Seeking Alpha

George Acs

 
View as an RSS Feed
View George Acs' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • The Crossroads Are Clear, But The Path Is Not [View article]
    You select a convenient assumption to make your point. In fact, not every sale results in the cycle getting perpetuated, nor is there always an equilibrium with every transaction.

    That's particularly the case during this period of unparalleled corporate buy backs.

    My sale of shares could easily be part of a buy back that draws money from corporate coffers, resulting in the retirement of shares and ends up in my mattress. Where is your equilibrium?

    It's the cash that's not being subsequently taken back out of the mattress that is not in play and using the sports metaphor, is therefore on the sidelines.
    Jul 25, 2014. 08:33 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Cisco Was A Friend Of Mine [View article]
    Have already hired a tattoo artist and an anesthesiologist and plan to adorn my wife's forehead.
    Nov 14, 2013. 04:24 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • I Love Caterpillar [View article]
    You may, or more likely did not, notice the use of the word "Presumably" when discussing the likelihood that the "smart money" was at play.

    Just to review, "presumably means "used to convey that what is asserted is very likely though not known for certain."

    For you to say "it's just as likely...." is itself a presumption that compounds uncertainty in that you are attempting to add a quantitative component to the argument. However, I would suggest to you that a company buying back shares would represent "smart money" and those covering their shorts are very different from the average individual investor. The two examples that you cite as potential alternatives seem to be aligned with my statement.
    Oct 23, 2013. 02:34 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • That Was The Crash, Dummy [View article]
    What you refer to as "short-sightedness" has given us a very good 30 years, all in all. This having come at a time when the world economy essentially transformed from silos to a global web of competing and colluding economies.

    To suggest that Greenspan, for example could have pulled the strings to make his 18 year tenure an "economically good one" is ridiculous. Good luck trying to restrain unforeseen and tangled forces for a moment, much less 18 years.

    Whatever Greenspan's opinion on Glass-Stegall, the fact remains that it was through the legislative branch that the repeal was enacted. During that period of time it was a Republican controlled congress, an ostensibly Republican Federal Reserve Chairman and a Democrat President.

    Where would you like to assign blame?

    There has never been an economy in the world that hasn't experienced cyclicality. The larger the economy the more difficult it is to correct the course, as it is difficult to prevent the course from going off track.

    It's quite easy to argue that their actions had detrimental effects and by inference had they taken another course of action the economy would be better, because there is no means to assess the claim.

    What we know is in hindsight and we will never know the "what would have been." That is why Greenspan and Bernanke are heroes to some and culpable to others.

    You may as well join the argument that Edgar Allen Poe would have been a far greater writer had he not battled alcoholism and perhaps drug addiction. Of course, there are those who argue that it was those demons that fueled his creativity.

    We'll never know.
    May 25, 2013. 04:44 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    Yes, but I don't really care about how it may have been portrayed by others, or your interpretation of how it may have been portrayed by others. I portrayed the Supreme Court decision in an historically accurate manner in addition to the narrow way in which the decision was applied.

    Yet you used your comment in a completely misleading fashion, suggesting that I was perpetuating what you believe to be a misrepresentation by "modern, liberal media."

    In fact, the misrepresentation was yours alone.
    May 1, 2013. 01:09 PM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What's More Frightening Than A Fiscal Cliff? [View article]
    Other than insider information is there anything related to stock picking that isn't?

    Show me a single thesis expounded by well compensated analysts and you can easily find precisely the opposite thesis by an equally well compensated and qualified individual, despite the fact that they have the same data available to them.

    The challenge becomes how to manage your positions once you've committed to the guess. In that case, observation of price patterns and movements helps to shift the odds a bit from 50:50. A casino can do very well with slim margins as can a grocery store. Why not an investor, too?
    Oct 28, 2012. 10:46 AM | 8 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Herbalife: Who's Consuming All Those Shakes? And Why... [View article]
    CrimebustersNow, you can't possibly be serious, although I do like your use of completely irrelevant quotation marks that are related to absolutely nothing at all, as if they are somehow part of a continuing discussion that appears to only be percolating through your own mind. My guess is that is consistent with some greater scheme of delusion and grandeur.

