valuecfa

Curious if other investors think Watson will be a game changer for IBM over the long term (not a short term thesis)? IBM predicts over $1 Billion in revenue form Watson by 2018 (2014 article). Small compared to overall revenue, but long term it is an interesting revenue stream. Given the likely very high margin provided from Watson and other AI computers, it's interesting to read about the partnerships/apps that are collaborating with Watson. Also, any thoughts on the model they are using to market and generate revenue with Watson vs other companies (revenue share/subscription)?

Yes. Sandridge the company owned by its shareholders...not a cash distribution to shareholders.

Yes. An partial IPO with proceeds to go to Sandridge shareholders

It may not happen this year as drilling is now extremely limited at Sandridge, and the scale back in drilling would mean much less revenue to the MLP.

Correct me if i am wrong, but at a cost of around $500 million to build, I don't believe that the MidCon Midstream unit that is likely to be spun out this year is even a part of Sandridge's PV10, and it is equivalent in cost to Sandridge's market cap. can they really pull off a spin to equity holders? that would be pretty crazy. I'm no capital structure expert but seems tough to do with the $4B of debt and preferred ahead of the equity. What's your basis for a spin off occurring? I don't follow this company at all so I apologize if this is obvious. They already filed an S-1: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1622869/000119312514447125/d807090ds1a.htm The IRS has been fielding a growing number of requests for private letter rulings from companies that provide services to the oil and gas trade and want to operate as MLPs. The IRS put a hold on any further rulings in March 2013 while it evaluated where to draw the line. Sandridge only recently got the IRS's blessing to form an MLP from this unit. http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/01/sandridge-mlp-idUSL1N0YN2JH20150601 http://okenergytoday.com/2015/06/sandridge-energy-receives-favorable-news-from-irs/

Correct me if i am wrong, but at a cost of around $500 million to build, I don't believe that the MidCon Midstream unit that is likely to be spun out this year is even a part of Sandridge's PV10, and it is equivalent in cost to Sandridge's market cap.

Any thoughts on added value from an IPO of the the saltwater disposal subsidiary?

http://www.theflyonthewall.com/permalinks/entry.php/XCOid2081285/XCO-EXCO-Resources-up--after-Pickens-says-company-approached-by-buyers Anyone have a link to the video, or was it a print interview? I just picked up some shares today. It would be nice to know the context of what Pickens had to say, being that he is a director of the company.

Last time the government tried to argue something similar Judge Sweeney said - With respect to defendant’s claim that the court lacks the authority to affect the exercise of the FHFA’s powers or functions, the court agrees with the case law of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which states that the “FHFA cannot evade judicial review . . . simply by invoking its authority as conservator.” County of Sonoma v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency, 710 F.3d 987, 994 (9th Cir. 2013); Leon County v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency, 700 F.3d 1273, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012) (“The FHFA cannot evade judicial scrutiny by merely labeling its actions with a conservator stamp.”). Thus, rather than turning a blind eye to a case and immediately dismissing it from its docket merely because the case concerns the FHFA, the proper approach is for a court to examine the factual underpinnings and legal contentions presented by the complaint, in order to determine whether the exercise of its jurisdiction is proper. County of Sonoma, 710 F.3d at 994 (“Analysis of any challenged action is necessary to determine whether the action falls within the broad, but not infinite, conservator authority.”). Indeed, “Congress did not intend that the nature of the FHFA’s actions would be determined based upon the FHFA’s self-declarations . . . .” Leon County, 700 F.3d at 1278. For purposes of the instant motion, there is no request by plaintiffs that would potentially restrain or affect the exercise of powers or functions of the FHFA as conservator. Consequently, blanket assertions concerning the court’s ability to conduct these proceedings, especially as they pertain to a discovery matter related to the question of jurisdiction, hold no merit. In other words, I believe Judge Sweeney will take this all the way to trial, and see what discovery brings up.

There are different arguments in the Federal claims case, and of course there will be an appeal of the district court case. But, yes i'm sure the gov will reference certain particulars in the district court decision to Judge Sweeney.

Yup. The district court case (the injunction) was dismissed. We still have the federal claims court case that is well into discovery. A blow nonetheless. Would have been nice to wrap this one up more quickly if injunction was in our favor.

I doubt Starr wins. I think the remedy is likely to be simply a cash remedy. However if they did win the next question becomes who picks up the tab and for what amount?

I think the strongest angle for the plaintiffs is was equity ownership legal? This article written today suggests internal documents reveal even fed officials didn't think it was: Internal Fed Documents Used to Question AIG Bailout -- Market Talk 9/30/14, 12:54 PM 13:54 EDT - David Boies is still grilling Federal Reserve General Counsel Scott Alvarez in federal court in Washington, D.C., to build Starr International's case that the government didn't have legal authority to acquire a 79.9% stake in American International Group (AIG) in its 2008 rescue. He cited internal emails, notes and other documents to try to show that Fed officials weren't on the same page in 2008 in terms of the "power" of the New York Fed "to hold" AIG shares. Officials apparently agreed the New York Fed couldn't "purchase" equity. But as one example of the legal wrangling, Alvarez testified: "Purchase is too ambiguous a term." (leslie.scism@wsj.com)

Berkowitz interview on Wealthtrack : Not much new, but worth a half hour of your time. http://wealthtrack.com/recent-programs/berkowitz-powerful-financials/

Swapped out some prefs for common today. Large decline is common's price is make it attractive again.