Liberty

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2014/10/interbrand-lists-apple-as-the-top-global-brand-again.html

I swapped my LBTYK for LBTYA when the spread became much narrower than usual. I figured, why not?

Good thing BAC has a huge buyback authorization... Oh wait. :'(

http://www.philosophicaleconomics.com/2014/10/how-often-does-the-stock-market-correct/

The roll-out continues very quickly. https://www.apple.com/pr/library/2014/10/13iPhone-6-iPhone-6-Plus-Arrive-in-36-More-Countries-and-Territories-This-Month.html

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/10/13/iphone-6-china-20-million-carriers-jd/ Apparently, iphone 6 preorders reached 20m in china.

http://brooklyninvestor.blogspot.ca/2014/10/the-halo-effect.html

Lots of good points made above. Here's another thing: Sirius XM can also go into on-demand streaming. They already have a streaming app for people who want to listen on their phone or at work, but they could add something closer to spotify for those who want to hear a certain track or artist right now, and either charge extra for it or roll it in their already very profitable package to make it stickier and give its subs fewer reasons to switch to something else.

GM doesn't even need a skynet to kill random people with its cars....

On the topic of ROIC, BaseHitInvesting has a great multi-part series on it. The latest post is here: http://basehitinvesting.com/importance-of-roic-part-5-a-glance-at-the-last-42-years-of-wells-fargo/ But if you look back, there's at least 5 in this series, and a couple others looking at Greenblatt's approach and such.

http://www.libertyglobal.com/pdf/press-release/10-10-Ziggo-Regulatory-Clearance-FINAL.pdf

There are two things here. One, we'll have to disagree on this, because I think the reason why I made 50% in a year in Apple is because most people genuinely don't understand the company. You can have a zillion people looking at something and still have most of them not get it (especially common if the media doesn't get it and everybody just unthinkingly swallows the media narrative). It's fine. It happens all the time. As for BAC and AIG, the reason people stayed away for so long is because their reputations were so tainted and yucky because of the GFC that most people were blinded to their restored (or in the process of being restored) franchises. The second thing is that yes, small companies are routinely more mispriced. I own at least 4 companies that are under 500m (3 of them under 100m). It's great hunting ground. But if there's something big that I understand and that I think the market is mispricing, I won't pass it up just because it's big. That's just as bad as overlooking businesses because they are small. It was a great idea to buy Mastercard at the IPO even if a zillion eyes were on it...

Most of the time size is a disadvantage, but there were plenty of eyeballs on Bank of America and AIG too. Heck, Berkshire was selling barely above book value not that long ago and Google was pretty undervalued a little before that. Saying that people can't be wrong about Apple reminds me of the efficient market theory joke; "Is that a 20 dollar bill on the ground over there?" "It can't be, if it was, someone would've picked it up." Edit: For a while a lot of people here were looking at GM. JPM, WFC, etc...

The book Valuation published by McKinsey has interesting stuff on how to think about ROIC and growth. I recommend it, especially the first half. http://www.amazon.com/Valuation-Measuring-Managing-Companies-Edition/dp/0470424656

Will the debt and number of shares outstanding stay the same too?

Question for those with a lot of experience with arbs: If Actavis gets Allergan, all the arbs that bought AGN and shorted VRX will need to cover. What is the usually effect of that on stock price? On first level thinking, increased demand for the stock should make the price go up. But on second level, I can see how after a deal fails there must be a pessimism spike and the arbs are probably buying back from that volume, so it might not actually have much of a net impact. Just curious to hear from people who've seen that actually play out many times before. Thanks.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/valeant-pershing-square-plan-to-boost-allergan-bid-by-15-a-share-1412718344 http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000317968

http://www.tuaw.com/2014/10/02/apple-pay-an-in-depth-look-at-whats-behind-the-secure-payment/

http://9to5google.com/2014/10/06/samsung-misses-earnings-q3-60-percent/

Tobias Carlisle on buybacks: https://greenbackd.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/the-manual-of-ideas-toby-carlisle-201410.pdf

http://www.philosophicaleconomics.com/2014/10/btc/

Very cute, congrats to all involved (especially the new mother, who had the really tough job so far...) :) We had a son in the past year and it's wonderful (and exhausting).

I think I like this better than the original plan, but I might be missing some implications... Need to study Ventures again...

Why do you claim to know that's the case? It could just as well be that women are more upset by slights than men*. If gender stereotyping/injustice towards women is more common than gender stereotyping towards men is as far as I know not known. But I'd make a bold guess and say it's about the same for both sexes. After all, stereotypes exist for a reason, be they good or bad - or wrong. One thing that many people never think about is that women are seen as inherently more valuable for who they are (for natural biological reasons), while men are valued on what they do. That's also probably why you see such a huge, huge gender imbalance among the homeless. *From what I've read (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/04/men-are-harassed-more-than-women-online.html), males receive more abuse online than females, for example. You wouldn't know this from the discourse, because we, both men and women, are primed to care for females under distress. That, and the abused males "suck it up" or plain just don't care very much. Next I'll be attempting to show you that people with "black" or "brown" skin are often treated differently, and mostly worse, than people with "white" skin... And that despite the fact that people with "white" skin also have problems, this doesn't make racism okay and it's possible for two separate issues to exist at the same time. No thanks.