Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: Cryptocurrencies
« Last post by Dalal.Holdings on Today at 12:16:04 PM »
The infinite elasticity of fiat money that is often so bemoaned by crypto proponents is, in my amateurish opinion, not a bug but a feature.

Oh it is a feature, to those in power of influencing the monetary supply. It's detrimental to everyone else. Due to that asymmetry it undermines the free market (and is therefore by definition bad in my opinion as I consider the free market to be the optimal system).

For those mentioning power waste, perhaps this recent study is an interesting read. It's on the price and sources of Bitcoin mining (both geographically and how the power is produced). The main conclusions are that at least 77.6% of the power consumption is from renewables and that a large part of this comes from stranded assets: power that is otherwise wasted.
https://coinshares.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Mining-Whitepaper-Final.pdf

(Note the source of the study is unlikely to be impartial based on the name alone)

Lol...is this a joke? Crypto "mining" is an extremely wasteful, carbon positive (coal in China) activity. Love how anyone in the crypto world can write a seemingly technical, extremely long "white paper" pdf and be considered legit. What a joke.

Crypto is worthless.
2
Investment Ideas / Re: BAM - Brookfield Asset Management
« Last post by John Hjorth on Today at 11:34:55 AM »
... The only unknown variables in the calculations are values in the separate categories of investment properties held by BAM the parent, or by subs of BAM controlled directly without involving BPY. The IFRS value of these investment properties is USD 5.321 B at YE2017.

That would be a good question at a future conference call to get an explanation & identification of these properties.

Today my thoughts have been circling about this particular BAM asset item of USD 5.321 B. It's a lot of value, and material compared to BAM BV. [YE2017 : BAM common equity USD 24.052 B, so gross [ex. eventual property debt] : 22%.]

I'm getting nosy and really persistent here [verging to become stubborn as some donkey]. Next, I'm going to dismantle and compare the notes in the financials about investment properties for BAM and BPY. By doing that, it must be possible to identify these investment properties. As basis, it should not be possible to "hide" a value that large in the BAM financials, when the notes are in some way structured and set as an asset directory.

Why is it so? [That there are investment properties owned by BAM, and not by the separate sub for that purpose: PBY?]: I don't know right now, but I hope to find out.

A possible explanation could be, that there at the formation of BPY years ago were certain properties considered "core-core"/"top notch"/"ultra-valuable", where BAM did not want to share the future progress in value and cash yield with the BPY minority LP unit holders.

[Like "the beer" in this old Carlsberg commercial, where everything is shared in the commune - women, toothbrushes and such - but not the beer! [I think English translation is not needed! [ : - ) ]]
3
Investment Ideas / Re: TSLA - Tesla Motors
« Last post by DTEJD1997 on Today at 11:13:30 AM »
So if you are Ford, or GM, or BMW, why the heck would you put serious effort into this venture, when you can simply do what you do best and stuff more money into your pockets than you know what to do with? Dalal is right that all the efforts so far have been half assed metoo projects. Part of the reason I detest the big corporate culture that mandates making it look like you are trying when everyone knows you aren't. It's the same reason Altria just incinerated $2B on Cronos. Shareholders of these companies pay a big price for the illusion of effort. But make no mistake, once someone lays out the road map, and demonstrates how to make serious money on EV's, that's where all the effort will go, and the products available will get significantly better. Until then, everyone is basically just letting Tesla do it's thing. As a result, Tesla has a super premium brand, and is by default, where EVERYONE who wants an EV goes. And yet, despite this, Tesla has been able to string together what? a couple of quarters in its history where at best, there are still accounting related questions as to it's profitability. While at the same time all the others with failure EV products make billions? No duh they don't have viable competitors yet, there is no reason. Tesla's only hope is that when and if making EV is massively profitable, they can maintain the headstart they've been given.

Absolutely.

