Gregmal

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3678908-office-reit-stocks-lag-broader-market-gains-as-office-occupancy-stays-low Is retail vs office still a debate? Dont get me wrong, premier trophy properties are still gold, especially in the era of Project Zimbabwe. But as an asset class or lets say for instance, if you are the owner of a large pool of these...its hard to imagine meaningful improvement over the short to mid term. With tax increases looming, companies have further incentive to squeeze savings. How does it play out? If you have a current lease everyone will at some point head back to the cubicles and corner offices. But there's definitely going to be serious discussions when renewal comes up; at least much more so than there was in 2019. The occupancy rates as it stands arent great, but are also misleading because of supply coming to market and additionally the nature of an office leases(IE long term, so really the only people who's shift has been reflected are folks who's leases expired in 2020 or 2021). Is there a catalyst or angle to be a hardcore office bull right now other than relative value? I am by no means in the short camp, for the simple reason that March 2020+ threw things so out of whack that you could buy things with terrible issues and still make money, but as things in RE-world continue normalizing, eventually the fundamental issues will become the valuation driver. So when "not all going BK" gets crossed of the list of catalysts, and it shifts more over to "expanding sq/ft and occupancy"...whats this going to look like?

This is a mega interesting subject and I have been kicking it around in my head for ages. I still dont know the right answer. The thread about picking 3 stocks for the next 15 years further piqued my curiosity although it also caused me to go deep on my strategy. Bottom line is that I dont think, or know, or whatever, what anything will look like in 10-15 years. Businesses that are or have been good holds for that sort of duration have typically been dynamic in terms of their ability to evolve; essentially doing so, so that their shareholders dont have to. Or just being purely dominant. Berkshire is a good example, and granted Im at a 40% or so allocation. But I started the year around 8% and see it as event driven/rerating. Id sell a third or so around 275/280 simply on the rerating. I'd take it back to ~10% if it closed in on $300. So its a good, dynamic business but the valuation is important and the position size weighting is ultimately predicated upon my short term assessment. Should I just leave it? Grow out of it through earning more while keeping the position the same? Honestly, no fucking clue. So essentially, the question is, what is the proper allocation for a position that is "forever". And again, humbly, I have no idea. If its a forever position...why not be massively aggressive. Many people put 20%+ of their net worth into their primary residence and hold it for 30 years. Is there value to security? Sure. Is it static? Again, IDK. Personally, where I am leaning is that if you are investing in the public markets you need to be cognizant of today, tomorrow, and the future. The 3 businesses I chose for the "next 15 years" thread all fit the category of things Ive 1) owned for 5+ years. 2) would continue to own for 5+ years. and 3) companies I own that I literally dont give 2 shits about the short term movements in. I have maybe a half dozen of these. Its so nice and totally on a different level vs much of my other investments. Its nice not being neurotic about "if I get 10% lets sell". But.....I also evaluate my short term and catalyst driven positions. Largely, they do as well, if not better than the "hold forever" stuff. Even the "hold forever" stuff, when I look at the trading positions for my investors who demand a strategy more hinged to short term, it beats the day lights out of "hold forever". So...I think that ultimately there is a trade off. The answer I still dont know. But largely, I think the personal question comes down to what are you trying to do and how active do you want to be? Do you want to be consumed by short term events? Or are you simply looking for a business that passively does for you what you'd hope your own does, without having to spend 40+ hours a week doing it, and 4-5 figures on the accounting every year? Ultimately I think the answer revolves around what you are looking for out of the capital invested. If you are simply looking to put it somewhere and then take it back in a decade, the bar should but significantly higher. But the expected return is probably significantly lower. If you are willing to put in the work, the risk is high but so is the reward. For example, I saw AIV as a total crap box but also saw the spin off and subsequent valuation of the stub to be retarded, with a clear catalyst for rerating. I bought in back in mid December, with no intention to hold this thing for more than maybe 6-12 months. From sub $5, its provided an awesome short term return. Stuff like this is at the bread and butter of how I make my money and why I have been quite fortunate. So again, do you want a "full time job" IE monitoring the short duration investment, or...are you looking for something simple, easy, and hands off? In a way, its simple and makes sense. But it also seems to highlight the obviousness of just finding something that works and appreciating balance in ones own portfolio...which effectively takes us back to square one!

Listed by Barrons as one of the top infrastructure plays poised to benefit from Joseph's spending bonanza. Up nearly 80% inside of 8 months. Think its still got room to run. More Gregmalpha.

MSGS, HTL, MSFT Would probably expect future returns to be similar to past returns.

