has allocated capital there. It's very hard to build in SoCal with the NIMBYism there. Which makes it a good portfolio. We're not saying that their CA properties should go for 2% cap rate. Private market value is sub 5%. Their assets sit on large sites and have re-development opportunities. So, if you're paying a 5% cap rate for them in the private market, you've got optionality on the development side. Sure, 2% is silly. 5% is too rich for me. But, I'm paying 9% when I strip out the downtown LA assets. Plus, they have development assets that should increase cashflow in the next couple years. I dont really have anything specific to LAACZ because I think for a number of reasons, its hard to triangulate a proper valuation given a lot of the nuances here, in addition to your observation about the management style. I sold out here a few months ago. Many of the reasons had little to do with the company, but at the end of the day I didn't feel it was impossible to get better returns with better liquidity elsewhere. But I arrived at the same conclusion as you did above, by making the same type of investments you described above. I used to have a little thing for under leveraged real estate companies. I still kind of do. But with the rate environment being what it is, I think its crazy for any real estate investor/company not to be utilizing some form of leverage. Many companies Ive followed and managers quote the 8% number, if anything I think its just boilerplate industry speak. A good deal is a good deal. The implications of a set hurdle kind of imply the bar is pretty low so Im not entirely certain why people so frequently cite figures like that. Purchasing RE with just cash, isn't very enticing, if it is, along with the never sell mantra, JW Mays probably checks a lot of boxes as well.

Added some MSB

BG has been missing, but in his honor, it should be announced.... New 52 week high and a respectable sized bid at $42!

Then perhaps there is a misunderstanding. Those are all perfectly reasonable. You are correct in that you did not call him, or insinuate that he is a liar. Your posts seemed to be curious as to his strategy more than "There’s an unverifiable 5 year CAGR (that changes every other post ..) implying “investing god” but a verifiable 10 month post history implying “ignore list”."

Well, my last post here(hopefully, but possibly not), I will clarify that indeed using the term pos was probably not the ideal adjective nor indicative of the point I was trying to make. I was in no way suggesting that writser is a pos. Just poorly describing a general type of response that came off as an individual attack. So, in the spirit of being a little nicer, my apologies. Otherwise, yes RNO, you have been vetted by the forensic analysts and it was determined you are probably lying. As I suggested in my prior posts, you wasted your time responding and then re-engaging with pupil in the follow up requests for information; in the future you probably should be reminded that it is a waste of your time to do so. I initially thought pupil was asking questions about your purported strategy for productive reasons. Not solving the age old mystery of "where did Jay Gatsby I mean, RuleNumberOne, get his money?. I might also causally debate the idea they are envious, but certainly there is a thread of something that threatens them enough to stir up enough emotion that would prompt one to investigate something that is, as previously stated, so irrelevant, and unverifiable.

Watchwood. I think thats missing the point. Its not "uncontested bullshit". Its also unequivocally unverifiable, so theres that. It's not "just" contesting it, its piling on and then taking it down a path of disparaging him. I mean, its not like everyone here is going to run around spreading like wildfire the idea that "OMG RNO does 50% a year" if somebody doesnt take it upon themselves to call him a liar and dig up old posts to conclude that "he previously said he easily beats 25-30% so thats proof he cant be doing 50!" Then of course too, theres the about face. Writser is usually one of the first ones to cry about "oh politics" with the backdrop being the sanctity of the investment site, but also semi regularly one to be unnecessarily condescending to people about investments. I dont think its a hard bridge to cross to see that this is 1) inconsistent, and 2) probably errs on the side on unproductive to encouraging investment discussion. We can all challenge a thesis or give pushback in productive or unproductive ways. There's plenty of examples of that which dont involve unnecessarily being a pos. Nobody should give two hoots about what people claim their returns are on the internet.

Good piece on the deal https://seekingalpha.com/article/4322883-simon-property-group-acquires-taubman-why-this-is-game-changer

Added a little more BRK and SPG

To me at least, the question is, who cares? The only one with a material benefit from RNOs returns are RNO. If we dive in, as has been done, its probable to conclude that the returns are of course "possible" but very "unlikely". But again, whether they are or arent doesnt really impact anyone but the author. If we wanted to be scrupulous jerks, we could literally attack just about every single person on the board who ever posts an investment idea, analysis, or makes a statement. We are all(hopefully) at least in the category of moderately sophisticated investors; we can all come to our own conclusions without being pompous jerks and risk alienating other(and future) posters, especially ones who actually take the time to engage. I've actually been quite surprised by how many people read, but dont post. Ive been contacted via PM a bunch of them over the years and the reason is always the same... Further, sometimes, there are people who go far out of their way to do the above, when their own "analysis" could just as easily be picked apart and disparaged unnecessarily, probably to an even greater degree. All I'm saying is that I dont think engaging in that sort of stuff is productive. For all the whining about politics from people, at least those of us that engage there know what we are getting into and its largely contained to its own section. Someone taking the time to post their thoughts or share their "strategy", and being called a "liar", or having posts from the past dug up and ridiculed...I dont really see what purpose any of that serves. (especially again with the nitpick bs like "oh you said easily 25-30% here, and now say 50%! OMG. well, 50% is "easily" better than 25-30%..." Who fucking cares? We all do our own thing. We're all going to be wrong if we invest enough. We're all going to make mistakes. If there are folks who claim they dont lose money or make mistakes, well, I think most of us are capable of drawing our own conclusions..... I'd point to Cigarbutt as probably a good example of doing it the right way...

