Seeking Alpha

Land of Milk an...'s  Instablog

Land of Milk and Honey
Send Message
Individual investor. Generally using index Mutual Funds or ETFs. Trying to diversify more (foreign in particular). Pick up tips & concepts, & learn more. I'm at alpha to keep a finger on the current moods & predictions... and so I notice up coming big financial news events before... More
  • Best Ways To Invest -- What's Your Opinion? A Place To Share Ideas! #18 143 comments
    Apr 18, 2014 9:14 AM

    I've set up this blog ...as a community place to share our investing ideas. Hopefully so we all gain more ALPHA!! It's a great way for my contacts to talk to each other at the same time, not just to me :).

    .

    All topics welcome. Investing, stocks, bonds, commodities, economy, politics about economy, and social (so we know who we're talking with). Please invite other investors! Stop by once in a while, or hang out all the time. Please post your questions, make a joke, or share your insights with us!!

    .

    My money has done well since I started this blog... so I'm hoping it adds value for everyone!

    .

    Only rules of the road are not to insult others, so state your view but don't call others names or put them down. Every view is valuable, if only to convince you, you are right!

    .

    This is Chapter #18. As the instablog gets long, I'll create a new blog & post a link at the end of the comments. Here's a link to the prior, #17: http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/11150861-land-of-milk-and-honey/2833033-best-ways-to-invest-whats-your-opinion-a-place-to-share-ideas-17?v=1397763114

    .

    Links

    Regular poster Fear & Greed has instablogs outlining his ideas which are great! -- also SA articles!:

    seekingalpha.com/user/706857/instablog

    Regular poster User7 has instablogs with a specialty in CEFs & loves when ideas are shared!: seekingalpha.com/user/7415181/instablog

    Interesting Times has a fun Portfolio Challenge:
    seekingalpha.com/instablog/5038891-inter...-8

    Also his regular instablog: seekingalpha.com/instablog/5038891-inter...-50 It's more oriented to precious metals, & economic concerns (worries) than mine.

    As for the regular posters, you'll get to know us, if you hang around!!.

    Disclosure: I am long IWM, DIA, SPY, QQQ, MU, LINE, CVX, PSEC, TCAP.

    Additional disclosure: ...and many more...

Back To Land of Milk and Honey's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (143)
Track new comments
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Hi - Happy holidays to everyone!!

     

    I'd like to get some conversation going on long term investments... so I have a question:

     

    What sectors-subsectors do you have well represented in your portfolio? What ones are you weak in -- maybe someone else has studied that area and can share their findings?

     

    Allocation plays a big factor in final results in long term investing, according to studies. Also rebalancing into underweighted, unloved sectors from time to time. Currently that includes Energy, EM, and ?.
    18 Apr 2014, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - Personally I'm trying to figure out energy a bit... but it's very diverse. So for anyone new to it...

     

    There's oil (and quality of oils), natural gas, alternative fuel (solar, wind, grains), nuclear, equipment manufactures (such as rigs), and leasing of equip (deep water rigs). There's upstream (collecting from ground), midstream (processing), and downstream (distribution to endusers -- us pions).

     

    Some are dividend aristocrats, others new development, some are MLPs, and some ETFs of the segment. All can be effected by gov't policies of countries they're in, and geological events.

     

    So what area of energy is unloved? And why'd it fall out of favor anyway?
    18 Apr 2014, 09:27 AM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » And coal... and what else am I missing?
    18 Apr 2014, 09:34 AM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Happy Holidays

     

    Since i've been at this a while I have decent diversity in my equity holdings..

     

    I have been lax in adding a name in the "defense" sector like an (LMT) (BA),etc.

     

    As much as I pounded the table on the economic recovery -- I never got my arms around the housing industry and so I missed the entire move off of the bottom.. a mistake on my part.

     

    My recent addition of (GILD) now gives me exposure to biotech .
    I also nibbled into the EM's with more exposure to Brazil-- Thanks Tack :)

     

    One area that is now drawing my attention is the solar names -- I need to do more research there. I currently have no names in that group.. Like the biotechs there are contenders ( those with earnings) and pretenders ( high PE wannabes)

     

    My initial focus is on (FSLR) in that group..
    18 Apr 2014, 10:19 AM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Unloved ---in the oil names would be the offshore oil stocks.. they are toxic to investors at the moment because of all of the hype around the N.American land drilling that is currently going on.

     

    & the land drillers have prospered for sure..

     

    (ESV), (RIG), (DO) and others.. They have been tossed aside - a LT INVESTOR will look at the quality that is there and avoid all of the short term noise about hourly , daily market gyrations.

     

    There will be a turnaround in the offshore drilling activities- when it happens is anybody's guess -

     

    After Due diligence.. pick a name there and in the next couple of years the rewards will follow.. the fact that (ESV) & (RIG) pay good solid dividends makes them more attractive for anyone with a market view of more than next week. The risk/reward is tilted in the favor of a LT investor at this point ..
    18 Apr 2014, 10:32 AM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    LMH:

     

    Commodities: Mining. Copper. Nitrates. Iron (Steel).

