Corner of Berkshire & Fairfax Message Board

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: EricSchleien on January 09, 2019, 03:22:54 PM

Title: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: EricSchleien on January 09, 2019, 03:22:54 PM
Enjoy!

https://intelligentinvesting.podbean.com/e/queen-city-investments-quct/
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: John Hjorth on January 09, 2019, 03:39:09 PM
Og, who are you, posting here on CoBF? Are you the provider & interviewer on this podcast? [Please leave Spekulatius out of this question.]
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Spekulatius on January 10, 2019, 08:38:22 AM
Og, who are you, posting here on CoBF? Are you the provider & interviewer on this podcast? [Please leave Spekulatius out of this question.]

What’s wrong about listening to my incoherent ramblings about a stock that one is better of not knowing about?
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: John Hjorth on January 10, 2019, 11:29:53 AM
Spekulatius,

Nothing. I actually appreciated listening to your voice. Somehow, it put some kind of colour on you as a person to me, personally. And I personally don't consider the content of that particular podcast your "incoherent ramblings". Exactly the same applies for me to your posts here on CoBF, which I also appreciate very much.

So, in short, - as already indicated by me - this is not about your personal integrity [which is fully intact to me] -but about the personal integrity of others posting here on CoBF.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: thepupil on January 10, 2019, 11:38:17 AM
John, I'm kind of confused. What exactly is the issue here?
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: gfp on January 10, 2019, 11:43:03 AM
Likewise..  Is there some negative to someone changing their "handle" on the message board from their real name to "Og"?  I have thought I should change my own ridiculously long and meaningless handle to something shorter, since it is just an accident of history (an old yahoo email account used to get a free trial subscription to Weldon's Money Monitor in the late 90's, which became my default name on chucks_angels yahoo board).  If I were to change my handle to gfp, would that upset someone?

John, I'm kind of confused. What exactly is the issue here?
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: augustabound on January 10, 2019, 11:56:56 AM
ut about the personal integrity of others posting here on CoBF.

When og changed his name (or got a new account, whichever) there wasn't any secrecy around it. He posted under his real name when he started asking about guests for his show.   

I also don't see a problem with what he is doing.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Pauly on January 10, 2019, 12:07:06 PM
Who knew that COBF had self-appointed hall monitors?
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Tim Eriksen on January 10, 2019, 12:13:01 PM
If Og is the same Eric Schleien who plead guilty to this then I understand the concern
https://www.eagletribune.com/news/new_hampshire/schleien-pleads-guilty-to-assault-on-teen/article_3807787a-106c-52b7-822a-3f9759c02453.html


Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Jurgis on January 10, 2019, 12:30:39 PM
OMFG
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Pauly on January 10, 2019, 12:50:52 PM
Yikes! Nevermind, police away, John.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Grenville on January 10, 2019, 01:22:12 PM
that's some messed up shit.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: flesh on January 10, 2019, 01:48:41 PM
I've never understood why guys with status/money do anything so risky. Aside from the ethical implications, which are clear, isn't it easy nowadays with the tinder's and online stuff to hook up easily? Last time I dated, a decade ago, it was easy, too easy, and I'm not making any claims on looks or skills here. Or is it about something else? IDK.

Edit: Want to add that I'm not a believer in the "believe her" aka lack of due process movement. I don't claim to know what happened. Myself, and two good friends have had issues in the past. In Eric's case, she may have looked 20 years old, IDK.

When I was 27, I had a great small company with about 20 employees. I had a half dozen female secretaries that all worked in the same room. My book keeper/payroll employee, a female, let me know one day that due to the lack of communication I had with the secretaries they weren't sure about their status with me. She asked me to simply stop by and ask them how they are doing intermittently.

The next day I said hello to one on my way by and somehow we started talking about tv shows. I brought up Big Love, which we pretty new IIRC, and said jokingly something about how I *might* be able to handle two wives. I was married at the time. The conversation was very brief. I can honestly say I had -zero attraction to this woman.

A couple weeks later, my book keeper LMK that all the other secretaries didn't like the "big love" secretary and she wasn't performing well. I said well go ahead and fire her... that was her responsibility anyway. She was fired.

A month or so later I get a call from the state saying that the "big love" girl was claiming I sexually harassed her and that the company had discriminated against her because she was mentally handicapped. It was the first that anyone at the company had heard about some purported handicap and it was never disclosed to us. Someone from the state came and interviewed all the other females and apparently they didn't didn't have anything bad to say about me and the case was closed.

 I'm simply writing this because we really don't know what happened and the are often incentives/disincentives working in the background, hidden. 




Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Spekulatius on January 10, 2019, 03:57:53 PM
For those who care, Eric disclosed his legal issues and the situation he is in prior to the meetup. I wasn’t aware of it, since don’t follow local news all that much. The story is what it is and I am not inclined to judge. What I do know is that the three of us had a great time talking investing, politics (a bit), stocks , doing a podcast (my first one) and play a board game. I wouldn’t hesitate to do another meetup again.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: SHDL on January 10, 2019, 04:18:43 PM
Well whatever the story is, it was good hearing you speak and learning how to correctly pronounce your screen name.  :)
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: John Hjorth on January 10, 2019, 05:42:41 PM
Well, Spekulatius,

to me, you're not [in any way] related to this.

In short, it's about double indentity here on CoBF.

Please explain yourself, Og, here.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: KJP on January 10, 2019, 06:41:39 PM
Well, Spekulatius,

to me, you're not [in any way] related to this.

In short, it's about double indentity here on CoBF.

Please explain yourself, Og, here.

Explain what?  That he's using a pseudonym on an anonymous message board?
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Cigarbutt on January 10, 2019, 07:50:10 PM
Well, Spekulatius,

to me, you're not [in any way] related to this.

In short, it's about double indentity here on CoBF.

Please explain yourself, Og, here.

Explain what?  That he's using a pseudonym on an anonymous message board?

So, is this a meeting place or a community?
Transactional or relational?
Anonymity is a double-edged sword which comes with its own sense of responsibility.
For me, an investment is a partnership and maybe that's too personal.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Gregmal on January 10, 2019, 08:25:59 PM
For me, this community is for two things, entertainment, and idea generation/buffering.

So in regards to the later, my only concern is making MU-KNEE..... let the truth and the info available take me to where I need to be to make it.

I open and welcome any and all ideas and info, it is on me to decipher it and either put it to use or discard it. Lets not worry about judging peoples character on an anonymous Internet forum/community. In a twisted sense, the most honest or transparent folks will be the ones getting assassinated while the opaque(not with standing John Hjorth who I am guessing really is John Hjorth) play judge and jury. Eric used his real name, google him, judge him, execute him. Anonymous poster never gets ridiculed.... If Eric likes pursuing teenagers, thats his prerogative. Doesn't mean he can't provide value to an investing community... Also doesn't mean he doesn't have a side to the story. Frankly I could care less.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: rkbabang on January 10, 2019, 08:57:10 PM
For those who care, Eric disclosed his legal issues and the situation he is in prior to the meetup. I wasn’t aware of it, since don’t follow local news all that much. The story is what it is and I am not inclined to judge. What I do know is that the three of us had a great time talking investing, politics (a bit), stocks , doing a podcast (my first one) and play a board game. I wouldn’t hesitate to do another meetup again.

Yes, I knew about it in advance as well and there is quite a bit more to the story than that article lets on. But it was a good time and I wouldn't hesitate to meetup with you or Eric again.

As far as John’s objection to the name change, that puzzles me.  I've been on this board since it was on the orher platform way back when. That was the pre-facebook days when almost no one used their real names online. That is why my username isn't my teal name. I don't see the issue with changing usernames or going anonymous.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: LC on January 10, 2019, 10:33:14 PM
Dude what the *$#$? Trying to pick up a 16 year old at Exeter Academy as a 30 year old?

I don't know what "more to the story" there can be. Who picks up high school girls as a freaking adult? And Eric, keep your crappy behavior outside of the 914 area code.

Anyways - was interesting to hear you speak, Spek. Funny how Eric could not pronounce the name....it is a typical latin pronunciation. But you were the star of the show and more importantly, knew your stuff - well performed!
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: LC on January 10, 2019, 10:52:14 PM
Holy cow. Too much brain damage to me, outta here!
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: KJP on January 11, 2019, 05:22:34 AM
Well, Spekulatius,

to me, you're not [in any way] related to this.

In short, it's about double indentity here on CoBF.

Please explain yourself, Og, here.

Explain what?  That he's using a pseudonym on an anonymous message board?

So, is this a meeting place or a community?
Transactional or relational?
Anonymity is a double-edged sword which comes with its own sense of responsibility.
For me, an investment is a partnership and maybe that's too personal.

