Hi Ho Silver

[Spekulatius]

A little of topic but how do you mean terrible book?

 

'One up on wall street' is one of my favorite books and was planning to read 'Beating the Street' one day.

 

There was no intellectual framework in how to select stocks.  It was full of discussions about how Lynch selected individual stocks, groups of stocks...alot of it based on "buy what you know".  When I tried to invest using his methods, it was pure luck...half the time I made some money, half the time I lost money.  It worked for him, but none of it could be duplicated!

 

I finally woke up when I read Buffett's Letters, "The Intelligent Investor", and finally "Securities Analysis".  That's when my batting average finally started to improve and the fundamental way I selected stocks was consistent, methodical and would work for the rest of my life. 

 

I got far much more value out of just reading 10-Q's and 10-K's in my first six months, than I did from Lynch's book.  Kiyosaki's books were good in just changing my mindset in how to invest, why buy businesses, and to create passive income.  But Ben Graham's books and Buffett's Letters changed my life forever!  I will be eternally grateful to them!  Cheers!

 

I agree that  Lynch’s books aren’t really good for investors getting started. At least by themselves, they are probably more dangerous than helpful. They are good in terms of how to get started doing research and find interesting stocks, but it doesn’t tell you about the next steps on how to look underneath the hood.

[Arski]

Reddit and WSB are not behind it.

 

If you go to their site , every third article says it's a scan, if you want to buy silver the ticker is GME.

 

If you want to buy silver, go for it. Maybe it's a good investment, great  However it's not true that there is this Reddit crowd doing so which is what the article is saying.  Yes there are write ups about silver but it didn't gain momentum.

 

Someone else is behind this.

 

Robert Kiyosaki seems to be pushing it pretty hard on Twitter!

 

I liked Kiyosaki's first two books...Rich Dad, Poor Dad and Cash Flow Quadrant.  They were a couple of the earliest investment books I read after Peter Lynch's Beating the Street...which was a terrible book to learn how to invest in the stock market. 

 

But over the years, Kiyosaki's gone stir crazy...he's pretty nuts now!  Although I would still recommend his first two books to new, young investors.  Cheers!

 

A little of topic but how do you mean terrible book?

 

'One up on wall street' is one of my favorite books and was planning to read 'Beating the Street' one day.

 

There was no intellectual framework in how to select stocks.  It was full of discussions about how Lynch selected individual stocks, groups of stocks...alot of it based on "buy what you know".  When I tried to invest using his methods, it was pure luck...half the time I made some money, half the time I lost money.  It worked for him, but none of it could be duplicated!

 

I finally woke up when I read Buffett's Letters, "The Intelligent Investor", and finally "Securities Analysis".  That's when my batting average finally started to improve and the fundamental way I selected stocks was consistent, methodical and would work for the rest of my life. 

 

I got far much more value out of just reading 10-Q's and 10-K's in my first six months, than I did from Lynch's book.  Kiyosaki's books were good in just changing my mindset in how to invest, why buy businesses, and to create passive income.  But Ben Graham's books and Buffett's Letters changed my life forever!  I will be eternally grateful to them!  Cheers!

 

I agree very much on the Buffett and Graham aspect and learned a whole lot more from them than from Peter Lynch, but I read 'One up on Wall Street' after I already got the "value" part of investing. I think it is a very insightful book after understanding the value aspects of businesses.

 

I also think Peter assumed the reader already knew how to value a business in some way and that the book should be a follow-up. He himself uses the value part also, only growth and 'buy what you know' was maybe his number one.

 

Still one of my favorite books.

[Parsad]

Reddit and WSB are not behind it.

 

If you go to their site , every third article says it's a scan, if you want to buy silver the ticker is GME.

 

If you want to buy silver, go for it. Maybe it's a good investment, great  However it's not true that there is this Reddit crowd doing so which is what the article is saying.  Yes there are write ups about silver but it didn't gain momentum.

 

Someone else is behind this.

 

Robert Kiyosaki seems to be pushing it pretty hard on Twitter!

 

I liked Kiyosaki's first two books...Rich Dad, Poor Dad and Cash Flow Quadrant.  They were a couple of the earliest investment books I read after Peter Lynch's Beating the Street...which was a terrible book to learn how to invest in the stock market. 

 

But over the years, Kiyosaki's gone stir crazy...he's pretty nuts now!  Although I would still recommend his first two books to new, young investors.  Cheers!

 

A little of topic but how do you mean terrible book?

 

'One up on wall street' is one of my favorite books and was planning to read 'Beating the Street' one day.

 

There was no intellectual framework in how to select stocks.  It was full of discussions about how Lynch selected individual stocks, groups of stocks...alot of it based on "buy what you know".  When I tried to invest using his methods, it was pure luck...half the time I made some money, half the time I lost money.  It worked for him, but none of it could be duplicated!