     

    Europe still has room to run, especially selected banks and telecoms.
    18 Apr 2014, 10:37 AM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    LMH:

     

    Shale has made offshore drillers especially weak.

     

    A warning to novice investors about upstream MLP's and energy trusts:

     

    Lots of MLP's and trusts look alluring on the surface, often because of greatly elevated yields and apparent cash flows to support them. However, these entities usually have defined, non-expandable reserves, and are rather like energy "annuities." If the size of these reserves comes into question, either internally or, more usually, from some external report, the value of such entities can plunge massively, literally overnight. Usually, unless such new assessment of reserves can be conclusively proven false, the loss in principal value is permanent. For this reason alone, personally, I scrupulously avoid any MLP's or energy trusts that are principally dependent on reserve estimations.
    18 Apr 2014, 10:45 AM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    An author i follow here on SA -

     

    FWIW -- his take on a couple of offshore plays

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    18 Apr 2014, 11:28 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (3982) | Send Message
     
    Long & strong energy, telecom, REITs.

     

    Weak just about everywhere else. I want to add another defense stock (probably (RTN)), and some more consumer discretionary like (HD), (KR), (PG), etc.

     

    Not really unhappy with what I currently hold, though. It's hard to be 100% diversified when your dealing with small money, as I am.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:19 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    L & everybody, Happy Easter, Happy Belated Passover

     

    In order for your portfolio to be able to perform well over the long haul you have to be diversified. The goal is to invest in solid companies that will reward you over time. For excellent candidates, check out David Fish's "CCC" list.

     

    Energy: (COP) (XOM) are the best to get energy exposure. Another good one is a partnership (KMP). Mix it up with some solar stocks. (SUNE) (FSLR) (SCTY) There are many other candidates in this category, F&G has some good picks here.

     

    Utilities: these stocks go up when the market goes down, so they are like insurance. (WEC) (ED) (DUK) (SCG)

     

    Industrials: also must haves, to balance out your portfolio. (GE) (HON) (MMM) (UTX) (DE) (CAT) (CMI) (SNA) (GPC)

     

    Defense & aviation: (BA) (LMT) (NOC) (BHI)

     

    Consumer Staples: these stocks go up when the market goes down....and most of them pay nice dividends. (CL) (CLX) (MO) (PM) (LO) (PG) (KMB)

     

    Consumer Discretionary: so many to choose from, but I own (M) (FL) (KO) (PEP) (DNKN) (KKD) (COST) (BGS) (SYY) (SBUX) (CBRL) (BUD) (STZ) (MCD) (MAT) (HAS) (GIS) (HSY) (AZO)

     

    Drug stocks: these stocks go up when the market goes down as well. Core stocks that IMO you must have in your portfolio. (WAG) (CVS) (JNJ) (MCK) are all must haves.

     

    I am a little more skittish of the big drug companies, as they don't always go up, but (PFE) (MRK) (ABBV) (BMY) are candidates. Do your DD, some of these companies are not expected to do well in the near term. Part of the problem is the competition from generics, so be careful. I only own (ABBV).

     

    Biotech stocks: risky but could reward you long term. I own (GILD) (CELG) (NVAX) (ICPT) Be especially wary of this group, as I think many of the stocks in this category will go bust. (AMGN) is a solid company in this group. Before buying risky ones, get the solid performers in your portfolio first...like the companies on David Fish's CCC list. Limit your exposure to speculative stocks. IMO, no more than 5% total of your portfolio should ever be in speculative stocks.

     

    Tech stocks: these could be broken into "oldies but goodies" and the riskier new ones. I own (IBM) (MSFT) (GOOG) (AAPL) (PCLN). (QCOM) (INTC) (CSCO) are other candidates in the "older" tech stocks.

     

    Newer ones that might do well. I have (FB) (TSLA) (SWKS) (SSYS) (WDAY) There are many to choose from....do lots of DD because some of these are very risky.

     

    Bank stocks: some people have chosen to stay away from these. However, they are making a come back and are worth owning if you are a long term investor. (BAC) (JPM) (MS) (GS) (WFC).

     

    Private Equity stocks: I own (KKR) (BX) (BLK)

     

    Other finance stocks: (TCAP) (PSEC) (OAK) (MAIN)

     

    REITs: this group requires lots of DD. I like (HCP) (OHI) (O) (ARI) (DFT) (NLY)

     

    Mining stocks: (VALE) (FCX) I own (VALE) and it's doing well for me. These stocks are down, which gives you an opportunity to get in cheap.

     

    Emerging Markets: some of your stocks like (KO) (MCD) (KKD) may get you some exposure. An ETF is an easy way to get into this area. (EWW) (EWZ) etc. There are thousands to choose from...do lots of research.

     

    Bond funds: My favorite is (PTY). Every portfolio needs some exposure to bonds. It makes your portfolio able to weather market risk, and may save you if we have another big market collapse. Here's why...if you own some bonds, you will still have money in your retirement fund to live on while you wait for the market to come back. In the past, I owned individual bonds. Now I like the convenience of ETFs and funds like (PTY). Easy to get in and out of. Other candidates are (PFF) (JNK) and many more. Do your research...you may decide that individual bonds meet your needs.

