Rupert Hargreaves

Long only, value, contrarian, deep value
Rupert Hargreaves
Long only, value, contrarian, deep value
Contributor since: 2012
Company: Hargreaves Writing LTD
Yes my screen is actually based on that with a few adjustments. The AAII screen is an interpretation of the F-Score, not an exact copy, which is what I have used. The AAII YTD returns also show the dangers of this strategy being long only (like I found out last year) down 40.5% YTD!
Thank you for such a reasoned response to that unwanted commented. I couldn't have said it better myself.
For my personal investing I do. I think the Z score has many benefits but this test is just based on the F-Score, which was designed to be used by itself.
I suggest you read the study before criticizing further.
http://bit.ly/1I8WM6u
If I might make a suggestion, rather than spending your time attempting to understand how Aristotle and Quintilian can help you invest, I suggest you try and grasp the concept of reading first.
The article clearly states that by using the F-Score strategy Piotroski's April 2000 paper Value Investing: The Use of Historical Financial Statement Information to Separate Winners from Losers, demonstrated that the Piotroski score method would have seen a 23% annual return between 1976 and 1996.
He didn't mention any classical literature in the study either.
I've submitted an edit which shows the current F-score P/B figs for last year's crop. ORIG actually still comes out on top.
Yes there is! Next Monday there will be a summary for the year gone along with a new crop of candidates. This time around I'm going to adjust the strategy for both long+short plays and introduce a non-resource portfolio to get a better understanding of how the strategy works in different environments.
Seadrill partners has lots of new, high-spec untis with long contracts, they should survive better than most. http://seekingalpha.co...
Yes! Exactly what the industry needs but it will take time for the company's repositioning to play out. That's the uncertain part. In my view there need to be a lot more scrapings before any sort of normalization is seen.
We are only four months in right now, so it's all to play for. I think we really need to consider the long-term returns here. The F-Score originally outperformed over the long-term.
Should be corrected now. It's delaying delivery, which is similar to idling.
HERO hired advisors to restructure its debt a week ago -- that's only one step away from bankruptcy http://bit.ly/1x3hTBx
It's difficult to say because it's not really a black or white argument. The company does have limited options, the balance sheet is not clean, there's plenty of debt and the company is going to have to be careful.
That said, Transocean is unlikely to go bankrupt anytime soon, in an emergency they have the $3bn revolver to draw on and some emergency cash but once these are gone, the company will be out of options.
They usually put out a press release, or fleet status update. The big issue is that the disclosure was almost hidden.
LR,
I agree but I think (with the exception of Petrobras) these cancellations can be easily explained. Why would you want an old rust bucket of a rig when you can get another, newer, higher-spec unit for a similar cost -- day rates are collapsing across the market -- I think in all cases this is a businesses decision. Diamond should take the hit, scrap the rigs and move on. It's not the end of the world.
Personally, I would stay away, if you want a great international tobacco pick, look to British American (NYSEMKT:BTI). There're marginally cheaper, have a lower level of debt and have access to the US market via RAI
Larry, have you ever read 'The Little Book Of Behavioral Investing'? It's a great read and along the same lines of the books you mentioned. Humans tend to act on impulse, it's something we've evolved to do and by our very nature, we're crap at investing -- we make silly mistakes and jump to conclusions.
The market changes, almost every single day and while it pays to ignore most of the daily movements, you should always be on the look out for any factors that will affect your original investment thesis and act accordingly; although you shouldn't act too fast, you need a game plan.
Exactly! NOV has a huge ammount of goodwill. Writedowns are unlikely but it's not possible to say for sure.
One of the reasons I put together this article, was really to try and prove a point. The data was gathered from a site that offers screening tools (for a fee) that any private investors. For the data, there's no human interaction, it's all worked out by algorithms. I've always believed that computers are, and will always be, terrible at stock picking, and a human with experience is needed to pick out the ‘duds’ as it were from the results given by the computer….there’s also a need to double-check the computer data.
So the article was essentially an experiment, not a very scientific one granted, but an experiment nonetheless.
Personally, I would exclude and commidty stocks, or indeed any company that lacks significant pricing power.
I think you're just tying to pick a fight here. I'm well aware of the fact that IBM may not respond and the fact that Cringely's ideas may just be the ramblings of a mad-man. But thanks for you're insight and remarkably ill-thought out comments.
That being said, most people realize IBM is having trouble, the idea of restructuring is not new to the company, they've done it before and they could do it again. The impact on employee moral here will be huge. If the company dose not say anything, it could be worse than actually going through with the layoffs. The news is all over the place now, it's unlikely most employees won't have seen it. It's more than likely that they will respond. If not, analysts will be calling the company wanting answers. We will know the truth soon enough then it will be time to comment. Until then we can only go on what's being reported.
You make a valid point. There's no reason -- just yet -- to say that this is indeed going to happen. This news has been out for a few days though, IBM would have said ASAP if it was a lie. No company can afford to have its employees coming to work thinking about drastic lay-offs, even if the rumour is not true.
If PM did report in Euro's that would certainly help the company.
Simple, by repeating the concluding paragraph:
The bottom line
All in all, Altria looks to be expensive right now based on historic metrics. However, it wouldn't make sense to sell as the company is a compounding machine. Trying to time the market would undoubtedly end in a loss making trade. It's better just to sit tight and let the company's stock price move however it sees fit, using declines to top up.
Moreover, there's no concrete evidence that suggest Altria's shares will fall as interest rates rise. The above data is just food for thought.
If anything, I advised against selling.
Yes but oil is a LNG substitute, lower oil prices mean that oil is cheaper to use than LNG, so demand for LNG falls. This is a great explanation of the market. http://bit.ly/1sUYtwO
In more production = more demand for ships, longer routes as well. But in the short-term the lng tanker market is oversupplied http://bit.ly/1AD3Pdu
I simply stated the facts.
two idle rigs in play but idled four and scrapped seven....how is that positive news?
you probably shouldn't do that.
This is exactly the problem the drillers now face. Even after writing off $2bn in goodwill, RIG still has $1bn of goodwill, which is concerning.
tradebr2010 your logics got legs but I was considering a worst case margin of safety view. I think over the long-term RIG will return to a P/TB of 1, or even P/B of 1 but are there further writedowns on the cards? I just don't know.
Thank you, I appreciate the feedback
With Icahn around I doubt it will be a full cut
If you find little value in the articles I write stop reading them. Hopefully your eternal optimism will pull you through.