5 Cash-Rich Companies With Potential Stock Catalysts [View article]
I haven't looked at it in a while -- the article is three moths old. If a stock is in a screen, I look. If it's not, I'm out.
What I suggest for you is that you look at PRSS in light of the screen you created on which it appears, which, prsumably, reflects your goals in the market. Is PRSS's presence in the screen legit? IOW, does it meet the spirit of the law in addition to the letter of the law. (IOW, are there any abberrations that caused it to get into the screen?) If it meets the spirit of the law, and if it's a screen with which you feel comfortable (i.e., you backtested it in a time period you think relevant to current conditions), then PRSS would be consistent with what you are looking for.
Apple's Slow And Steady Search Attack [View article]
I don't know much about Siri, except for the episode of the sitcom "The Big Bang Theory," where one of the characters tried to date Siri (he doesn't do too well with flesh-and-blood women, and actually, even Siri ditched him), but here's something I do know.
For the last four apps I installed on my iPad, i could not find them by searching in the Apple app Store. (The search terms brought up apps, but not the ones I was looking for.) I actually had to open a web browser, search on Google using the same terms, and then get the Apple app store links (all appeared at the top of their respective Google results pages) that let me download the apps I was looking for.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
"Because he has no clue."
Actually, the bear case re: Sirius is neither obscure nor difficult to ferret out. As I said, I don't agree with it and for my own account, I'm long. I'm not critiquing your position. I'm critiquing the article, which is just, plain bad and regardless of the context of the other comment on short data, the fact remains that in this case, the number of days outstanding would not suggest a serious short squeeze danger to anyone who knows how to assess such information.
It's interesting that in your hostile reaction to my suggestion that you understand both sides of an investment case, you made reference to my prior discussions with Paulo. I decided to do, like you, and check your prior work.
Holy @$&^#!
I blundered and should have known better than to attempt to communicate with you. You are another Paulo. While he seems to devote his life to posting an embarrassingly huge number of bearish articles on AMZN, you do likewise regarding bullish articles on SIRI. Although I disagree with Paulo's trading position but agree with yours, there is one very important similarity: When any author is so extreme and over the top in churning out copy on one stock, that is a person with whom serious dialog is not possible. (Actually, you may be more extreme; Paulo occasionally sprinkles in articles on things other than AMZN; you seem all SIRI all the time, if not I'd have had to look much harder.)
My mistake. I usually check profiles of authors any time I read an article, but in this case, I slipped. Chalk it up to holiday distractions. In any case, you can now take comfort in the fact that no further attempts at legitimate discussion will be foisted upon you. I have now unchecked the track-new-comments box on top of the comment sections and will no longer get SA notice of further postings re: this article.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
"Again, completely expected. Thank you! Stop wasting my time, and stop wasting the reader's time. Take your ball, pout, and go complain some more about Paulo's position on Amazon."
Yes, that's right. When I wanted to take the time to make a serious point about AMZN, I did publish my own article(s). And as I noted, I choose not to put in the time with SIRI, because it simply isn't worth it.
" I don't need your granddaddy lecturing."
Actually, you do . . . desperately. But discussions with Paulo helped me learn to recognize when I'm dealing with someone whose mind is tightly closed and to cut down on wasted time.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
Hey Faulkner, I just noticed. Livermore is right. Mid-single digits numbers of days to cover, while not trivial, is certainly not nearly as big a deal as you suggest. So not only is your article lazy (as per my other comments), it's just plain wrong.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
" You may question one's sanity (soundness of judgement) on any decision, and I will likely say it again many times. If I found the short position to be sound of judgement, then I would have to question MY soundness of judgement in being long. One side is right here, and one side is wrong.
I find it fascinating that my statement of "a novice investor with a lot to learn," is constantly taken and used to paint me as... well, a novice. Always left out of the quote is the remainder :
" and always will consider myself as such"
When and if I am 90 and old and gray, if I am asked, I will always say I am a novice. I will never ever be an expert at anything in life, because there is always plenty to learn, and there are always things I do not know. I am always looking to learn. I'd say it surprises me (but it doesn't) how wrong the self proclaimed "experts" are over and over and over again.