     

    Here's why I sold my corporate bonds last year. Yes, I bought them cheap, below par & was getting a solid 6.5% average interest income. I had built a nice portfolio, with 5,10, 15, 20 etc. maturity dates. Here's the problem with bonds. When you sell, the par value may have declined. So you can lose a lot of money. Oh sure, if you hold them to maturity, you do get the full amount back. Do you really want to lock up your money for 20 years? Compare holding a 20 year $50,000 bond at 10% interest to holding (MCD) or (LMT) for 20 years. You can do this by going back 20 years to test it out.....the stocks earn you 2 or more times the $50,000 plus all the bond's interest. And that doesn't even include the stock's dividends. Think you wouldn't buy a great stock? Well, you could sell it & buy something else. If you are a good stock picker, I think you are more than capable of choosing a good company to hold for 20 years. Plus, if it doesn't work out, you can always replace it with some other stock(s).

     

    Instead of bonds, consider that you are getting a solid income stream from your social security or pension. This is why retirees should own stocks, they already have bond like income coming in every year.

     

    It's very possible that in the future, when I'm past 70 say, that I just might invest in some bonds. In order to make myself even more financially secure. At this time, in my later 50s, stocks are much more attractive to me.

     

    Let's say you have millions. Well in that case, I would put at least half of those millions in bonds because they are low risk.

     

    It all depends on your situation and what helps you to SWAN, sleep well at night.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:21 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    I personally don't like coal other than the volatility, in the options there is money.

     

    Even if you pick up a coal name, you mind as well take the most leveraged that is not going bankrupt any time soon.

     

    They are in a declining industry, but coal prices could easily spike and many of these names would fly.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:24 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Forgot telecoms...I like (VZ) and (T).

     

    This is a great idea to see what we all do to diversify our portfolios. I am getting good ideas from all of you, so appreciate what everyone posts. : )
    18 Apr 2014, 12:24 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Although I listed most of the stocks that I own, there are many others out there that can help you make your portfolio robust.

     

    (BRK.B) is a very good candidate.

     

    Not everyone should do what I've done. It requires a lot of time to watch over my portfolio, as I do have over 60 positions. Here's why....I don't want any single stock to be over 2 % of my portfolio. It's risky to have too much invested in any one position. To spread the risk, you need 50 separate picks. Bob Wells, a SA contributor, does an excellent job of explaining this line of thinking. Check out his superb articles.

     

    By choosing excellent companies, you really do lower your risk. Do I have to wonder every week if (JNJ) (PEP) (LMT) (NOC) (BUD) (CL) (CLX) (KMB) etc. are "good picks?" No, I don't. The blue ribbon, time tested solid companies really are the best investments you could ever make.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    Just want to add my perspective on Europe, clearly there is value in the names, but...

     

    The Euro is the only major developed currency not being systematically devalued this has raised the value of the euro close to historical heights http://yhoo.it/1aKpo1X;range=2y

     

    This of course continues hurting the economy of most of the euro block, which is probably the most fragile of the lot. Which could of course pressure them to devalue as well, not to mention the probable strength of the $ with the ending of QE and various other positive macro developments in the US...

     

    And to my point, investing in the euro area you need to take into a count a possible 5-15% decline in the currency.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:31 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - FG

     

    Interesting layout - thanks! Defense hasn't come up much on here.... good topic to visit.

     

    After looking at energy,... it's Alternative Sources that's the long term most growth play. And SOLAR is the most narrowed on technology so less risk of getting into the left-behind technology.

     

    Plus solar is definitely being integrated into homes. It will become common in new construction. So to my mind -- THAT'S the real, best, long term energy play.

     

    New industry, proven technology, looking for the entrepreneurs that make it pop. It's buying into desktops before everyone owned one.

     

    Plus there's an ETF for the subsector, so you don't have to pick the winning company yet! (TAN). 1.10% dividend. I'm not sure there's much barrier to entry, & if so, selecting a single stock is risky.

     

    Next I need to do DD on looking for an entry point. (Probably next market pullback.) It's down a lot since March... not sure why... maybe selling off froth with the recent rotation away from tech & risk? These were incredibly higher in 2008-2011. Early excitement that wore off? Or something more problematic?

     

    My worries to still check out:
    1) is sector highly frothy from anticipation?
    2) as solar is integrated, production goes up, costs margin go way down... how will that effect these? Is there a much better timing to buy in -- after costs are already down?

     

    .......Anyone have experience with this part of an industry's development???

     

    BTW, I've gotten (FSLR)'s ads in my mailbox, and they're professional and convincing.
    19 Apr 2014, 01:29 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » T

     

    Commodities being down for 3 years... seems like a place to look! Anyone have stocks or ETFs picked out in these?
    19 Apr 2014, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » T

     

    Very useful insight from experience!!!

     

    Does (LINE) seem to fit into this?

