Seeking Alpha

Jacob Wolinsky

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Jacob Wolinsky's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation? [View article]
    Could be but that number seems very small considering how much money they were required to raise and accept from the Government. Where are you getting your estimates from?

    On Nov 25 01:36 PM yomamma wrote:

    > Your capital raise estimate seems bearishly too high . Current estimates
    > are around 5-10 billion.
    Nov 25 01:54 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nucor Corporation: Fantastic Stock at an Attractive Price [View article]
    It was clear I was referring to November last year and not this November, that is when most foreign stocks and metals hit their lows.
    But people like you are just looking for anything to nitpick to make a nasty comment about.
    I just started posting here, I did not realize how many people here post nasty comments. I in the future will no longer respond to stupid or nasty comments.
    Why don't you write some articles of your own? Instead of just looking to criticize other people?


    On Nov 25 12:58 PM pelicanpete wrote:

    > Jacob, it is now November 2009 and you were referring to some past
    > November.
    >
    > You should know that NUE hit a low of $38.02 in November. NUE hit
    > a low of $25.25 in November. Also NUE hit a low of $50.11 in November
    > (which is higher than the high of THIS November). (courtesy Yahoo
    > Finance)
    >
    > Maybe if you fill in the blanks (2009, 2008 and 2007) it might make
    > sense.
    >
    > You, Jacob, write too fast and don't have anyone check your posts
    > for you.
    >
    > Too bad,
    Nov 25 01:31 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Nucor Corporation: Fantastic Stock at an Attractive Price [View article]
    <img class="authors_reply" src="static.seekingalpha.co...">

    While trying to make other people look like a fool, make sure you do not make yourself look like one in the process. Nucor did hit a low of 25 last November check the chart

    bigcharts.marketwatch....
    Nov 25 12:33 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Nucor Corporation: Fantastic Stock at an Attractive Price [View article]
    I mentioned earnings several times in my article. You obviously did not read it.


    On Nov 25 11:43 AM ari5000 wrote:

    > really? a value article but you never mention earnings or cash flow?
    >
    >
    > Is this a joke?
    Nov 25 12:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation? [View article]
    <img class="authors_reply" src="static.seekingalpha.co...">

    That was a small point in my article. But if you want to nitpick a small point I will respond.

    The stress test assumed an unemployment rate of 8.4% in 2009 and a worst case scenario of 10.3% unemployment. Right now we are at 10.2% and we will likely go higher. Even if BAC was not stressed to the extent the test expected, it may be stressed in the future if the economy does not recover as quick as the tests assumed.

    Second point: Many people including prominent economists think the stress tests were a joke. The Government got themselves into a whole and therefore tried to resolve it by ordering the banks to raise enough capital to make it look legitimate but not too much as to panic the markets.

    On Nov 25 11:28 AM bbro wrote:

    > As usual someone who only did a cursory read of the stress test....BAC
    > is 15 billion dollars ahead to date ahead of the loss assumptions
    > in the stress test. Using the macro assumptions is a Cliff Note version
    > of
    > interpreting the Stress test. Please read the stress test in whole
    > for
    > an accurate appraisal. I give an F for not rading the assignment
    > in full.
    >
    > HERE IS A HINT: BAC was stressed to 11.35 Billion per quarter in
    > loan chargeoffs and 3 billion in trading losses per quarter. It has
    > been nowhere near that....
    Nov 25 11:49 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Berkshire Hathaway Stock Portfolio: At Risk of Resembling an Index Fund? [View article]
    <img class="authors_reply" src="static.seekingalpha.co...">

    I do not think you my responses to other comments. I was clear that I did not focus on Berkshire's business operation, I focused on their STOCK portfolio. It is possible that the Brk stock could return more than the S&P, while the Brk stock portfolio under performs it. The two are uncorrelated(although not completely), since BRK gets most of its revenue from operations and not from stocks. My main point is that people who mimic Buffett's stock picks MIGHT one day be mimicking an index fund.


    On Nov 25 10:10 AM jadick wrote:

    > With regard to Buffett (BRK.A) becoming a human index fund you assess
    > what holdings he has in the Dow colony and that is far from an accurate
    > assessment of ALL
    > his holdings. You over look the insurance and reinsurance holdings
    > which are significant investments and income generators. Then there's
    > NetJets, an Israeli metal cutting tools business (Iscar Metalworkings
    > Companies) a company valued at $55 billion in 2006 when Bershire
    > acquired an 80% stake, Dairy Queen, The Washington Post, Johns Manville,
    > a string of luxury items producers and sellers, a handful of furniture
    > companies, another pawful of clothing companies, logistics companies,
    > and let us not forget See's candies, producers of some really world
    > class chocolates, a flight safety company and more, all of which
    > hit the bottom line. So, $100 Million here, $40 billion there, sooner
    > or later we're talking about some serious dinero.
    >
    > My point: there's far more to Berkshire than a few Dow companies
    > - - way too much, in fact, to relegate as a Dow index wannabe.
    Nov 25 10:55 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Berkshire Hathaway Stock Portfolio: At Risk of Resembling an Index Fund? [View article]
    Interesting point, I did not think of foreign stocks as an alternative for him. However, from his current releases it does not look like he has positions in foreign stocks.