 

I finally woke up when I read Buffett's Letters, "The Intelligent Investor", and finally "Securities Analysis".  That's when my batting average finally started to improve and the fundamental way I selected stocks was consistent, methodical and would work for the rest of my life. 

 

I got far much more value out of just reading 10-Q's and 10-K's in my first six months, than I did from Lynch's book.  Kiyosaki's books were good in just changing my mindset in how to invest, why buy businesses, and to create passive income.  But Ben Graham's books and Buffett's Letters changed my life forever!  I will be eternally grateful to them!  Cheers!

 

I agree very much on the Buffett and Graham aspect and learned a whole lot more from them than from Peter Lynch, but I read 'One up on Wall Street' after I already got the "value" part of investing. I think it is a very insightful book after understanding the value aspects of businesses.

 

I also think Peter assumed the reader already knew how to value a business in some way and that the book should be a follow-up. He himself uses the value part also, only growth and 'buy what you know' was maybe his number one.

 

Still one of my favorite books.

 

The other issue is who the hell can invest like Lynch did.  At the peak of the Magellan Fund, he had like 3,000 investment positions...that's probably double the size of my circle of competence, let alone the universe of stocks I could invest in. 

 

He also would never recommend holding a portfolio with less than 50-100 stocks.  I'm lucky if my portfolio has 10 stocks...and in actuality, if I've got 10 stocks, then I'm not that sure on a couple of them.  I've been most certain about my portfolio when I hold only 4-7 positions.

 

I just didn't gain any real knowledge or ability from his book.  It was a good read, but that's all I got out of it.  Not to take away from the brilliance of the man and investor...but it just didn't do anything for me.  Cheers!

[no_free_lunch]

On Lynch, I read the book and thought it was a great read but yes you step back and it is a bit hard to apply.  I don't have a link but I read that in the 80's and 90's it was LEGAL and common practice for companies to pre release their earnings to select mutual fund managers.  I also read that lynch was part of that intake (just reporting what I saw).  Could be a no so insignificant part of the alpha.

[Arski]

The other issue is who the hell can invest like Lynch did.  At the peak of the Magellan Fund, he had like 3,000 investment positions...that's probably double the size of my circle of competence, let alone the universe of stocks I could invest in.

 

He also would never recommend holding a portfolio with less than 50-100 stocks.  I'm lucky if my portfolio has 10 stocks...and in actuality, if I've got 10 stocks, then I'm not that sure on a couple of them.  I've been most certain about my portfolio when I hold only 4-7 positions.

 

I just didn't gain any real knowledge or ability from his book.  It was a good read, but that's all I got out of it.  Not to take away from the brilliance of the man and investor...but it just didn't do anything for me.  Cheers!

 

I totally understand.

 

By the way, he had a lot of stock in his portfolio but it was dominated for 80% by his 10 largest positions. I don't know the exact numbers though.

[JRM]

Back to silver, there does appear to be a shortage of physical at the moment.  Reuters has reported that the US mint is behind on orders for silver and gold bullion coin.  Spot checks at online coin dealers show backlogs and minimum order requirements.

 

This article is making the rounds on reddit and elsewhere: https://renaissancemen.org/2021/02/02/why-the-silver-longs-and-eric-sprott-can-defeat-the-silver-shorts-an-education-in-4d-chess/

 

Very similar concept to the Andy Schectman interview I posted, but with more details.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Back to silver, there does appear to be a shortage of physical at the moment.  Reuters has reported that the US mint is behind on orders for silver and gold bullion coin.  Spot checks at online coin dealers show backlogs and minimum order requirements.

 

This article is making the rounds on reddit and elsewhere: https://renaissancemen.org/2021/02/02/why-the-silver-longs-and-eric-sprott-can-defeat-the-silver-shorts-an-education-in-4d-chess/

 

Very similar concept to the Andy Schectman interview I posted, but with more details.

 

Well annual silver production has been in decline for the last 6 years. We're basically back to a similar stock-to-flow as gold at these production rates - and since incentive rates for Copper and Nickel and etc have been so low in recent years, new production is unlikely to materialize in the near term.

 

I don't think it's a long-term secular argument for silver, but I do think in the near-to-intermediate term it should be trading rich to it's history verse gold and right now we're still relatively neutral-to-cheso relative to gold depending on how far you want to look back.

 

I think $40+ an oz for silver is in the table over the next 12 months with, or without, reddit.

[JRM]

We'll see if industrial demand picks up with EVs, solar panels, etc. driving secular demand.

[Spekulatius]

We'll see if industrial demand picks up with EVs, solar panels, etc. driving secular demand.

Silver demand from solar cells is supposed to go down because the industry innovates around using less silver by using new process techniques as well replacing/stretching the silver with alloys. this has been going on for while and is likely to continue.

 

Also, aren't the shorts in silver mostly the miners hedging their production?

[JRM]

There are far more silver futures traded than physical silver coming out of the ground.  This setup is the opposite of oil last summer.

 

Interestingly JP Morgan has closed out most or all of its silver short position in the last year.