     

    They took on the Berry fields -- I imagine to counter the limits of their prior holdings. But now got reamed for having debit from paying more than investors wanted for Berry. So this kind of buying & debit & downgrading seems to come into play & be part of the cycle?
    19 Apr 2014, 01:34 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Y

     

    Interesting, helpful to get this info on the exchange rate potential! It does complicate foreign investing...
    19 Apr 2014, 01:42 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » T

     

    My posts are getting very separated from the posts I'm commenting on.

     

    My comment of "Very useful insight from experience!!!" was to your post about

     

    "A warning to novice investors about upstream MLP's and energy trusts:"
    19 Apr 2014, 02:24 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    LINE not my favorite.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:35 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » T

     

    Any particular reasons? I'm already in it at a 12% loss (LINE). Is it a limited ability to produce... so at that risk you described?

     

    Also any thoughts on the BDCs? (http://bit.ly/Ne44cC) is break even with nice dividend. But (http://bit.ly/1mmmzfg) and (http://bit.ly/10gQkhr) are easily 9% down, still with nice dividend.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:40 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    L,

     

    I'll repeat my process:

     

    I never, ever, buy a dividend, I'm buying a piece of a business I have a reason to invest in. That has to come first in the risk assessment.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:43 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    L,

     

    My frank advice. You are not going to learn this game through (only) getting ideas on this or that.

     

    You need to learn how to think, analyze, and determine a consistent process that works for your personality and tolerance. Otherwise you get twisted by the wind, by other investors opinions, and dont form your own convictions.

     

    To me too many investors do this. They invest in this or that because Buffett is in it. But you don't learn that way. It's funny, I'm in 3 stocks I discovered Carl Icahn is in. Now I'm not in because he is, didn't even realize he was in a couple of them. But it's interesting.

     

    My advice is think. Contemplate the world around you and the developing secular themes, and who might benefit. Then, always buy quality to take advantage of that. Of course, people will debate quality.

     

    I've rarely lost much when I focused on quality. I've lost many many thousands, buying junk or shorting high quality.

     

    And learn who's running the show. We don't buy companies -- we (at least I ) buy the CEO and his /her team.

     

    With EM's I buy the president / government.

     

    Think about it.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:48 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » M,

     

    I'm not sure what you're criticizing in my process? I didn't buy a dividend. I have a whole pages of document I wrote for myself figuring BDCs out. I researched BDCs fairly well & liked the business model, and picked strong ones. It was also my early buys -- and I've learned since then.

     

    Tack suggested BDCs and has expertise in them. So I'm curious what he's now thinking. They're down because of surprise news; they were taken out of the major indices! Also down when ZIRP worries came round a month or so ago - which is why I don't have much in them - I had kept it light because of that concern.

     

    I haven't posted my DD on the various energy stocks yet. I need to do some other things today -- and that'll be longer. So if that's what you're thinking I'm not analyzing -- it's that my analyzing is too long to write up :)

     

    >>> "You need to learn how to think, analyze, and determine a consistent process that works for your personality and tolerance. Otherwise you get twisted by the wind. "

     

    I ask an interminable number of questions. I use answers to form theories, which often don't look much like the questions or answers. In my entire life I've been called a lot of things, but twisted by the wind or others isn't one of them :). More like "why can't you ever just do what everyone else is doing?"

     

    So don't worry -- I'm straightforward, but I'm rarely just taking things as "instructions." I decide for myself.
    .
    19 Apr 2014, 03:08 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    L,

     

    That's good. It's not a criticism. Don't take it that way.

     

    Its generalized counsel -- not directed at you but anyone -- about developing the right thought process from a top down level.

     

    I'm not writing specifically to you, although I posted your name. I'm sharing my process as its developed for 15 years. (Anyone) Take whatever is of value, leave the rest.

     

    I see at lot on this and other blogs, "it's got a great dividend, so it must be a good buy" type of thought process. That's, like the last thing I look at.

     

    Bottom line, I use a top down approach. Others use a bottom up. People should use what works for them, but be consistent, as not to get twisted up.
    19 Apr 2014, 03:18 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » M,

     

    Oh... it wasn't me specific. Okay. It is solid advice to not get big eyes over a dividend... and not notice the business underneath it!!

     

    Nevermind my PM then...
    19 Apr 2014, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    LMH:

     

    Their cash flows are growing and the outlook should be favorable. I've traded it a few times.

     

    Actually, it's probably a good hold, if one ignores the volatility.
    19 Apr 2014, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Tack,

     

    Is that thought about (LINE) or BDCs?
    19 Apr 2014, 04:25 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    Commodities are tied to china... if China rallies so will they, might be easier to look at some solid Chinese companies.
    19 Apr 2014, 04:29 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    LMH:

     

    About (LINE).

     

    I like and hold all of those BDC's. Also, hold ARCC, AINV, FSC and TICC. TICC's price drop seems especially unwarranted.

     

    Prices for BDC's have significant volatility, but over time, their large payouts mount up and compound.
    19 Apr 2014, 04:35 PM Reply Like
  • ValueinvestorEU
    , contributor
    Comments (562) | Send Message
     
    F & G

     

    Look into the midwater segment, last rigs for the segment that was built was during the oilcrisis in the 80ties. Look for the companies with the best balancesheet.