Why does it have to be the same for everyone?  What prevents "relational" interactions among some and "transactional" interactions among others on the same message board (or, for that matter, the same workplace or city block)?
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: writser on January 11, 2019, 08:23:41 AM
Imho the board is fine the way it is. I couldn't care less whether John or Eric or Cigarbutt is your real name or not and if you opened another account or not. Report posts/posters you think are inappropriate and let Parsad do his job. No need for John or others to police the forum by their own moral standards. Frankly I'd have preferred it if this thread didn't exist - I'd rather have everybody disclosing as much about their personal lives as they are comfortable with themselves. I am here mainly to make money rather than friends. But I guess that's not true for all.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Liberty on January 11, 2019, 09:42:46 AM
There's a big difference between anonymous and pseudonymous. If you keep the same alias for years, people get to know you just as much as if you were using a "real name". A lot of the best accounts here and on Twitter are pseudonymous, but we know who they are because we've been following them for years, even if we don't know their real names.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: CGJB on January 11, 2019, 02:32:13 PM
Good grief, talk about hijacking a thread.

There's nothing wrong with Og posting that he'd interviewed a member of this board for his podcast. The fact that the person interviewed is a member of this board makes it relevant to the board.

I can't see why it's a big deal that a member of this board used to post under his real name, then decided to post under a made-up name -- especially since the vast majority of board members use made-up names. Is that against the rules or guidelines set by Parsad for posting on this board? If not, there's no issue here. Certainly no reason to start questioning the person's "integrity."

And I bet there's plenty more to the story than what the linked news article reported. But that's neither here nor there, especially since it's a settled matter legally. I wish Parsad would delete everything in this thread except Og's original posting, then only allow comments pertaining to the interview.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Gregmal on January 11, 2019, 02:43:15 PM
Good grief, talk about hijacking a thread.

There's nothing wrong with Og posting that he'd interviewed a member of this board for his podcast. The fact that the person interviewed is a member of this board makes it relevant to the board.

I can't see why it's a big deal that a member of this board used to post under his real name, then decided to post under a made-up name -- especially since the vast majority of board members use made-up names. Is that against the rules or guidelines set by Parsad for posting on this board? If not, there's no issue here. Certainly no reason to start questioning the person's "integrity."

And I bet there's plenty more to the story than what the linked news article reported. But that's neither here nor there, especially since it's a settled matter legally. I wish Parsad would delete everything in this thread except Og's original posting, then only allow comments pertaining to the interview.

Welcome to COBF. This stuff happens all the time. It's head scratching. So many self proclaimed "investors" regularly get hung up on totally irrelevant details, fabricate issues, and almost always look for excuses to miss the forest for the trees.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: LC on January 11, 2019, 03:14:53 PM
Partially correct.

Motives are important.

Imagine this: someone posts a stock idea. Now as an investor, you will never know 100% of the details regarding how to value this stock. You know what the financials tell you, what your due diligence tells you, etc. but you will never have a full picture.

Now, what if you find this person is a paid promoter for the company? Wouldn't you want to know this? Wouldn't you want to understand the biases and incentives underlying a stock pitch? This is why disclosure statements exist.

Liberty makes a good point. Despite anonymous names, we all build up some social cache here on this message board. Or at the very least, over time people understand our biases and incentives.

Of course content matters, but so does context. You need both.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: writser on January 11, 2019, 03:54:07 PM
Your point being? Posters are not allowed to create a new account because then you lose the context to say “get the fuck out of my area code you pervert” when they post a podcast? I’d say that is actually a great reason to argue for the opposite.

This is an anonymous board. If somebody with 5 posts pitches a stock: be skeptical. If somebody with 500 posts pitches a stock: be skeptical. If somebody with 5000 posts pitches a stock: be super skeptical.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Gregmal on January 11, 2019, 03:56:51 PM
Partially correct.

Motives are important.

Imagine this: someone posts a stock idea. Now as an investor, you will never know 100% of the details regarding how to value this stock. You know what the financials tell you, what your due diligence tells you, etc. but you will never have a full picture.

Now, what if you find this person is a paid promoter for the company? Wouldn't you want to know this? Wouldn't you want to understand the biases and incentives underlying a stock pitch? This is why disclosure statements exist.

If I was lazy and didn't want to be thorough with my due diligence? Sure. But in that case I'd be better off buying an index fund.

If I'm willing to do the work and do my own deep dive, it is entirely irrelevant.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: LC on January 11, 2019, 04:19:46 PM
Your point being? Posters are not allowed to create a new account because then you lose the context to say “get the fuck out of my area code you pervert” when they post a podcast? I’d say that is actually a great reason to argue for the opposite.

This is an anonymous board. If somebody with 5 posts pitches a stock: be skeptical. If somebody with 500 posts pitches a stock: be skeptical. If somebody with 5000 posts pitches a stock: be super skeptical.

