Liberty

Short piece about Apple University. Doesn't really say much, but gives an idea: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/technology/-inside-apples-internal-training-program-.html

http://glennchan.wordpress.com/2014/08/11/my-thoughts-on-the-kmi-merger/

That's wonderful news Sanjeev! Congrats, I'm sure it's a lot of work and planning. Question: will the part of the letter about it be released publicly, since it will be a public company? Or will it be just for your private investors? Thanks.

I think it would be a very good thing. I would love to see all those people doing something more beneficial to the civilization. I think this is a case of the broken window fallacy. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

Check this out: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-to-grid

http://glennchan.wordpress.com/2014/08/09/what-ocwen-and-altisource-do/

The big LCD screen TV boom of the past 15 year had a much bigger impact on the grid than the electric car transition, mostly because it happened faster and TVs are on during peak time while cars charge at night, and it wasn't that bad. I don't think it'll make too much of a difference on that front, especially as utilities become less profitable because a lot of their most profitable peak time sales get eaten up by solar power (look up what's going on in Australia lately for a preview of what might happen elsewhere).

More negative press: http://online.barrons.com/news/articles/SB50001424053111904329504580071540804625172

It's a lot compared to the 35k they'll make this year. You have to walk before you run. Their peers are missing the boat long term.

The fremont plant has at least 500k/year capacity (maybe more since they're probably more automated than average). http://www.teslamotors.com/no_NO/forum/forums/tesla-double-its-production-fremont-plant

John Malone talks about levered free cash flow:

For the sake of argument, what if you had bought all of amazon for $20bn in 2004 and sold it to a private buyer in 2014. How much do you think they'd be ready to pay for it? What if you had bought it all in 2004 for $20bn and had stopped all investments in growth and just tried to maximize FCF as fast as possible. How much money do you think you could have taken out of it in 10 years? One step further: In scenario 2, let's say that after maximizing FCF instead of growth for 10 years you sold it all to a private buyer. How much do you think they'd be willing to pay for it, and is that more than what they'd pay in scenario 1? I have no idea how to answer these questions, but if I was trying to value the company, I'd be thinking about that kind of stuff and not just how much actual FCF they actually made in the past 10 years and putting a multiple on that.

Yeah, the very restrictive definition means that this is a floor. The real number is probably much higher, especially for all those pre-construction condos that people like Brad Lamb are flogging to the unsophisticated masses, claiming they can make triple-digit returns in a few years... I think it's said well here: https://twitter.com/benrabidoux/status/497780348299018241

Here's GM's first all electric car since they crushed the EV1 over a decade ago: http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/2014-chevrolet-spark-ev1.jpg $26,685 MSRP, 82 miles of driving range. I doubt it'll compete very well with Tesla's upcoming Model 3...

All other automakers are kind of between a rock and a hard place when it comes to electric cars. To properly make them, they can't keep using most of their legacy manufacturing equipment, and to properly sell them, they have to explain why they are superior to gasoline/diesel vehicles (their main products). They're also stuck with dealers who make most of their money on maintenance, something that goes away in good part with EVs. That explains why they all kind of do a half-assed job, limit production to relatively small batches, or make EVs/plug-ins that are pretty conventional technically (small electric range, not much use of lightweight materials, etc) and look kind of niche (why wouldn't Nissan sell an electric Altima? or BMW an electric 3 or 5?). They want the PR halo effect from making these cars, but they don't want to cannibalize their other sales. Tesla is fighting against a bunch of people that have their hands tied behind their backs, basically.

17% of condo owners in Toronto, Vancouver bought for investment http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/17-of-condo-owners-in-toronto-vancouver-bought-for-investment-1.2731289 This won't end well...