     

    I am long Awilco (20% dividend yield fine balance sheet) and short seadrill through puts. That way I get industry hedge while collecting my dividend.

     

    Insurance is always a great business to know.

     

    I got a position in UVE but I am considering AIG as well because they have a very high combined ratio that is coming down, however I wouldnt suggest insurance business unless you are able to see through all the smoke and mirror in the accounting.

     

    on oil I am a bit bullish on BP. and then I got MNI as a turnaround / asset play.

     

    Besides that I trade alot of special situations.
    19 Apr 2014, 05:00 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    V,

     

    Welcome !

     

    I'm not familiar with (UVE) but wil take a look --

     

    I have looked at (AIG) for a while now - just haven't pulled the trigger .

     

    I know many that have made a small fortune on BP - being patient and getting on board during all of the "negativity" surrounding Macondo .. I wasn't one of them :)

     

    They still look to be a good investment now..

     

    Sometimes one can uncover a diamond when looking around the trash bin --

     

    (CVX) is my play in that space - & i recently added (XOM) in the low 80's as i thought it was undervalued there..
    20 Apr 2014, 09:54 AM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    Since energy is a key focus of mine, I am quite curious when anyone could have recently bought (XOM) in the low 80's.
    20 Apr 2014, 10:47 AM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    My sincere apologies for use of the word "Low' - I should have used the word 'mid" --(XOM) was purchased @ 85.85 and its documented here

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    20 Apr 2014, 01:02 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Welcome ValueinvestorEU - nice to see you again!

     

    "best balancesheets" - I'll keep in mind. Can you describe what options you'd trade as a hedge to offset price worries while collecting the dividend?

     

    I was surprised to see Erie is poor as an insurance stock purchase -- they've very decent to have as an insurer.

     

    Thanks for the insights on oil and insurance...!
    20 Apr 2014, 08:16 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » For those new to the blog welcome! We've moved onto chapter #19, which is here:
    http://seekingalpha.co...
    20 Apr 2014, 08:41 PM Reply Like
  • astarr66
    , contributor
    Comments (234) | Send Message
     
    T:

     

    Any thoughts on the recent dramatic drop in (MCGC)? I notice it is on your list of BDCs.....
    21 Apr 2014, 01:46 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - astarr

     

    Try posting it on chapter 19 (link above your post)... since that's where everyone is now...

     

    I have (TCAP), (TCRD) and (PSEC). All took a drop when BDCs were removed from the indices. Then on the rate "scare." Then TCAP and TCRD missed earnings but are solid on covering the dividend, so they're down a lot, while PSEC is down from it's high but it's at a prior holding point.
    21 Apr 2014, 06:12 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    as:

     

    MCGC has pretty much made a hash of things, as of late, and has now canned their CEO. This may or may not portend better times ahead. One positive is that they expect their current NAV to be about $4.31, which is well above their current market price.

     

    I pulled the plug on MCGC around $4.00, but may ease back into a modest speculative position.
    21 Apr 2014, 06:22 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    Further comment on (MCGC):

     

    Almost assuredly, MCGC will need to cut their dividend. It's very typical for such announcements to occasion and immediate sell-off, as existing holders capitulate and throw in the towel. Often, just as fast, new buyers enter, and shares bounce off those lows and commence a steady rise.

     

    So, the opportune moment to add shares is in the initial reaction to any dividend-cut news.
    22 Apr 2014, 11:49 AM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    Tack is correct about Shale. The above article is from Bret Jensen about land drillers including (PDS).

     

    This is a quality long term holding for me along with the rest of my natural gas space exposure. It is not a trade, as explained in my instapost.

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    I explained in the last post the dangers of buying weak stocks based in dividend yields alone. Especially notable are stocks like (ESV) have zero insider buying at so called "crisis pricing". One has to ask why. 6% dividend yield is little protection when the stock can lose that in a short interval.

     

    The market and institutions are not supporting these stocks, while energy services are going straight up. One should ask why before investing.

     

    I believe other quality stocks would be stocks Bret mentions like (HAL) or (BHI) if (PDS) is too small. I like the Canadian focus and undervaluation of (PDS).
    18 Apr 2014, 10:57 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    (NE) just reported an excellent quarter. In the oil energy sector, I like (XOM) (COP) and (BP).

     

    I'm planning on holding them for decades....unless sometime in the future it makes sense to sell. That means if they cut the dividend or the business model itself goes kaput, then I'll sell.

     

    Meanwhile I'm enjoying the dividend income.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Plus, if I'm so fortunate that my picks go up over 50%, then I would prune the positions.

     

    As part of your over all portfolio management, it is a good idea to sell part of a position if it goes up a lot.

     

    Another way to decide "is it time to sell?" is when the stock gets into over valued territory. I did this with (MCK) (SBUX) (TSCO) (LMT) awhile back, and I'm glad I did. I've even bought some of them back cheaper, (MCK) and (LMT). Taking profits off the table is never a bad idea.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:40 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Blue,

     

    can't go wrong with those energy names - i'll add (CVX) as a good one to own -- its a core position for me ..