One can argue that Microsoft, which was a behemoth with vast resources in the early 2000s, had no reason to launch an MP3 player, even while a tiny (nearly bankrupt in the late 90s) company called Apple was going into it. After all, why go into the low-margin, capital intensive business of hardware devices when MSFT could just keep making a killing off that high margin, capital light software biz (Office + Windows, baby)? So Microsoft sat on its laurels for some time. Then came the Zune (half assed attempt) once the importance of that market became clear. Then came the iPhone and Steve Ballmer was just fine and dandy having his Windows Mobile software in a bunch of phones at the time...

2007:
Quote
"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance," said Ballmer. "It's a $500 subsidized item. They may make a lot of money. But if you actually take a look at the 1.3 billion phones that get sold, I'd prefer to have our software in 60% or 70% or 80% of them, than I would to have 2% or 3%, which is what Apple might get."
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2007/04/ballmer-says-iphone-has-no-chance-to-gain-significant-market-share/

Once the iPhone got big, MSFT tried to come out with "me too" Windows Mobile devices, but it was too late--their products were dead on arrival.

Remember, no chance that EVs become a big thing--after all, they're just a "subsidized item" that costs more than what we already have...And look at their tiny market share! And just wait till Tesla's competitors enter this market in 202x--these are real "fierce" competitors we're talking about that have vastly more resources at their disposal than MSFT did in 2000.

I would be incredibly cautious about comparing AAPL to TSLA.  It is a trap to do so.

AAPL was profitable back when the iPhone came out, tremendously so.  AAPL did not have ANY where near the capital needs to roll out the iPhone as what TSLA will have to have to roll out substantially more vehicles.

The iPhone was profitable pretty much out of the gate...not so with TSLA's products.

AAPL had/has an incredibly efficient and profitable supply chain...not so with TSLA.

AAPL has tremendous cash flow, and is buying back stock, paying dividends...TSLA is going to need capital.  TSLA is REALLY going to need capital if they are going to significantly expand.  Even if TSLA is profitable, they are not profitable to being self funded.

Finally, at the end of the day, assuming TSLA doesn't go BK, and they continue their sales build, what you ultimately have is a car company.  Right now, the market does not like car companies as evidenced by the low single digit P/E's.

When I'm out driving in the Detroit/SE MI area, I also look at makes & models of other vehicles.  I see a LOT more TSLA than I did a year ago.  With that being said, some days I don't see a single TSLA.

Why should regular auto manufacturers be doing anything more than dipping a toe in the water with regards to EV?  Where is the market demand?  Nobody that I work/associate with (other than 1 person) is saying "I need to get an EV".  The guy that wanted an EV bought a TSLA years ago. 

FCAU is making money hand over first.  They are investment grade debt, and getting better.  They are taking market share...they are unlocking value...they are improving operations AND the finances.  Yet the market gives them a low single digit P/E (4 or 5).  TSLA has much lower sales, worse balance sheet, losing money and is worth almost 2.5X what FCAU is?

We will see, but I'm putting $ on FCAU.


4
Investment Ideas / Re: GRPN - Groupon
« Last post by heth247 on Today at 11:05:32 AM »
I'd start with the last shareholder letter (which is actually the first one ever written) and go from there.

Given2invest, couple of questions for you:
1. When you say the margin of safety at $3 is very big, can you quantify it?
2. What do you think the catalyst is and how long will it take? If it is a buyout, will somebody buy a business in the middle of transformation?

thanks.
5
Politics / Re: Bring out the guillotine!
« Last post by Cigarbutt on Today at 10:07:30 AM »
I'm sorry for a late reply here...

I don't read the Politics forum here on CoBF daily, and I've actually also granted myself a couple of days to think and read a bit about it. Primarily to avoid ending up in self-oscilation and mental overdrive, just to get called out to behave by fellow board members. [Like when I have been posting about Ms. Vestager's doings.]

I was caught by surprise by what's going on in France. I did not see it coming, based on my personal ignorance about general French living conditions.

What you have read about what's going here in Denmark, I personally consider a fairly correct overall description.

To me, it's deeply concerning, to put it mildly.