Well Spek, I guess they agreed with you! https://seekingalpha.com/news/3539970-simon-property-to-buy-controlling-stake-in-taubman-for-3_6b-in-cash

Well, as usual, the forum police arrive. But I dont think its really worth the effort or energy getting bent out of shape over what some guy on the internet claims his returns are or arent. I think, but he can correct me if I am wrong, pupil asked questions out of interest, particularly to see if there was anything inherently useful in the purported strategy that he could explore further. If there isn't, discard and move on. If there is, valuable information has been attained; one of the main purposes of existing on an internet based investment community. I think its probably wise to view places like this as an ecosystem where one can both learn, and contribute. After all, one's market timing strategy works for them, no different than others who purport to fervently search for any sort of irregular M&A spread or deal with an attached CVR, buy without spending "much time on the proxy"(despite admitting "In my experience the 'background' section is usually one of the most interesting parts of a special situation proxy"), apply some plug in input from the Kelly criterion based largely on inexactly quantifiable judgment calls, and then "hold on for dear life", because after all, if it doesnt work out, its just another "short term trade that becomes a long term investment".... All jokes aside though, I think its counter productive to the purposes of an investing community to go out of ones way to be a jerk to another contributing member(at least in the non politics section), as we recently saw in the Altius Minerals thread; it can have unintended(or more malignantly, intended) consequences. Read and explore/discard. Or if you're frail, just ignore the user if they bother you that much.

And the rebuttal to the rebuttal. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a81b554be42d6b09e19fc09/t/5e4073fcff19c4789026a215/1581282304249/Blue+Orca+Issues+a+Rebuttal+to+China+Medical+System.pdf

If you operate opportunistically, and employ high concentrations, its not really that unbelievable(although certainly not an easily replicable strategy). It also, kind of filling in some deduced details, probably explains Mr. RuleNumberOnes ranting about lack of market volatility; he exploits them and feels the Fed is costing him opportunities. If you are highly disciplined, this is probably the best strategy, but the downside is you arent invested heavily much of the time and should the market just stay in a largely peaceful state, you're losing money. But the opportunities are there. CVS earlier this year was a no brainer in the $50s. I know a bunch of us here traded DVA a bit back, quickly going from $50s to $70s in a few months. AXP in 2016 another. Target a few years before that. WFC right now is probably the closest thing to a special situation like that, but probably doesnt offer the same upside. But if you're willing to take big concentration risk, this is probably the easiest way to achieve hugely outsized returns with low adjusted risk.

Wow. So mostly plain vanilla stocks like what the people here buy. Just better timing lol

If I had to guess, it seems like he'd probably have a bit of a better understanding than most with respect to the market darlings. From there, just wait on market driven and non fundamental panic points, and then buy the stocks with high yo-yo effects. Probably avoid things like earnings, etc. Without the merits of debating names, you could probably pull stuff like this off with names like SHOP, TTD, MDB if you're full risk on, but even stuff like AAPL, GOOG, FB, AMZN, MSFT, etc if you're risk off. clarification: by "yo-yo effect" I mean a high correlation to whatever your action is predicated on. If you snap your wrist, the yo-yo goes in the direction you desire. If you are betting on the S&P reverting, said security moves with (x) times the S&P, if you're betting on SSS moving, XYZ will move on SSS, if you're betting on credit quality erosion, ABC with move 4x in the direction you wish if you are right on credit erosion. Sounds simple but can be more difficult than one would think. Also quite different than just buying WFC and waiting for some rerating in perpetuity.

Please support your point that central banks have removed market fluctuations! With facts, not feelings. Well for one, just look at the VIX. But of course a fluctuation is all relative. Some people buy 1% dips and naturally they'll be more active than folks looking for 10%.

RuleNumberOne, you can be a dick, but so can all of us. I do think you may go overboard at times, but again, so do some of us(especially myself). But in terms of approach, you are 100% right. I read something a while ago and did some research on the subject, and while I forget the exact numbers, a HUGE percentage of overall stock returns occur in very brief periods of time. Timing is everything. I find your ranting to be a useful dose of "the other side of the coin" that few else here bring to the table. Of course, no one is forced to read any of it. Heck, if theyre soft enough, they can always ignore you. I also concur, the folks who obsess over modeling and whatnot, often have poor returns and often consistently get hung up on stupid stuff that prevents them from seeing the big picture. Out of school I went into the biz overly focused on that kind of shit because thats what your told is important. But its not and most of it is a total distraction and downright waste of time.

This was actually a good read and probably bolstered my belief in what I wrote earlier. Lets see what the confirmed numbers look like in a week or maybe a month. But so far, you have barely 100 total cases outside of China and 0 deaths. You also have a death count that is bolstered by people with other conditions and complications, which is always important to consider as well, even with the common flu. A week later, maybe some 300 total non China(although like 90% of regions close to China), and just 1 outside death(in Hong Kong).

Blue Orca, one fo the better activist short sellers I follow put out the follow report this past week. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a81b554be42d6b09e19fc09/t/5e3b7688fe4a570a61057022/1580955280455/Blue+Orca+is+Short+China+Medical+System+Holdings+Ltd+%28HK+867%29.pdf Something rarely seen, CMS, maybe a half hour after the report hit, requested a trading halt to their stock, which has remained in effect the past couple days. Today, they released this. http://www.cms.net.cn/kangzhe/PicNew/ImgStocks/2020-02-07/80cb3ef1-1f54-4915-bc1a-35c713abc963.pdf Stock should open for trading next week. Last few Blue Orca pieces have been pretty lethal. Hong Kong is still kind of a tricky place for investors, and thus these type of situations seem a little easier to find than here is the states.