     

    all energy names have moved nicely in the past month or so -- I wouldn't chase here ..
    18 Apr 2014, 12:42 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    yes, (CVX) is excellent too. I like your picks, wish I had bought them when you first mentioned them. Some are up well over 50% since you first brought them up : )
    18 Apr 2014, 12:47 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    you mentioned (V) last summer and I bought it...it's done so well. I like (V) even more than (MA).
    18 Apr 2014, 12:49 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    BS,

     

    History would indicate weak price action precedes either a dividend cut or decline in the business fundamentals, and strong price action leads improvements.

     

    Market action makes -- or leads the news, not visa versa.

     

    Eg. I was already long (MBT) when just the hint of a de-escalation was reported yesterday. The stock skyrocketed, but the CNN headlines still highlight "crisis in Ukraine".

     

    By the time the "all clear" is sounded, what do you think this blue chip, high yielding Ukrainian telecom stock will be trading at? It's Ukraine's At&t, practically priced for bankruptcy.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:51 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    M your pick (MBT) is really a nice play on the Ukraine situation. Looking at the chart, it's dropped a lot since last October when it was $24.

     

    Looks like you just made some fast money, it was up almost 9% yesterday.

     

    Hmmm....thank you for posting about this one. I might buy some on Monday! Wish I had bought it a few days ago.

     

    Fast money is good money too : )
    18 Apr 2014, 01:09 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    BS,

     

    I will hold it to 24 at least. Nice divy too. I added Friday, payed up at 17. Convinced things are likely to calm down. Short gold on this too, expect a major break.
    18 Apr 2014, 01:16 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Blue,

     

    Glad u made $ on that -- I played (V) successfully buying under 200 when i mentioned it , then had it called away @ 220 -- it went to 235 or so then dropped back to under 200 where i just bought it back.

     

    I can see it going back to the 230 area again -- :)
    18 Apr 2014, 02:16 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - I've started looking at energy (ESV) (HAL) (PDS)...

     

    and Bret Johnson is recommending ALL of them!!!!
    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    I'll post more of my DD later. (ESV) (RIG) and (SDRL) are in the deepsea drillers subsector. (HAL) and (PDS) are in the oil energy services subsector. So it's not direct comparison.

     

    Deepsea drillers are extremely unloved with large drops, so a definite devalued contrarian buy. There is some prediction of more drop 20-40% (from Barron's so not sure I'd take that seriously). But not sure if it's time to buy yet.

     

    Oil energy services is on a tear. With more upside predicted based on high increases in forward earnings estimates, even though stocks are at all time high.

     

    Got me thinking about alternative energy as the real future growth industry.
    19 Apr 2014, 01:52 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - On SA messing up links...

     

    I copied to clipboard before posting. Then edited a typo and SA messed up the links. So pasted the clipboard version, re-edited typo. And so it posted with correct links...! It's a workaround - but makes me happy when my symbols show up as I planned...
    19 Apr 2014, 01:55 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - BSF

     

    (XOM), (COP), (BP) are downstream distribution and/or broad (up, mid & down of drilling to processing to distribution). I have (CVX).

     

    Good names that have gone up. That unloved limb seems to be near a top since now they're inline with the general market... so a hold, but I'm thinking not to chase them.

     

    (NE) is deepsea drilling, I'll include the good earnins in my DD on those.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:01 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » FG

     

    Yep, I'm getting more on top of things... so hopefully will catch the next wave when you first mention it -- not after it's peaking :). As BSF said...
    19 Apr 2014, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Typo - that unloved Climb seems to be near a top.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:09 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » M,

     

    Good point -- that the info that weakens a stock is hinted at beforehand. I can see where weak price action is always time to look closely... and not buy into a storyline instead of digging.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    L,

     

    my thoughts this week ..

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    19 Apr 2014, 02:25 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    I Also hold (TCK) as a longer term diversified mining company.
    18 Apr 2014, 11:01 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    M, (TCK) looks like a good speculative play. The PEG ratio is 0.33 (on CNBC.com earnings tab). The future earnings however are negative. However, this is exactly why the price of the stock is down, and makes it a good choice for a speculative play. (VALE) is similar in this regard. So far (VALE) is doing well for me. Wish I had bought some more while it was down about a week ago.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:46 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    BS,

     

    I don't like (vale) or anything brazil until the election is settled. To buy brazil here is somewhat of a gamble that the existing president will not be re-elected, a gamble I am unwilling to make, especially with the run-up by those betting on a change in govt.

     

    I think she will be re-elected, and her policies have been a clear negative to investment.

     

    (TCK) is just as cheap with zero political risk.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:57 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Brazil is a cesspool of corruption....agree with you. It's why I really hate (PBR).

     

    (VALE) is one of my risk plays. I don't have much in it (never do with my riskier picks).