Your statement :
"I know what the shorts are thinking."
Absolutely begs explanation. Unless it is "they are thinking the share price will go down," then would you care to share what it is these shorts are thinking? Do you feel that the short position is of sound judgement here? If so, do you also feel that your long position is of sound judgement?"
I said "But I know what the shorts are thinking. I disagree with it . . . ." What part of "disagree with it" did you not understand?
As to whether I care to share what the shorts are thinking, no not at the moment. You're the author. Do your own job. And if you fail, don;t ask someone else to do it for you in the comment section.
I've written my own SIRI articles in the past, but lately, have decided it's not a worthwhile use of my time considering the exorbitant number of SIRI articles already published in general and on Seeking Alpha in particular.
My point here is not to challenge your conclusion; like I said, I'm with you in the final answer. I'm long.
My criticism is the approach you take, one that is needlessly silly and quite reckless. There is a buyer and seller on every trade, meaning disagreement is a fact of life in the market. You must ALWAYS know what the other side is thinking if for no other reason than to double check your own work; nobody should be so arrogant as to assume that this can be skipped. You do your readers a dis-service when you brush aside the substantial short interest as mere insanity.
And by the way, I'm not going to debate this any further, because it's not worth more discussion. Either you accept that you should do your homework and understand both sides of an issue, or you don't. I've stated my position. You are free to take yours. readers can judge for themselves.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
"I absolutely have to question the sanity of these shorts."
Ouch. Having described yourself in your profile as "a novice investor with a lot to learn," permit me to offer a suggestion. Never, never, never ever say again anything like what you said above.
This is not a matter of how I feel about SIRI. Actually, I'm long. But I know what the shorts are thinking. I disagree with it, but most important, I know it. Naively questioning the sanity of those who take positions opposite yours, the hallmark of an amateur, might work out in your favor every now and then, but over the long term, you're likely to get your head handed to you.
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
It's possible MSFT may flop, but in the sense that we say this about all new things; there was once a chance iPad would flop. I think the two new things window 8 is bringing are the ability to run tablets and regular pcs, and the ability to handle full-blown MS products.
The first is important, I think, because of a so-far unmet need combine the power of pcs with the convenient form-factor of tablets, each of which are very much valued in the marketplace but is currently not really available without carrying two devices.
The second is under-rated. MS Office is still THE primary way of doing work. Yes there's open office and google docs, but neither are nearly as good as MS Office. Ditto the tablet versions. People can do side work or touch up on tablets but when it comes to REAL work, full-blown versions of programs are needed. If Windows 8 can get these into the tablet form factor, that would be huge.
Modern Portfolio Theory 2.0 - The Most Diversified Portfolio [View article]
Eric's comment reminds me a bit of an old grad-school portfolio management course. We learned all the usual MPT topics, efficient frontier, etc, etc. etc. As a project, we all had to create and manage portfolios and naturally, toward the end of the semester, we had a show-and-tell of sorts. As it progressed, I noticed that the students with the best stocks did best regardless of how effectively or ineffectively they applied the allocation techniques, and conversely the students who had bad stocks did badly regardless of how well they might have applied the allocation techniques.
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
The way I did it was not a failure to monitor and drop. In p123 simulator, stocks aren't sold simply because they fail to make a screen. They need t run afoul of specific sell rules. I set to to hold stocks indefinitely unless that QVG rank fell below 70.
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
Yes, that is so. A key aspect of an MSFT investment case would be one's acceptance of the notion that Windows 8 is different enough to suggest that the trend we've been seeing will give way to something different.
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
"Dividend growth investors tend toward buy and hold . . . . "
Understood. But are they hurting themselves by doing that?
I an able to implement that approach on the portfolio123 simulation platform, and was able to see that performance definitely suffers. Remember that the buy-and-hold culture comes from a world characterized by high trading costs and the absence of screening-testing platforms. Taxes are still an annoying issue at present, but as the culture continues to evolve, attitudes toward buy and hold may change.