    On Nov 25 09:45 AM Advill wrote:

    > If Mr. Buffet ties his investments to US, it could be true, however
    > he has been actively investing in European banks, Chinese banks,
    > Chinese car maker and Southameric home builders.
    >
    > There are much more interesting opportunities outside US but after
    > all Mr. Buffet is a patriot , I can bet a finger that he knows he
    > can produce more money outside USA than into but decides not to do
    > it.
    >
    > However if returns in American stocks reduces i´m sure he will move
    > more money to non american assets and will continue beating Dow.
    >
    >
    > Rgds
    Nov 25 09:50 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nucor Corporation: Fantastic Stock at an Attractive Price [View article]
    Thank you.

    I also own GE and am overweight in the metals sector. They have been some of my most fantastic performers over the past year. Any thoughts on US Steel? It was at 190 two years ago and is now at 42. I got in earlier at 40 and bought again at 20.


    On Nov 25 09:38 AM Tom Armistead wrote:

    > Good article, NUE is a quality company. 5 year average EPS is the
    > right metric for a cyclical, a P/E of 10 on that basis is attractive.
    >
    >
    > gaspains, many good stocks look unattractive at low points in the
    > cycle. That would include IBM, which could be bought in November
    > last year for 77, now trading at 128: or GE, which could be bought
    > under 7 in March and now trades above 16.
    >
    > I have been buying some industrials to include steel, positioning
    > for a potential economic recovery.
    Nov 25 09:48 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Berkshire Hathaway Stock Portfolio: At Risk of Resembling an Index Fund? [View article]
    <img class="authors_reply" src="static.seekingalpha.co...">

    I am not taking a side either way but just wanted to point out what Bruce Greenwald said about it

    question: I know you own Berkshire Hathaway , so I have to ask you what you think about Buffett’s purchase of Burlington Northern Santa Fe.

    Greenwald: It’s a crazy deal. It’s an insane deal. We looked at Burlington Northern at $75 and I’ll give you the exact calculation we did. You don’t have a high earnings return. They are paying 18 times earnings, but it’s really much worse than that. They report maintenance cap-ex very carefully. They report depreciation and amortization, and they report only about 70% of the maintenance cap-ex. So they are under-depreciating, and their profit numbers are lower than the true profit numbers – and in a bad way, because the tax shield for the depreciation is undergone too. Their profitability is much lower than it looks.

    Buffett’s paying 18-times [at $100/share] and at $75 he was paying 16-times. Our calculation is he was paying 21-times.

    Secondly, there are two kinds of assets. There are the rights-of-way, which you can’t get rid of. So there’s no issue about having to earn a return on them because you have to keep it in the business, and because there’s nothing they can do with those rights-of-way. If you look at the asset value of the non-right-of-way equipment, and you write it up because it’s more expensive than it was originally, you get an asset value that’s very close to the earnings power value. We didn’t see a lot franchise value or hidden asset value.

    The other thing is that if you try to calculate sustainable earnings, you have to cope with the fact that earnings are up enormously since 2003, when oil went up. There is a simple calculation you can do, which compares the cost-per-ton-mile for freight for a truck versus a railroad. If you build the increase in the price of diesel fuel into the post-2003 experience, when revenues suddenly start to grow, what you see is that the entire growth of the revenue is accounted for by the energy advantage that the railroads have and therefore how much business they can capture from the truckers, and how much pricing they can get because the competition is now more expensive.

    There is nothing special about the railroads. It’s entirely an energy play.

    If you look at what their margins should have gone up by, given the energy efficiency, the margins go up by only about half of that. So you don’t have a good aggressive management over these five years producing outsized returns.

    We looked back at when they did the merger with Santa Fe, because then they did increase margins. But they got bored with it, and margins started to come down. The same thing happened recently. We don’t see a lot of hidden profitability in the culture of the company.

    It looked to us like an oil play. He has a history of making bad oil play decisions. And that was at $75/share, we thought there were better oil plays. At $100/share we think he has lost his mind.

    from gurufocus.com/news...