Yea I dont think the "politics" is really even the issue here, but rather a wakeup call as to the various nuances of sports teams and ownership. I fail to understand, after taking away baseball in 2020, what the fans, players, employees, vendors, etc of the Braves/Atlanta(I actually just realized they are not even in Fulton anymore, rather Cobb County)....What does punishing these people accomplish? What did they have to do with the implementation of the law? Imagine if Dominos told all its franchises in GA to close? Its just horrifically thought out knee jerk reactions that hurt people who didnt do anything wrong. MLB HQ moving the game has no effect on "their" bottom line. Its something similar I look at with the MSG entities, especially over the past year as Dolan has been getting much more vocal about donating to Republicans. Look at what happened with the WNBA team in GA. I dont think Braves ownership is in anyone's crosshairs, however sports has become very different over the past half decade and the leagues are seeking growth at all costs. The players are using their platforms more and more. Not even just politically, but for their own gain. Look at Anthony Davis or James Harden. Guys were basically just like, "I dont wanna be here anymore, trade me"...and just like that those teams are fundamentally altered. Its something folks need to consider. I mean at this point would it be farfetched if the Braves made the WS(OK they aint beating the Dodgers, but still) but the networks and MLB said "no homes games"? Playoff home games are pure gravy for the teams.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31183822/mlb-moving-all-star-game-atlanta-georgia-voting-law I support this move. Love the idea of punishing Atlanta, and specifically Fulton County, which is probably one of the biggest problems with Georgia. Bring the ASG to Texas, Arizona, or Florida where it will be appreciated. Or do it neutrally in one of the Carolinas. That would be cool. https://twitter.com/alexsalvinews/status/1378081618808692737/photo/1 Not sure what punishing a group of fans or a city does for the league in terms making a political statement, but Manfred's stealthily crept up on Goodell in terms of taking the title of largest idiot running a professional sports league. EDIT: added link to statement from the Braves

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/01/cathie-woods-ark-innovation-gets-neutral-rating-at-morningstar-strategies-are-below-industry-standards.html So while I agree, and even added to my shorts in ARKK and ARKG today, I must say, the arrogance of "industry standard" being a standard at all, is hilarious. Its probably a good thing one doesnt follow the sheep in suits who cant beat the index, "manage their risk" only in the context of preserving their own interests/careers/bloated salaries, and generally speaking, cant see beyond a spreadsheet. Perhaps we need to tell Cathy she needs to be more in line with "industry standard", such as, IDK, Melvin or Archegos? Or just Goldman? The financial industry is such a joke.

Today's rip seemed like a fine opportunity to tack on some more shares to the ARK shorts, so I seized the opportunity. Also added a few shares of MSGE.

Totally would support this. Havent watched TV or subscribed to any "news" publications in ages. The primary reason being is that no one reports what happened anymore. Its always a skew or opinion wrapped up with the only aspect of fact being the proverbial tip of the iceberg you see. Everything is taken out of context, and I guess its deliberate. Take the Georgia election for instance. How many different outrageous and deceptive headlines have we seen? Whereas the truth is basically this... https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1377439829001125891 Meanwhile, I havent really seen any updates on the "kids in cages" fiasco in quite some time...even though I hear theres some pretty big problems at the border currently. And god forbid the stories require an "expert" or outside opinion. Seems people seek out the "experts" whom happen to "find" the result theyre looking for.

To be fair, theres plenty of people who thought it was or should be 0. I dont think anyone believed $25 either. Just guys talking their book/product.

Yup, yup. Well put Spek. I dont even really think one need look at the fundamentals any more than a few minutes because the chart tells the story. These are ok/good businesses that face big question marks. They went up a lot and then went down a lot and the share price movement caught the attention of a lot of people. But I dont think they are any more or less attractive now than they were before all the funky stuff started. If you weren't a buyer back then I dont know why one would be now.

What am I buying today? Took my 4 year old to get T-ball stuff. Holy fuck did it make me feel old. Glove, helmet, hat...$150. 20 years ago I busted my ass for 15 hours doing landscaping work to pay for a Nokona glove I needed for HS ball. Now before you can even hit the kids up with chores you're spending nearly $200 for stuff they'll grow out of in 12 months..and the adult gloves are pushing $300 for run of the mill quality stuff...crazy. Dont even want to think about hockey equipment for the fall. Hopefully no one follows me into that trade!

Theres different levels of acceptability IMO depending upon what the content or purpose is. It was well known that in the politics section it was kind of anything goes and feelings were not to be spared. There often seemed to be quite a few sensitive souls who used every available instance to get riled up and complain. But generally if you went there you knew what you were getting into and those that didnt want a part of it avoided the area. With investing content its different. Theres a highly diverse group of participants here who frequent this place and even just in general, putting your thoughts out there is probably intimidating for some. Theres people here ranging from college kids to hedge fund managers to NEOs at public companies. Probably, outside of laziness, why theres some 3000 members and maybe 5 dozen people who actually contribute. Even if its not intimidating, I dont see many hitting up an investment thread with the purpose of just wasting time. If someone posts something they are probably doing it for a reason and it is to be assumed that its a constructive one. Its neat seeing the different sides of the story and varying market participants. There's plenty of threads where there is good back and forth...both sides with a clear purpose. Sometimes pride gets involved, but the core of the issue always seems to be driven by the investment. The Seritage/SRG or Peloton/PTON threads are a good example of this. I am not quite sure I see what purpose personally attacking or belittling someone has on an investment thread(again, politics its fair game). Theres indisputably zero value to comments like "I won't try to clone you" or "I prefer my returns without the drop first". And its even more perplexing when there was zero done to provoke the individual making the attacks other than someone putting their timestamped thoughts and actions into the mix. I mean for all the bitching and complaining about "dragging down the conversation" and "quality of content" from some folks, largely because they couldn't handle the politics section which was cordoned off and came with a warning, you'd think there'd be zero tolerance for stuff like this. Maybe having a political discussion in a section labelled politics turns people away, although I think thats pretty pitiful, but crapping on people who are trying to discuss an investment, in a totally nonconstructive way; I guarantee you has a significantly greater negative effect....or maybe a lotta folks just have double standards...I dont know.

