FRMO - FRMO Corp.

[Liberty]

It's not like they control the pricing of the stock... if you invested in 2012, you're in at about $2 per share. If you just read the statements without looking at the price movement they've done ok.

Complaining about changes in the revenue share is just plain ignorant. Stahl and Bregman are way too generous towards frmo shareholders in how they structure fees to frmo from HK. I honestly don't think there's anything like it out there...

Settle down.

Did I complain? I said it was esoteric. I meant it's confusing and complex, and when you haven't thought about the company (which I used to own) in years, most of it is down the memory hole.

[Liberty]

Once in a while I remember this company and have a look.

The dynamic reminds me a bit of Altius. It's really interesting on paper, which is why I originally bought it. But the stock still trades where it did in 2005.... It's a bit like the old saying "however beautiful the theory, once in a while it should be compared with reality" (can't remember exact phrasing, but that's the gist of it).

[matts]

That's because these guys have spent the last decade positioned for zimbabwe level hyperinflation. You almost couldn't dream up a thesis that turned out to be more wrong. They think the ETF-driven system is set to crash, and then stick about a third of their AUM in a single oil-driven stock, TPL. Add to that their religious belief in bitcoin, a thesis that will never come to pass, and this is the result. On top of that, they take no responsibility for their mistakes and just keep blaming passive investing.

The guys are smooth talkers and that's about it. I say this as someone who made FRMO by-far the largest position in my portfolio a decade ago.

[Liberty]

That's because these guys have spent the last decade positioned for zimbabwe level hyperinflation. You almost couldn't dream up a thesis that turned out to be more wrong. They think the ETF-driven system is set to crash, and then stick about a third of their AUM in a single oil-driven stock, TPL. Add to that their religious belief in bitcoin, a thesis that will never come to pass, and this is the result. On top of that, they take no responsibility for their mistakes and just keep blaming passive investing.

The guys are smooth talkers and that's about it. I say this as someone who made FRMO by-far the largest position in my portfolio a decade ago.

Reminds me a little of Leucadia, with the big positioning for inflation and commodities, before the JEF exit..

[thowed]

It's really interesting on paper, which is why I originally bought it. But the stock still trades where it did in 2005.... It's a bit like the old saying "however beautiful the theory, once in a while it should be compared with reality" (can't remember exact phrasing, but that's the gist of it).

Lovely sentiment - one to remember.  I usually get tripped up this way when I try to be too clever.

[coc]

That's because these guys have spent the last decade positioned for zimbabwe level hyperinflation. You almost couldn't dream up a thesis that turned out to be more wrong. They think the ETF-driven system is set to crash, and then stick about a third of their AUM in a single oil-driven stock, TPL. Add to that their religious belief in bitcoin, a thesis that will never come to pass, and this is the result. On top of that, they take no responsibility for their mistakes and just keep blaming passive investing.

The guys are smooth talkers and that's about it. I say this as someone who made FRMO by-far the largest position in my portfolio a decade ago.

Reminds me a little of Leucadia, with the big positioning for inflation and commodities, before the JEF exit..

At least LUK had the guts to say "We are positioned for inflation, if you don't believe inflation is coming, you shouldn't invest." Or something to that effect. I guess they were right! 

[Liberty]

At least LUK had the guts to say "We are positioned for inflation, if you don't believe inflation is coming, you shouldn't invest." Or something to that effect. I guess they were right! 

Yes, I remember it being very explicit, close to those words in one, if not many, of their letters.

[KinAlberta]

It's really interesting on paper, which is why I originally bought it. But the stock still trades where it did in 2005.... It's a bit like the old saying "however beautiful the theory, once in a while it should be compared with reality" (can't remember exact phrasing, but that's the gist of it).

Lovely sentiment - one to remember.  I usually get tripped up this way when I try to be too clever.

Ditto.

I always treated LUK more like a hedge. They made bets off their forecasts of the future and got lucky a few times. Seemed that sometimes they believed too much in their ability to predict the future.

I always try to maintain the view that no one can predict the future so I find FRMO rather refreshing in their rather explicit statements that they cannot predict the future so are endeavouring to make low cost bets on various possibilities.

As for quotes on theory I like the tongue-in-cheek saying that goes like: It works in practice, but does it work in theory?