Now how is it, that it is so right now here? To me personally, it's about logic flaws in our democracy, leading to among other things populism. An efficient election process in a representative democracy leads to a representative composition of the Danish parlament [called Folketinget], mirroring the population. I'm a huge fan of all your posts here on CoBF with links to essays etc. about stupidity and ignorance. WYSIWYG. Persons on the seats equipped with moral compasses, that are dearly in need of recalibration, or even worse: persons who are morally bankrupt.
- - - o 0 o - - -
More later.

Keep in mind that these aren't 'ordinary' protests.
...
Then look at the 'strong man' & the 'communist countries' - no protests.
Why do you suppose that is?  ;)
SD
People often marvel how Mr. Buffett can take an on-the-spot decision involving billions of dollars but often forget that the decision was the result of a thought process occurring over decades.
Opinion: The time to do the thinking is now.
Thought the following was relevant for the European political landscape and what it may mean for future decisions.
https://timbro.se/allmant/timbro-authoritarian-populism-index2017/

Opinion: "Non-deplorable" people who complain about the rise of anti-democratic sentiment are quick to notice the weaknesses in the growing movements but slow to recognize their own shortcomings that lie at the very origin of the drift.
People of all stripes are looking for alternatives and this is an opportunity cost game.
There's work to be done!
6
Investment Ideas / Re: FRPH - FRP Holdings Inc
« Last post by Williams406 on Today at 09:58:10 AM »
Thepupil,  Your point regarding FRP providing "commoditized" RE development financing captures my concern. I'm curious to know if those of you buying here would buy more or less aggressively if FRP was sitting on the proceeds.

I bought a bit more H40's and think it will be tough to lose money long term here. Also regard DC as a very unique MSA so I don't hate the announced projects thus far. I just note they are different than what FRP has done in the past.
8
General Discussion / Re: Cryptocurrencies
« Last post by SnarkyPuppy on Today at 09:52:53 AM »
Given how bitcoin obviously has 0 value, why aren't you short?
9
Investment Ideas / Re: TCEHY - Tencent
« Last post by mjs111 on Today at 09:18:15 AM »
I was reading through the F-1 for the Tencent Music IPO, and was unsure if this was a spin-off or not.

On page 72 of the F-1 the Tencent Music says the IPO will raise proceeds of around $544 million to $709 million.  When I read that I thought this wasn't a spin-off and instead a carve-out, since a spin-off wouldn't be cash-generating.  On page 18 of the F-1 the company refers to this transaction as being a carve-out.


Then on page 88 the company says this:

Under Practice Note 15 of the Rules Governing the Listing of Securities of The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited, this offering is deemed a “spin-off” transaction by Tencent for which Tencent requires approval by the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. The Hong Kong Stock Exchange has confirmed that Tencent may proceed with the “spin-off” transaction. Pursuant to Practice Note 15, Tencent must make available to its shareholders an “assured entitlement” to a certain portion of our shares.

As our ordinary shares are not expected to be listed on any stock exchange, Tencent intends to effect its Assured Entitlement Distribution by providing to its shareholders a “distribution in specie,” or distribution of the ADSs in kind, at a ratio of one ADS for certain number of ordinary shares of Tencent held at the applicable record date for the distribution. The distribution will be made without any consideration being paid by Tencent’s shareholders. Tencent’s shareholders who are entitled to fractional ADSs, who elect to receive cash in lieu of ADSs and who are located in the United States or are U.S. persons, or are otherwise ineligible holders, will only receive cash in the Assured Entitlement Distribution.



If this is a spin-off, where existing Tencent shareholders end up getting an unspecified number of shares of Tencent Music in a tax-free transaction, where does the $544-$709 million in cash come from?  If this is a carve-out what's the above reference to a spin-off talking about?


Thanks!


F-1:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1744676/000119312518340313/d624633df1a.htm


Mike
10
Any ideas on which preferred convert under moelis? I can't see any preferred that are convertible. Does it come down to a vote to change the terms?

Looks like a two thirds vote to change terms of the certificates, so it'll come down to institutional ownership. Any way to find which hedge funds own what? I don't want to end up holding preferred that don't get a juicy conversion offer.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10