Post whatever, as whomever, you want but if there’s context I’m not going to ignore it.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: johnny on January 14, 2019, 04:12:37 AM
im absolutely shocked to learn that a poster on my beloved value board has been getting involved in poorly thought out situations in largely ignored markets, oblivious to parentco and litigation issues
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Spekulatius on April 10, 2019, 06:47:16 AM
Annual report is out. Cliffs notes:

Trust fund assets and under management and revenues up +15% YoY after stagnating for a while
Earnings ~$70/share ( some extraordinary gains from 1031 swap of RE included)
Book value ~$1050/ share
~$600/ share in bonds and cash
Some investments in RE and startup ventures initiated ($20/ share)
$53 revenue/ share in real estate rents
0.52 acre/ share CA farmland

I am very pleased with the pickup of the trust business.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Foreign Tuffett on April 10, 2019, 03:41:52 PM
Annual report is out. Cliffs notes:

Trust fund assets and under management and revenues up +15% YoY after stagnating for a while
Earnings ~$70/share ( some extraordinary gains from 1031 swap of RE included)
Book value ~$1050/ share
~$600/ share in bonds and cash
Some investments in RE and startup ventures initiated ($20/ share)
$53 revenue/ share in real estate rents
0.52 acre/ share CA farmland

I am very pleased with the pickup of the trust business.

Thank you for the update on this.
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Janeo on May 15, 2019, 04:37:19 AM
Hi there, I got interested in the stock after listening to the podcast. So I googled around and found something interesting regarding the 25,000 acres of land.

So here's a bio (http://straighttalktv.com/bios/henry_walker.html) of Henry Walker pre-2010. I assumed this because it states that QUCT's AUM is $1.2b and in 2010 the AUM is ~$2b. In that bio, it states that QUCT has a 25,000 acre working cattle ranch, and other commercial/retail investment properties located throughout Southern California.

And this is a bio (http://labusinessjournal.com/news/2017/sep/26/money-book-w-henry-walker/) of Henry Walker published in 2017. I quote the relevant parts: "Queen City Investments, a multifaceted holding company that owns F&M Trust Co., California’s oldest chartered trust company with assets under management of $2 billion, a more than 50,000-acre working cattle ranch, and other Southern California commercial-retail investment properties. "

Am I missing something here or did the amount of land QUCT owns actually doubled over the past decade?  :o
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: Spekulatius on May 15, 2019, 03:12:55 PM
Hi there, I got interested in the stock after listening to the podcast. So I googled around and found something interesting regarding the 25,000 acres of land.

So here's a bio (http://straighttalktv.com/bios/henry_walker.html) of Henry Walker pre-2010. I assumed this because it states that QUCT's AUM is $1.2b and in 2010 the AUM is ~$2b. In that bio, it states that QUCT has a 25,000 acre working cattle ranch, and other commercial/retail investment properties located throughout Southern California.

And this is a bio (http://labusinessjournal.com/news/2017/sep/26/money-book-w-henry-walker/) of Henry Walker published in 2017. I quote the relevant parts: "Queen City Investments, a multifaceted holding company that owns F&M Trust Co., California’s oldest chartered trust company with assets under management of $2 billion, a more than 50,000-acre working cattle ranch, and other Southern California commercial-retail investment properties. "

Am I missing something here or did the amount of land QUCT owns actually doubled over the past decade?  :o

I don’t think that anything has changed with respect to QUCT‘s Land holdings. I have been tracking this stock since at least Y2010 and I don’t think there were some larger land purchases. They continue to shuffle around their commercial real estate holdings den possibly some plots near Long Beach. Buying another 25,000 acres would have been in the news, that’s a size of 40 sq miles and that’s a lot of land!.

What I did find is that  the ranch is held via Messer Land &Development, which is registered in 12707 Huasna Road in Arroyo Grande. When you look this up in the San Luis Obispo county website, you can look at some plots there, but they are only part of part if the land  apparently.

https://assessor.slocounty.ca.gov/assessor/pisa/Search.aspx (https://assessor.slocounty.ca.gov/assessor/pisa/Search.aspx)

Pro Tip, search for the street number 12707 and a couple of parcels will pop up. The parcels are named Huasna Rancho, which is actually from a Mexican land grand from hr 19 century ( for 22k acres back then), but I don’t think that the areas for Messer Land ranch and the land grant are a exactly the same, but I think they overlap.

Anyone is welcome to do  do more sleuthing, I have spent already enough time in this rabbit hole  :o
Title: Re: Interview with Spekulatius on QUCT
Post by: marrob on June 08, 2019, 10:21:54 AM
This is old information but the 1996 Walker's Manuals lists that they own "a 27,000 acre ranch in Arroyo Grande, California. The company also leases 25,000 acres from the U.S. Government and raises cattle on the properties." Maybe that is where the roughly 50,000 acres comes from.