Jmac42600

Agreed. Pretty much nailed every point here. Lampert has insider info and has a large % of his net worth in this.

Are you sure that he has sold out? I saw his 13F however a lot of large shareholders in SRG have been converting their holdings to OP units I believe. Does anyone else have insight on this? If its true and he has sold out then that's very concerning to the story here.

VQS.TO following Connor Haley into this one

I disagree. Costco by expanding into China is simply just copying their existing strategy and expanding into a new market. That provides growth for them as a company because they are expanding their TAM and reaching new customers. Despite the fact that physical retail sales are declining as a % of total, you are neglecting the even larger pie which is the Chinese economy growing. Just because eComm sales may make up 70-80% of total sales one day, doesn't mean Costco or even Alibaba can't benefit and grow as a business by opening up physical locations in China. An industry can be losing market share but still grow if the industry is growing. I don't really see how Chinese consumers spending a larger % of GDP per capita on eCommerce is that unbelievable. Remember, this isn't as overly simplistic as you're making it out to be. There are many factors here that you're choosing to ignore in your overly simplified analysis. Income inequality, higher penetration of online spend in China vs the US, less competition in China vs the US, different cultural and demographic profiles, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not in agreement with you. Time will tell.

By this logic couldn't you say that because ECommerce penetration is only 14% in the US then there's no reason for physical retailers like Walmart to expand online? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't agree with this point. Why wouldn't a business want to expand? Also, I understand that you're trying to show the bear case here. But your calculations that you're basing your assumptions on you even stated "are probably incorrect." You made a lot of very interesting assumptions that none of us know could be close to reality or far from it. For example, you assumed people spending less than RMB 2k and people spending between RMB 2k and 7k was a 50/50 split. What if its a 10/90 split, or a 20/80. That would completely change the whole premise of the questions you would be asking. While completely making all of these assumptions, you are asking for others to come and argue against you with some "believable numbers." Again, maybe I'm wrong here and not trying to argue, but just trying to think through everything here critically. I'm choosing to believe that Alibaba's numbers have a high probability of being factual, and I think the incentives are way more in the favor of that assumption than yours. But again, maybe I'm wrong, we'll find out eventually.

Sold PCT. Was a speculative position and a mistake on my part in hindsight. Hindenburg's short report had very valid points.

Yeah saw that. We'll see how they do. Likely a success.

Yeah I saw that. TFSA rules allow you to buy foreign stocks, yet I can't buy them for a reasonable price at any Canadian broker... Doesn't really make sense to me.

Yikes.

Sorry I noticed on Interactive Brokers you can't buy international stocks in a TFSA. Any brokers where you can with reasonable fees??

What's the international trading fees? Is it in line with Canadian and US transactions?

I'm a Canadian looking to buy International stocks (specifically on the LSE and TYO) in my TFSA. I'm currently with Questrade but they just said it's $195 to conduct a trade on an international exchange. I'm only looking to do small transactions ($1000-$2000) so its obviously not economical to me. Any Canadian brokers that have reasonable cost international trading? Thanks a lot!

TOI.V

What do you think is protecting this company from a similar fate to ebay? Not saying Ebay is dead per-se, just growth slowing substantially. Also, I recognize that they are very different businesses too. Just asking for people's opinions.

I don't think its too unknown tbh. First, the brand moat is there. This is a top 20 brand globally surprisingly above the NBA and up there with P&G. This is no longer a magazine, and instead has become a fashion company. The royalty rate rn is only 2%, and norms for brands like this are 7-12%. Plus, they can leverage their brand to expand into other markets such as sexual wellness, and beauty/grooming (which is what they plan on doing). In the sexual wellness space, its very fragmented and ripe for a top 20 global brand to take a large share. Imo, the margin of safety here is that they can renegotiate contracts to an appropriate royalty based on their brand strength, and once thats factored in it gives you a share price higher than today's price. Every other growth opportunity is gravy at that point.