Solid and sizable run of insider purchases by Considine and some other both purchases and sales from the other directors. Given the $8 stated NAV, sketchy track record, clarity and cap rate compression on coastal MF...is anyone of an opinion differing from... that this is basically still kinda cheapish but not excitingly cheap and probably warrants a $6.50-$7 FV? I've been trimming up here, but I'm also a big fan of just grabbing low hanging fruit rather than spending more time than necessary waiting for the exactly deserved valuation to shake out. Still own some, but curious if anyone sees things differently. Easy money IMO was the dollar and change between mid-high $4s-6.

All Im saying(sans KCLarkin once again missing 95% of the gist of not just my post but the one above it cuz...."he started a thread in 2015 and it went up!")...whats the need for continually going after other people for posting their 2c? Especially when they havent done anything to you individually? Same exact thing was done repeatedly to linealdin in the Altius thread. Guy was hands down the most informative poster on the company and repeatedly badgered about the same type of crap. Its one thing to provide pushback, its another to seemingly put more effort into going after other contributing members than you do your own investment ideas....If you can take the time to do one, I wouldnt think it that hard to do more than post twitter links and spam your own blog on the other?.... Not sure why this is so controversial. I mean you even snidely remarked about "I prefer my multi bagger returns"...to which I even threw you a softball in which you could have let us know where you are looking for your multi bagger returns, to which you predictably sidestepped the question about talked about your prior investments and not talking in the wrong thread(huh? Start another one then?)... and then proceed to again pointlessly go after SD with "dont worry I won't try to clone you"... I dont think the board needs Liberty to see that PWE or whatever its current entity is has been a total piece of shit.

Dont think it depends on anything other than identifying which cycle your are projecting and where the tentacles of the octopus reach. Banks have undergone a fundamental purge over the past decade and are now integral to the implementation of basically anything that is likely to unfold. That said, Im not trying too hard to be cute on this. I did start BAC the other day but its just another angle where BRK wins.

^^^Exactly. So its kinda rich to pick on people who post what they buy and sell, and additionally, generously share their insight/thought process/outlook. Whether its right or wrong or useful or not; this is kind of irrelevant and if not of value to folks, they are free to ignore it. Theres nothing wrong with calling bullshit...but...when the one calling bs, almost exclusively posts links and little else, to the same CNBC type headline articles that we all have access to, its hard to argue this provides value to anyone, period. Especially when there is often little other color and no mention of ones own positioning....Engagement, even if its wrong, can provide market insight. The later, provides nothing. I mean does anyone really give a shit want SD real returns are? Its an anonymous message board...if you blindly follow anyone based on what they claim(whether they are right or wrong) you are a fool.

I second that. For a techtard like me, might take a while to get everything down. But generally speaking it looks good!

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3677815-cleveland-cliffs-guides-q1-full-year-adjusted-ebitda-above-estimates All hail LG. Guy is a legend.

I would look at ARKG to find a few candidates that describe what you're talking about quite well. Given what just happened with Archego Capital this past week, I wouldnt rule out anything in terms of volatility on a forced sell.

You have to love the components....large cap, old economy stocks and a slapstick 3d printing ETF....but hey! People dont seem to understand, they arent hedge fund managers, they sell a product, and people want it enough to pay for it. So be it.

If nothing else I think there is some inconsistency to people who dont post informative personal takes on an investment, or make any effort to indicate what they are buying or selling, ragging on people who do. Transparency, for better or worse, is always admirable. Even if its admirable simply in its futility.

Trimmed some AIV

IDK but it isnt politics to me when I go out to eat or buy groceries and you see crazy hermits scampering around, snapping at people about "your mask needs to be up higher, be considerate"....when its like "yo retard, your state is tops in the country in covid cases currently with 50% more cases than states with 3x the population and 100% business capacities AND NO MASKS...and oh yea, your death rate is still the highest too....but yea, follow the [s]slogans[/s] science. Nice snout cover by the way!". And thats not even touching on how dismal many of the vaccine rollouts have been! Getting everyone vaccinated will force everyone back to normal. I mean I was looking to book a summer/fall trip to Hawk Lake in Ontario the other day and the guy basically said, "we have no visibility into when or what needs to happen in order for the border to open up again...just keep checking in"...pure lunacy! The subject might be uncomfortable, and it should be. But I dont see what people think theyre solving by getting mad at me???? People should be slamming at the doors of all their local officials creating a massive shitstorm and demanding that EVERY SINGLE FUCKING PERSON who wants a vaccine gets one ASAP. Enough of the current status quo!