    For the sake of the children, you should probably maintain your 100 yard distance.
    Sep 13, 2014. 04:52 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • How Will Apple's Stock Split Impact Its Shareholders? [View article]
    I don't think that your contention that the sole reason for the split in shares was to "enhance the clientele for the stock," has much basis.


    To begin, Apple is not disproportionately owned by institutions prior to the split. It is owned at about the same level as both Coca Cola and IBM, representing another two very different price points from Apple. It is much more held by individuals than most of the stocks in the S&P 500.


    Additionally, there's no evidence that highly elevated share price is related to increased institutional ownership. There are relatively few stocks in the range of Apple, but among those, they are much more likely to be owned by individual investors than by institutions, when compared to the rest of the S&P 500 stocks. Historically, that included stocks like Google, MasterCard and Amazon, although Priceline and Chipotle are more widely owned by institutions.


    But to suggest that the Board of Directors would show such largesse is hard to accept, particularly since it took considerable arm twisting to get the Board to take any actions that would be considered to be share holder friendly for their existing share holders, much less to do any thing for potential share holders.


    Finally, while Apple may be in an entirely different universe of stocks, perhaps representing an aspirational kind of holding for some, the many years of history indicates that stock splits are all about the math. Any artificial enhancement of share price is usually after the announcement and not after the split and tends to be very transient. Anyone considering buying shares of a split stock, even Apple, on the basis of the split is most likely going to be disappointed, especially if your further contention, that of increased volatility was to become the case.


    It is funny to see on the one hand you dismiss the notion for increased post-split liquidity as being without empirical evidence, and then you suggest that "the stock split might result in lower liquidity."


    Might? Where is that empirical evidence? It's one thing to have a difference of opinion, but to dismiss something for its lack of empirical evidence and then offer more of the same is pure solipsism
    Apr 25, 2014. 06:53 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Cisco Was A Friend Of Mine [View article]
    I just assumed that everyone who would know the difference was likely to be dead by now. I know that I'm barely hanging on
    Nov 14, 2013. 11:23 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Beating A Dead Horse To Life [View article]
    Yes. Yes, it was.
    Jun 29, 2013. 09:48 AM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    That's right. It shall not and it does not double dip.

    Various foreign entities exact various corporate tax rates. The US cumulative corporate tax rate takes into consideration that which has been paid to a foreign entity once overseas funds are repatriated.
    May 1, 2013. 02:34 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Shame On You, Apple [View article]
    The SCOTUS interpretation and its application was indeed new. The distinction between corporate entities and people, with regard to certain rights, privileges and obligations had not previously been argued within the context of campaign financing restrictions.
    May 1, 2013. 12:59 PM | 7 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Herbalife: Who's Consuming All Those Shakes? And Why... [View article]
    I think you may be projecting a bit too much, again in an effort to have events conform to your thesis.

    Change is made for any number of reasons, including an evolving environment, changing needs etc.

    Making change is not necessarily an admission of any sort. When you have made changes in your life were they necessarily a result of having admitted you were on the wrong path or could there have simply been a better path that you came to recognize on some occasions?
    Could change be made because of recognition or admission of illegal or unethical business practices? Of course, but it would seem that doing so while under such intense scrutiny would offer little benefit, as they are being investigated for past practices and not likely to receive any "points" for forward practices.
    Oct 8, 2014. 08:18 AM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Herbalife: Who's Consuming All Those Shakes? And Why... [View article]
    Thanks, but way too much time spent in doing so. I think I'll stick to casual observer status, as long as the barrage from those acting under the guise of protecting society takes a breather.
    Sep 16, 2014. 08:49 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Herbalife: Who's Consuming All Those Shakes? And Why... [View article]
    Your record? What is your record? I may have missed it when seeking to find out about your organization, that once again, refers to you as a "one man struggle," so when you refer to "WE," it does add a little to the mystery

    You seem to have two issues confused, perhaps not understanding what constitutes "credibility." Credibility doesn't require a name, nor do "facts and leads." However, there is a big difference between writing off a one time informer as opposed to someone who is on a constant campaign and stands to make personal profits, as a result. Although even Chicken Little may have had some useful information most reasonable people would have stopped listening after a while or questioned the motivation.

    Don't misunderstand. It is the motivation that I question with regard to some whose apparent sole purpose focuses on a single company that is already under the spotlight.
    Sep 10, 2014. 04:25 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
4,962 Comments
3,098 Likes