    On Nov 25 08:59 AM CaptainJJack wrote:

    > I own BNI, and I disagree with Berkowitz and the critics of Buffet's
    > deal.
    >
    > Yes, he paid a lot. But, in my opinion, you get a lot when you become
    > an insider.
    >
    > But, by far, the overriding dynamic is that railroads are now clear
    > monopolies in most of the areas they operate. Just look at a railroad
    > map of the US, and you find little overlap.
    >
    > The main competition is trucking, and if you look at the economics
    > of that business, you find it turns on finding and holding on to
    > truck drivers.
    >
    > Their key constraint is capital: They have to find a way to fund
    > the initial costs of a trucker getting into the business. I haven't
    > seen much on this lately, but I am guessing that banks are reluctant
    > to loan person enough money to buy a rig and finance their first
    > years in operation.
    >
    > So, I think the railroads will be very profitable in the future,
    > and I am willing to bet rates will rise even if other prices are
    > falling.
    Nov 25 09:42 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Wells Fargo, JPMorgan and Bank of America: Stock Prices Can Double [View article]
    I posted an article today on SeekingAlpha ,questioning John Paulson's target estimate for BAC. i think it is relevant to Amit's above article. If anyone wants to see it here is the link seekingalpha.com/artic...
    Nov 25 09:22 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Fair Value of Bank of America: A Flaw in Paulson's Calculation? [View article]
    I reported him, I report all these spammers


    On Nov 25 08:48 AM john s. gordon wrote:

    > get this crass commercial message off the air.
    Nov 25 09:17 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Buy American: U.S. Investors Shunning U.S. Mutual Funds [View article]
    And since when does the average investor ever have success trying to get into the "hot" market sectors? People really think that since the little guy is putting more money in foreign stocks than domestic stocks, that foreign stocks will outperform? If anything this is a contrarian indicator since the little guy always gets in at the wrong time.
    Nov 25 05:51 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Berkshire Hathaway Stock Portfolio: At Risk of Resembling an Index Fund? [View article]
    I know they are not a mutual fund. If they thought their other insurance subsidies were so good, why invest in stocks at all? Put the $50 billion to other uses?

    Anyway that misses my point. In my article I did not focus on Berkshire's business operation, I focused on their stock portfolio. It is possible that the Brk stock could return more than the S&P, while the Brk stock portfolio under performs it. My main point is that people who mimic Buffett's stock picks MIGHT one day be mimicking an index fund.


    On Nov 24 10:59 AM rnam wrote:

    > BRK is not a mutual fund investing only in listed equity. Have you
    > forgotten the operating companies? The growth in float and cost of
    > float from the insurance subsidiaries is much more important in valuing
    > BRK not the constituents of its portfolio.
    Nov 24 02:54 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Berkshire Hathaway Stock Portfolio: At Risk of Resembling an Index Fund? [View article]
    I agree with you. My main point is that Buffett's options are limited and getting even more limited as time goes on. This is reflected in his current portfolio.


    On Nov 24 10:48 AM slam stocks wrote:

    > The BRK-A portfolio does resemble the DOW, but he chooses the best
    > components to beat the market.
    >
    > Consider his business model on quality US companies with high moats
    > to prevent competition and with easy to understand (no tech) financials.
    > There is really little available for him to choose. The alternatives
    > are basically the same: KO/KFT vs. PEP, GE vs UTX (Dow), XOM vs CVX
    > (DOW), JNJ vs ABT, HD vs. LOW, PG vs CL . He already owns most of
    > the banks already. Paying a steady/increasing dividend is also very
    > key in his returns. Considering these similiar companies, he would
    > essentially replace another DOW component or choose more or less
    > the same type of stock with similiar returns. Yet, he beats the market
    > by choosing the best of the DOW and does not get weighed down by
    > the poor performers.
    >
    > I agree his portfolio is not perfect, but given his choices and industry
    > selections they are both very good. He is definitely brillant and
    > I religiously follow his strategy. With a fairly similiar portfolio,
    > I siginificantly beat the market by also choosing the best DOW components
    > or comparable stocks.
    Nov 24 02:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Berkshire Hathaway Stock Portfolio: At Risk of Resembling an Index Fund? [View article]
    People buy stock because they want to outperform an index fund, not match it. Therefore if Berkshire's stock holdings were performing the same as the S&P it would not be to the shareholders satisfaction.


    On Nov 24 01:28 PM PenName Dave wrote:

    > Silly title... risk of becoming an index fund?
    >
    > Whats the risk? Index funds outperform money managers 80% of the
    > time.
    Nov 24 02:48 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
464 Comments
482 Likes