Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

The Capitalist Manifesto  

View The Capitalist Manifesto's Comments BY TICKER:

Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Is It Really That Hard To Beat The S&P 500 Over Time? [View article]
    i am not looking for investments that start with the letter A and have a board member who is second cousins to the president. I look for fundamentals that have stood the test of time by teachings of Graham/Dodd/Buffett.

    I also backtested the things I knew wouldn't work...and guess what..they didn't...over time. In short sprints, anything can happen, but over long periods of time, the fundamentals prove to work.
    Jul 23, 2015. 11:25 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Really That Hard To Beat The S&P 500 Over Time? [View article]
    Over an extended period of time (through a full cycle) 18.8% over multiple bull and bear cycles. But, i reiterate, I don't just look at my results during a bull or a bear. you have to look at a full cycle or more. and it can't be partial cycles.
    Jul 23, 2015. 11:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Really That Hard To Beat The S&P 500 Over Time? [View article]
    That is true. I bought and sold every year to avoid long term survivor bias. And I bought companies that were in the top 20% of market cap, which today would be $1Billion. Those companies are not immune to sinking to zero, but it rarely happens in 1 year.

    Good point though!
    Jul 23, 2015. 11:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Really That Hard To Beat The S&P 500 Over Time? [View article]
    That's true!
    Jul 23, 2015. 11:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Really That Hard To Beat The S&P 500 Over Time? [View article]
    That is correct!
    Jul 23, 2015. 11:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Is It Really That Hard To Beat The S&P 500 Over Time? [View article]
    Incorrect. I used fundamentals that have worked over 140 years and have been proven by value investors like Ben Graham and backtested to see if they proved right. And then I backtested fundamentals that have proven to not work...and big surprise...they didn't beat the market.
    Jul 23, 2015. 11:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • ChannelAdvisor December Data Implications For Amazon.com [View article]
    Gary, I assume you are buying like crazy right now, right?
    Feb 12, 2014. 01:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Impact From UPS And FedEx Price Increases On Amazon.com [View article]
    Name me other companies who were this ridiculously overvalued and that ended up, over decades, growing in value? This is unheard of. Not sayign it's not possible, but why would it be different this time?
    Dec 22, 2013. 06:02 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Impact From UPS And FedEx Price Increases On Amazon.com [View article]
    Wow. I've heard this before. It never ends well.
    Dec 20, 2013. 04:09 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Impact From UPS And FedEx Price Increases On Amazon.com [View article]
    Exactly. I just asked a high school class today what "investing" was and they said "putting money into something and it going up or down in value." So I asked "Is gambling and the lottery, therefore, investing?"

    I don't know what "smart money" is because the last time I checked, chasing a stock because everyone else has it and they don't want to be left out isn't very smart. And that's what money managers do. They have to. I don't blame them, but don't say that you're right just because momentum is working.

    Gary: If Amazon went to $10 per share tomorrow, would that make Amazon a bad investment? I would argue that it's a good deal now! But according to your theory, $403 down to $10 means bad investment.

    Do you see my point?
    Dec 20, 2013. 04:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Impact From UPS And FedEx Price Increases On Amazon.com [View article]
    Yep. Investment. That's what I'd call it too. (Insert sarcasm here) As is said above, the fact that you can't say whether AMZN is overpriced or under priced shows the lack of understanding of the fundamentals of a company. Nothing in the world of AMZN says "good buy" from a fundamental valuation standpoint. Could it still go up? Of course. But it has a lot of catching up to do to even justify today's value.
    Dec 18, 2013. 08:32 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Impact From UPS And FedEx Price Increases On Amazon.com [View article]
    http://yhoo.it/18Ox3Jx

    HAHA! Everyone is drinking the cool-aid. I love how they are comparing Bezos to Jobs. Yeah, Jobs' company made $37Billion last year and Amazon made...?

    This stock is unreal.

    And please stop saying you're "investing" in Amazon because the definition of investing is not this...this is speculation.
    Dec 17, 2013. 10:43 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: Profitless Prosperity [View article]
    I am interested to find out what "smart money" Gary is referring to. The only people I know supporting AMZN are the ones who don't understand financials and investing or are short term traders.

    I don't consider analysts smart at all. I don't consider money managers smart at all. They jump ont he AMZN train because if they are right, they ride the wave up and if they are wrong, they say "everyone else got it wrong too." That's not investing. That's pandering.
    Oct 27, 2013. 05:35 PM | 12 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon.com: Short Term A Guess, But Remaining Long-Term Optimistic [View article]
    Gary, I am not kidding. I realize that the stock has gone up, but it's not worth $363 per share. And real money being returned to real investors is in the form of dividends and retained earnings. I want my return to be secure and not based on speculation, as is the case from Amazon.

    Amazon has no business being worth $363 today. If you believe that, you aren't an investor. You are a speculator. It may work today and tomorrow, but eventually it will come back to haunt you. It's no secret that the best long term money managers are ones who buy based on value and business fundamentals...not castles in the sky.
    Oct 27, 2013. 05:16 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Amazon: Profitless Prosperity [View article]
    Of course this is spot on! If this were a start-up! This is a company that is 17 years old and has $70Billion in sales and still cant make money!

    Look at every other business out there: Ford, GM, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, GE...etc...they ALL INVEST back into their businesses and spend billions doing so. But what else do they do? They are able to make money. Consistently. Look at old company Microsoft. This company is considered dead and yet their revenues increased by 20%, I believe, while Amazon also rose, but for a company that is still playing the "growth" card, how do we justify the value?

    Also, the one thing you didn't mention is that valuations are based on metrics. Would you buy ANY business for 10 times revenue? CRM is worth $32Billion but it has $3Billion in sales? Really?

    I definitely agree in paying for future potential, but don't pay whatever...pay a reasonable amount and discount for your risk that you are taking. Don't just give them the keys to the car before they have proven they can drive. A 2 year old will be able to drive someday, but we don't give them the keys because they haven't yet. Let's not give Amazon a valuation of $165Billion before they have earned that or even the potential.

    If they stopped spending like crazy on Cap Ex, what would their NOI be? They would still be no more than $3Billion and with $165Billion valuation, that's still 53 times earnings! Come on. Give me a break. I believe in giving value for future growth, but still it has to be reasonable.
    Oct 27, 2013. 05:11 PM | 36 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
76 Comments
234 Likes