Gregmal

So..... obviously the market has been crazy of late, and Ive been notably bearish(although still more than 100% long), HOWEVER, did Mr. Buffett not long ago state something to the effect of "if interest rates are permanently lowers, then the Dow should be at 100,000"? Or something to that effect. I say this wondering, because Ive been amazed by the run in a lot of things like AAPL and MSFT. But at the same time, looking just moments ago at MSFT, I ask myself, is MSFT really out of place trading at a 1.25% dividend yield and a 3-4% earnings yield against the backdrop of a 1.8% government 10 year?

Per CNBC, both Tepper and Druckenmiller are still quite bullish on the market. Tepper is probably one of the few guys I drop everything to pay attention to, so there's that. But there's also the fact that I still cant find anyone but myself and maybe a couple folks here to pencil into the "bearish" column. Which continues to concern me nonetheless.

Ive lived in the city for a short period of time. Ive lived, my entire life, typically about 30 minutes outside of it and no further than I am now, which is about 40 miles(70 minutes). My observation is that the further you get from the city, the more considerate, and more friendly people become. I do not necessarily think this means city people are inherently more selfish, just that this is how one must conduct themselves in that type of setting. If anything my time in the city reminded me of college(as does the descriptions of events in this thread). Everyone is in a dorm, and everyone is crammed on top of everyone else. You've people cooking, smoking, blasting music, throwing parties, fighting, screaming, etc. A free for all. Ask someone to quiet down? You're likely going to have an altercation. If you're lucky they'll placate you- only to then immediately go back to doing what they want. While as a single 20 year old I had no problem dealing with that kind of stuff, as a married guy with a family I have no desire to.

To invert this, with CVET doing poorly, it seems that HSIC (from which CVET was spun off) dodged a bullet and ought to be a better business now. It seems reasonably valued too. I put it on my watch list together with CVET. I would be more inclined to buy HSIC here than CVET. Returns since this post: CVET 34.4%; HSIC 12.2%. To be fair, everything is up huge during this timeframe. Except maybe smart money hedge fund guys who are probably up like 1.5%.

The suburbs are calling

bought a little more MSGN

Curious if others have any thoughts on this. It is my feeling that there have been enough settlements now that not only is there precedent but enough clarity in these stocks to go long. The flip side is that most carry a huge debt load and there is the chance that they would have a hard time earning their way out of it regardless. But my 2c is that the death by opioid litigation thesis is dead. I only have a small TEVA position but am looking at restarting ENDP and maybe MCK

So despite the consensus that things are very stretched, valuation wise, everywhere public, there is just this pocket of really cheap investments waiting to be had and no shortage of them despite the abundance of PE capital slushing around? This makes no sense.

The top 5 trending stocks on Stocktwits are TSLA, SPCE, BYND, APHA, CGC.... one probably couldn't put together a better short basket. Just let the sheep and cattle lead you to the greener pastures. Daily gains for those, +11%, +9%, +21%, +11%, +12%... material news? None.

The end is nearing. Just look at what kind of junk is trending everyday. A few glamor stocks and FAANGs and then retail investor stocks. I would be almost certain a good amount of money will be made being short just about anything sometime in the near future, especially stuff like AAPL. Nothing goes up in a straight line and things that do almost always retrace much if not all of it.

Yea the above is something I struggle with a little. You kind of have a great short setup here, but there are also quite a few very realistic scenarios here where you stand to profit from some tragic and unfortunate stuff. Not something a typically like participating in.

This is true for BAM but likely also true for a lot of other companies with very smart folks. And while its true that it would be ignorant to assume returns come from synergies and spread sheets, its also ignorant to assume returns will come regardless of what is paid for assets. Some have already pointed out the mall conundrum. The truth here is likely somewhere around what a couple have stated, that the returns comes from fees on AUM and this incentives acquisitions and also provides a buffer to the firms downside. I like the business, but its also a little risky. Playing hot potato even with a subsidy.

I get all of the above, for sure. But when viewing securities as ownership in a company, does it not bother anyone, that on a look through basis, your resources are being put to work via acquisitions, at an astounding rate, either at current market prices or in bidding contests likely translating to above market prices? By default, when you are the top bidder in a process, that means there is no one to divest said asset to, at anything but a lower price. Hardly investing with a margin of safety to say the least.