     

    I think (DNKN) & (KKD) will have excellent quarters. Both are now going international. I guess donuts can get you emerging markets exposure : )

     

    Coffee, donuts, booze & cigarettes. The sin stocks do make life sweet.
    18 Apr 2014, 01:02 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Blue ,

     

    in keeping with the "Sin" mode - I ve had success with (LVS) as a short to intermediate holding --

     

    It's back to the low to mid 70's, held the 200 day MA and maybe set for another run back to 90...

     

    big earnings improvement story there with the Macau properties

     

    I'm not in it at the moment
    18 Apr 2014, 02:22 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    F&G, I've owned (LVS) for years. Remember when it went down to like $5 a share, or was it less? I had it in my regular investing account back then. Sold it last Spring, but already had it in the retirement account. It's one of my "buy & hold until it makes sense to sell" stocks. I would say "buy & hold forever" but sometimes, due to over valuation or if the company starts tanking, it does make sense to sell. Also good to reap profits & book those gains. But I do see (LVS) as a very long term hold. Macau is minting $ & someday we will see Vegas come roaring back. Maybe sooner than later, as the US economy is starting to rev up.
    18 Apr 2014, 08:14 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Next week will either make us all very happy or give us opportunities to buy some of our favorite picks cheaper.

     

    Here's a good read on what earnings reports to watch for next week

     

    http://cnb.cx/1mjY1RJ

     

    Got my fingers crossed. I bought a lot of stocks when they became cheap recently. (GILD) (CELG) (ICPT) (NVAX) (WDAY) (SSYS) (TSLA) (SCTY) (FB) (PCLN) (GOOG) are my hopes to add profits.

     

    (IBM) and (GOOG) just got cheaper. I already have plenty of (IBM) from when it got real cheap last year. I did add a few shares of (GOOG) & (GOOGL).

     

    Still have plenty of cash just in case next week gets interesting.

     

    Good luck to everyone....always keep some powder dry.
    18 Apr 2014, 12:58 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    BS,

     

    I have about 5 of your above names, but all via short expensive puts I put on when volatility spiked. A very small bounce in each, and the options expire worthless for nice gains.

     

    Also outright long (GOOG) and (http://bit.ly/JbJWmX) as a bit longer term plays.

     

    (http://bit.ly/I2oi2V) was sweet as I sold the 560 calls against my stock for 18 right before earnings, now the calls are worthless, I'm $1.00 bid and will keep the stock.
    18 Apr 2014, 01:06 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    M your calls, puts etc. are all very interesting.

     

    Years ago my dad told me to never bet on the market. He made an incredible amount of money, just holding long positions. He's the best investor I ever knew. So I don't use options, but it's interesting to hear about what you are doing.

     

    I've already made some money on some of my recent risky picks. Others are going to take some patience. (TSLA) and (SCTY) are likely the riskiest positions I have right now. Most of these stocks will get sold, once profits are made. Could be wrong, some may turn out to be enormously profitable in 20 years.

     

    Yes I am a total stock market junkie.
    18 Apr 2014, 01:24 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    BS,

     

    It's simple for me on the options side. I try to be the house, at the point of maximum demand for the instrument I am selling.

     

    Some people, instead of taking a loss on a bad position, sell calls on a stock sliding lower. Then the stock rebounds, they are short calls at a low strike, and don't benefit -- at best.

     

    When near the height of the freak out on momentum names, I sold slightly in the money, Amzn puts for $30. Great premium due to the volatility. As (AMZN) is not a core long term theme, I'm happy with a simple worthless expiry.

     

    I'm short the (TSLA) 205's, so even a pre - earnings bounce takes those out of the money, and I could consider buying them back.
    18 Apr 2014, 01:40 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    No offense BS -- not directed at you -- but to anyone promoting Brazil as a core investment strategy and holding just because it's cheap, I do not see the risk reward at all, with the polls indicating reelection of the president that caused the crushing of their stock market in the first place.

     

    http://reut.rs/1mk5lNh

     

    I maintain, the real reason Brazil rallied this much, was an unwind of a pair trade the hedge funds had on, long US momentum / short emerging markets and brazil.

     

    Other EM's are interesting, but brazil is untouchable at the present time IMO. It's absolutely essential to understand the politics in EM investing.
    18 Apr 2014, 02:11 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    I'm going to have to take the other side of that advice, at least in part.

     

    Brazil's stocks have been hammered into submission already, so the current administration is well priced in. Also, one must differentiate between companies, as to which are more subject to internal political money business and are also more dependent on local economics. Lastly, I'm not sure what "core" holding means. One must seek value where value presents itself. Of course, it's always necessary to maintain balance and diversification, so that risks do not become overweighted.

     

    More specifically, I like the risk/reward ratios for companies, like (VALE) and (SID). The former, the world's second-largest mining company, is selling at 40% of its three-year high, and the latter, the largest steel company in Latin America (15th in world), at 25% of the same. And, both of these issues are throwing off double-digit yields. Importantly, both obtain the vast measure of their business through exports, not internal consumption. To me, these are sit-and-wait stocks.