Tesla is currently supply constrained and has waiting lists. It's a seller's market for them, people are beating a path to their front door. So having to make a call isn't exactly high friction compared to the car salesman experience at most other brand's dealerships... And maybe the fact that you were not willing to make a long-distance call kind of signalled to them that you weren't serious about wanting to buy a $75k+ car? How many calls do you think they get for test drives from people who just want a fun ride and won't buy? But that doesn't mean that service would be bad if you bought the car. All I've heard about service to Tesla owners has been great, top of class, and they're rapidly adding new service points and Supercharger stations all around. IMO a diesel car isn't even in the same century as the Model S. Your loss.

http://glennchan.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/lmcalmck-share-class-arbitrage/ Thanks for the idea Glenn, I swapped my LMCK shares for LMCA this morning at a slight gain. Event hough the voting power of the A shares is kind of theoretical in this company because of Malone's control, I still don't see how having voting power can't be worth at least a little something.

Alderon annual meeting presentation (audio + slides): http://player.vimeo.com/video/102775216?portrait=0&byline=0&color=333

The banks are off-loading a lot to CMHC, but if the excrements hit the fan, I don't think the government will just let taxpayers be on the hook for everything (how many votes do you win that way?). They'll find a way to put a lot of pain on the banks. IMO. But yes, we are getting off topic. We can continue this in the Canadian RE thread if anyone's interested. http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/garth-turner-greaterfool/

There's tons of leverage. Look at the all-time high household debt levels. Look at HELOC growth. Look at the size of RE in the canadian economy, look at home ownership levels vs historical, look at where incomes and rents are VS house prices. Ask yourself why houses cost almost twice as much in Canada as in the US, especially with the tepid canadian economy. Look at who the marginal buyers are. Look at how little people have invested elsewhere than in their houses (lots of almost empty RSPs and TFSAs, baby boomers selling to fund their retirements). Look at how HGTV and RE shows on TV have multiplied and become a national pastime. Look into the moves that the government has been making in the past few years trying to cool things down (you used to be able to buy with 0% down and 40 years amortization a few years ago, and with the popular cash-back mortgages with first time buyers, some people start with negative equity). Catalyst can be almost anything (recession, interest rates rising, commodity cycle, China troubles, US troubles, etc) that leads to a change of sentiment. As long as people believe house prices never go down, they'll keep piling debt and think "better buy now, it'll just be more expensive later". the fact that Canada did relatively well in 2008 only made things worse, because people went "see, it can't happen here, we're immune". But the market already has started softening in parts of the country, and at some point sentiment will turn, and when that happens it can move quickly. I'm not shorting banks or whatever so I have no opinion on timing, but I'm happy to rent until things become more rational (when the toronto RE market crashed in the late 80s, it took something like 14 years to get back to its peak... but this time it's not just toronto, it's almost everywhere). This gives an overview of what's going on, except that things have gotten a bit worse since this was written: http://www.greaterfool.ca/2012/01/08/in-the-end/

I'm not him, but I'm guessing he meant protected from competition; pretty much an oligopoly composed of a small number of big banks with almost no new entrants.

Lol? I'm in Canada and I've been watching RE pretty closely. We're pretty much as bad as other RE bubbly countries of the past in our own special ways (history never repeats exactly, but it sure rhymes). Who knows about timing, but I certainly know house prices have lost contact with reality long ago, that income haven't kept up and people are piling on debt, buying million dollar crack shacks in Vancouver and over-supplied small concrete boxes in Toronto, and that it won't end well. http://i.imgur.com/a53qo9o.png http://i.imgur.com/YBqsya1.jpg

Have you looked at Canada's real estate situation? I think there's a very good chance that these banks might be at the peak of the cycle.

Here's a tip: Don't click on those threads ;) They're usually labelled pretty explicitely, and when they aren't and you end up clicking on one, hit the "back" button in your browser and don't come back to that particular discussion. I feel a lot like you about these, and get sucked in and I know it's mostly a waste of time... But I know I only have myself to blame. No need to change the forum when we can simply change our behavior and nobody's forced to read anything they don't want to read. :)