Modern Portfolio Theory 2.0 - The Most Diversified Portfolio [View article]
I have to confess I'm not grasping the logic of this particular strategy should be expected to produce strong returns (although you discuss diversification, ultimately, you measure the success of the effort in terms of return). But I had a tough night so that may be on me.
Even so, I am still able to recognize that IVV is not a suitable benchmark. Since you are testing a specific protocol for assigning weights to securities within a very specific list, it would seem to me that the most appropriate benchmark would be an equally-weighted portfolio of that very group of securities.
I ran that benchmark portfolio on stockscreen123 using annal rebalancing (i.e. re-set weights to equal once per year) and got an annual return of 8.9% vs. your 10.6% over the course of your chosen test period. So you did outperform, but not by nearly as much as the article suggests.
As to the cause of outperformance, it seems, as others suggested, attributable to significant fixed-income exposure at times when equities performed horribly and fixed income soared. This was, indeed, the right thing to have done, but the maximum diversification is not by any means the only way to have done that. Many other approaches, including beta, sharpe, relative trend, etc., could just as easily have done that.
5 Cash-Rich Companies With Potential Stock Catalysts [View article]
What I suggest for you is that you look at PRSS in light of the screen you created on which it appears, which, prsumably, reflects your goals in the market. Is PRSS's presence in the screen legit? IOW, does it meet the spirit of the law in addition to the letter of the law. (IOW, are there any abberrations that caused it to get into the screen?) If it meets the spirit of the law, and if it's a screen with which you feel comfortable (i.e., you backtested it in a time period you think relevant to current conditions), then PRSS would be consistent with what you are looking for.
Apple's Slow And Steady Search Attack [View article]
For the last four apps I installed on my iPad, i could not find them by searching in the Apple app Store. (The search terms brought up apps, but not the ones I was looking for.) I actually had to open a web browser, search on Google using the same terms, and then get the Apple app store links (all appeared at the top of their respective Google results pages) that let me download the apps I was looking for.
Just saying . . . .
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
Actually, the bear case re: Sirius is neither obscure nor difficult to ferret out. As I said, I don't agree with it and for my own account, I'm long. I'm not critiquing your position. I'm critiquing the article, which is just, plain bad and regardless of the context of the other comment on short data, the fact remains that in this case, the number of days outstanding would not suggest a serious short squeeze danger to anyone who knows how to assess such information.
It's interesting that in your hostile reaction to my suggestion that you understand both sides of an investment case, you made reference to my prior discussions with Paulo. I decided to do, like you, and check your prior work.
Holy @$&^#!
I blundered and should have known better than to attempt to communicate with you. You are another Paulo. While he seems to devote his life to posting an embarrassingly huge number of bearish articles on AMZN, you do likewise regarding bullish articles on SIRI. Although I disagree with Paulo's trading position but agree with yours, there is one very important similarity: When any author is so extreme and over the top in churning out copy on one stock, that is a person with whom serious dialog is not possible. (Actually, you may be more extreme; Paulo occasionally sprinkles in articles on things other than AMZN; you seem all SIRI all the time, if not I'd have had to look much harder.)
My mistake. I usually check profiles of authors any time I read an article, but in this case, I slipped. Chalk it up to holiday distractions. In any case, you can now take comfort in the fact that no further attempts at legitimate discussion will be foisted upon you. I have now unchecked the track-new-comments box on top of the comment sections and will no longer get SA notice of further postings re: this article.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
Yes, that's right. When I wanted to take the time to make a serious point about AMZN, I did publish my own article(s). And as I noted, I choose not to put in the time with SIRI, because it simply isn't worth it.
" I don't need your granddaddy lecturing."
Actually, you do . . . desperately. But discussions with Paulo helped me learn to recognize when I'm dealing with someone whose mind is tightly closed and to cut down on wasted time.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
I find it fascinating that my statement of "a novice investor with a lot to learn," is constantly taken and used to paint me as... well, a novice. Always left out of the quote is the remainder :
" and always will consider myself as such"
When and if I am 90 and old and gray, if I am asked, I will always say I am a novice. I will never ever be an expert at anything in life, because there is always plenty to learn, and there are always things I do not know. I am always looking to learn. I'd say it surprises me (but it doesn't) how wrong the self proclaimed "experts" are over and over and over again.