The businesses themselves, not debating. You could make the argument similar to that for a lot of current companies, if you also ignore the valuations. Im just surprised its not more concerning to folks the degree to which these guys have been going hog wild with the acquisitions given where the markets are and where we are perceived to be in the cycle. If Berkshire was buying stocks with such zeal, it would likely get people riled up. I do not see, by and large that there is evidence Brookfield is getting "special" deals, ala BRK in 2008-09. So is it not kind of surprising they are levering to the gills to buy companies at market rates, given what I think most people think about current valuations? I do find it ironic though, BRK won't touch anything with a 10 foot pole, meanwhile Brookfield cant find an asset it doesnt want to buy.

Clinic businesses are different animals than product pushers, entirely. It really doesnt matter what or where IVF gains traction, you will need the consumables and the equipment. Within those areas you will also have a differing mix in terms of quality. I personally dont think the clinics are nearly as solid a way to play this for a number of reasons but if you are so inclined Virtus(not really all that great of a business to date) and Jinxin(still a little early to tell) are more so where you'd wanna look than HTL. In terms of stuff that has nearly nothing to do with any of this, but is related to HTL shareholders, I think looking at the future uplisting should provide holders of shares today, with a meaningful return; available basically just for holding the shares...and independent really of an variance in sector or company fundamentals. From experience, an uplisting typically provides a 20-30% boost to the valuation. Many times more, especially for a high quality business. XPEL for instance, tacked on over 50% entirely due to the OTC/TSX to Nasdaq move.

https://moiglobal.com/barr-walker-202001/

https://moiglobal.com/bill-chen-202001/ Well done.

Picked up a few DD as close to $60 as I could

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3531018-brookfield-temasek-team-up-for-thyssenkrupp-elevator-bid-reuters These guys are quickly becoming the Softbank of real assets. To the extent that they can continue to borrow, eventually they will own everything. Its also hard to say they are getting "deals" considering the bidding process.

Yea FCAU has long been a regret of mine. Its been the better investment, largely because Machionne was a world class manager. With GM, you cant be a growth company when revenue isn't going anywhere. You cant be a dividend play, when you cant even bump the payout a mid single digit % every year. You cant be a buyback machine if you refuse to buyback stock, and you cant be a conservative company with a strong balance sheet when you are teetering on junk status. So, I'm not an auto executive and Im not arrogant enough to say I have the formula for running an auto company. But what I do know, is that I would find an identity and just stick to that. GM has half assed everything which is why its gotten credit for nothing. They've gotten some push from shareholders occasionally, and like with Tepper, done enough to shut them up for a bit, and then revert back to bad behavior. Einhorn had a flawed presentation, but the right idea with the dividend shares, and then growth shares. I also think the ship sailed on Cruise. There was a huge opportunity to IPO that in Hong Kong, or even here, and they did nothing. Now its hard not to question that valuation, given it may be another Softbank special. The right move IMO, which would obviously never happen, would be to shut the sedans, sell/JV the truck lines to Toyota or VW(someone dying to get into the NA truck market) and then become a pure play EV/autonomous driving company with only modest exposure to the best parts of "old auto".

Don't forget pissing away money on Lyft, Maven, and probably Cruise. While Ive long liked Cruise, it is hard now not to view it through the tainted lens of Softbank being the main reason it's considered a home run... All the car companies except Tesla have been trading like junk for the last 12 month almost without exception. that includes Europe, and to a to a lesser degree Japan. They are like the c malls of the industrials. For sure, with regard to the sentiment, but 2019 was yet another record year for auto sales(in $ figures). The problem is they are terrible allocators. E&P companies are probably better peers than the malls. They make tons of money in good years but give none of it back to shareholders because dumb career industry folks run the companies based on out dated and inefficient theories for "what you're supposed to do". Then during the bad years... shit gets ugly. As my bearishness on the overall market has grown, GM has started to bother me more. If this is how they perform in a record market, I probably dont want to be around for when things stop going perfectly.

Don't forget pissing away money on Lyft, Maven, and probably Cruise. While Ive long liked Cruise, it is hard now not to view it through the tainted lens of Softbank being the main reason it's considered a home run...

"If you run through a dynamite factory unaware your pants are on fire, you will likely share the same fate as an idiot who carries a match" -Gregmal

Hedged out the bulk of my GM position. Lightened up in high $30's a few months ago and have locked into a trade that makes this now or never with capped downside. Incompetent management and naive shareholders are a recipe for basically what this company has been since its IPO. Things are not dandy when your stock has gone no where, dividend hasn't been raised in years, buybacks nonexistent, and ratings agencies considering your debt-junk. Yet some continue to tell themselves things are great; probably fueled by Buffett inspired "value investor" wisdom.

Been trading FVE. Maybe something interesting for you special situation folks after restructuring.