Your statement :
"I know what the shorts are thinking."
Absolutely begs explanation. Unless it is "they are thinking the share price will go down," then would you care to share what it is these shorts are thinking? Do you feel that the short position is of sound judgement here? If so, do you also feel that your long position is of sound judgement?"
I said "But I know what the shorts are thinking. I disagree with it . . . ." What part of "disagree with it" did you not understand?
As to whether I care to share what the shorts are thinking, no not at the moment. You're the author. Do your own job. And if you fail, don;t ask someone else to do it for you in the comment section.
I've written my own SIRI articles in the past, but lately, have decided it's not a worthwhile use of my time considering the exorbitant number of SIRI articles already published in general and on Seeking Alpha in particular.
My point here is not to challenge your conclusion; like I said, I'm with you in the final answer. I'm long.
My criticism is the approach you take, one that is needlessly silly and quite reckless. There is a buyer and seller on every trade, meaning disagreement is a fact of life in the market. You must ALWAYS know what the other side is thinking if for no other reason than to double check your own work; nobody should be so arrogant as to assume that this can be skipped. You do your readers a dis-service when you brush aside the substantial short interest as mere insanity.
And by the way, I'm not going to debate this any further, because it's not worth more discussion. Either you accept that you should do your homework and understand both sides of an issue, or you don't. I've stated my position. You are free to take yours. readers can judge for themselves.
Sirius XM Radio: 370 Million Bad Ideas On The Short Side [View article]
Ouch. Having described yourself in your profile as "a novice investor with a lot to learn," permit me to offer a suggestion. Never, never, never ever say again anything like what you said above.
This is not a matter of how I feel about SIRI. Actually, I'm long. But I know what the shorts are thinking. I disagree with it, but most important, I know it. Naively questioning the sanity of those who take positions opposite yours, the hallmark of an amateur, might work out in your favor every now and then, but over the long term, you're likely to get your head handed to you.
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
The first is important, I think, because of a so-far unmet need combine the power of pcs with the convenient form-factor of tablets, each of which are very much valued in the marketplace but is currently not really available without carrying two devices.
The second is under-rated. MS Office is still THE primary way of doing work. Yes there's open office and google docs, but neither are nearly as good as MS Office. Ditto the tablet versions. People can do side work or touch up on tablets but when it comes to REAL work, full-blown versions of programs are needed. If Windows 8 can get these into the tablet form factor, that would be huge.
IMO, RIMM had a different problem. See my 2010 Forbes article: http://onforb.es/SpcsoL
Modern Portfolio Theory 2.0 - The Most Diversified Portfolio [View article]
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
A Backdoor Approach To Dividend Growth [View article]
Understood. But are they hurting themselves by doing that?
I an able to implement that approach on the portfolio123 simulation platform, and was able to see that performance definitely suffers. Remember that the buy-and-hold culture comes from a world characterized by high trading costs and the absence of screening-testing platforms. Taxes are still an annoying issue at present, but as the culture continues to evolve, attitudes toward buy and hold may change.
Modern Portfolio Theory 2.0 - The Most Diversified Portfolio [View article]
Even so, I am still able to recognize that IVV is not a suitable benchmark. Since you are testing a specific protocol for assigning weights to securities within a very specific list, it would seem to me that the most appropriate benchmark would be an equally-weighted portfolio of that very group of securities.
I ran that benchmark portfolio on stockscreen123 using annal rebalancing (i.e. re-set weights to equal once per year) and got an annual return of 8.9% vs. your 10.6% over the course of your chosen test period. So you did outperform, but not by nearly as much as the article suggests.
As to the cause of outperformance, it seems, as others suggested, attributable to significant fixed-income exposure at times when equities performed horribly and fixed income soared. This was, indeed, the right thing to have done, but the maximum diversification is not by any means the only way to have done that. Many other approaches, including beta, sharpe, relative trend, etc., could just as easily have done that.