     

    Another potential candidate is (PBR), which is selling at 36% of its three-year high. With PBR, however, the risks are higher because they are more subject to internal price manipulations in Brazil, they have more debt, and they offer lower yield. Still, the longer-term outlook appears promising at these price levels.

     

    Although they don't offer the export-oriented attributes of the foregoing and are the most likely to be manipulated for political purposes, two candidates for possibly huge gains are (EBR.B) and (CIG). EBR.B preferred is selling at 28% of its three-year high and yielding 13.6%, while CIG is still selling at 50% of its high (after a big jump in March) and yields 17.2%. These electrical utilities are not going away, unless they would be nationalized (don't think Brazil is quite Argentina, as yet), and electrical demand only grows in Brazil, despite government price gerrymandering for political purposes. The risks are higher here, but the potential gains are also very sizable.

     

    As the old adage goes, no risk, no reward.
    18 Apr 2014, 02:43 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Tack, I'm willing to keep my investment in (VALE) for now....I've made some $ already. It is volatile tho, but as long as it tips to the upside, I'm in. As you say, Brazil has to turn sooner or later.

     

    Many decades ago, I lived in Brazil as a high school exchange student - back in the 1970s. I don't think it has changed much since then, as far as corruption goes. It was fascinating & disgusting at the same time. I had to bribe my way out of the country, in order to get the "exit visa" stamped on my passport. The guy wouldn't do it until he got his bribe.

     

    The people are friendly. That is the best I could say about them. Lazy, ready to party....not interested in working hard. Samba, bebida, and fiesta. Sad but true.

     

    Don't get me wrong, some of the people were really wonderful.

     

    However, I would never put that much into investments there. Just don't quite trust them. Actually, that's how I feel about most foreign countries and why over 95% (maybe 99%) of my investments are in US companies.
    18 Apr 2014, 08:24 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    BSF:

     

    In mid-'70's I spent five years running Latin American sales & marketing for a division of Pfizer. I have many fond memories of my many stays in Rio. Some of the finest dining ever at the the Swiss-run Ouro Verde Hotel on the beach at Copacabana. The good-old days.

     

    Parties or not, VALE is still the world's second-largest mining company, and I am willing to go along for the ride for a modest position.
    19 Apr 2014, 12:01 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    T, I was in Rio in 1974....it was a great place to visit. The best time of my life was getting to experience Carnival (aka Mardi Gras here) in Brazil. I still speak Portugese & am in touch with many Brazilian friends still today.

     

    The first time I ever saw a beggar on the street was in Brazil. I cried, because it was so sad, especially the kids. Growing up in a small town in the Midwest, we didn't ever see beggars.

     

    There is a lot of political tension going on now in Brazil. Many people are upset about the money being spent on getting ready for the World Cup, and then the Olympics. Nothing spent on education, helping the poor, etc.

     

    From the year I spent there, it was shocking seeing the difference between education in the US and in Brazil. We went to school from about 7:30 am until noon. The same school held 3 sessions every day, morning, afternoon & evening - all different students. No books. Not even one....as the teacher talked, one student would write out the lesson on the chalk board. Shocking to me, coming from a small town in the Midwest we had beautiful schools, football stadium, Olympic sized indoor pool, huge library...all kinds of sports & activities. With the terrible education system it's no wonder that Brazil is not doing that great.

     

    Very few people went on to college. The family I stayed with was very well educated, via private schools. I saw the colleges, even toured the medical school in Sao Paulo.

     

    One of my biggest fears was getting sick. I was ready to return to the US a full 2 months before it was time to go.

     

    One of my happiest days was getting back to the US! As a 17 year old, it was a great experience, but made me appreciate the US & my own family a lot more.

     

    Another shock for me was going to India. We really don't have problems in the US. Minor irritations, yes. Compared to most of the rest of the world we are very fortunate here.
    19 Apr 2014, 02:06 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    Tack, a few questions. No one is debating these are cheap.

     

    However so is (TCK), without the political risk, and more broadly diversified than (http://bit.ly/tfbCVq). Just as cheap and very well run. Canadian oils are also dirt cheap here, so why (http://bit.ly/r2x22e) ?

     

    Let's assume Brazils govt is re-elected, which they would take as an affirmation of their policies and direction.

     

    How then can you know the following -- that the utilities will not be nationalized, that the royalty deal for (http://bit.ly/r2x22e) and (http://bit.ly/tfbCVq) will not worsen, that they don't move towards an argentine model? You've outlined the issue. To me politics is paramount.

     

    I'm sure you know by now, risk doesn't particularly scare me.

     

    Btw, I paid you a huge compliment on the "crash" article.

     

    I think your assessments of overall market liquidity and lack of individual participation in the market are totally bang on, as is the overall cautious -- waiting for 2008 again -- mentality.

     

    I've given those a thorough study and am convinced the longer term public money simply isn't really in yet. Think we have a ways to go but more focused towards value large caps and real economy.

     

    Still could be a choppy year but I see potential chop not major downside, at least not in the value indexes.
    18 Apr 2014, 02:55 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    Asbolutely nothing wrong with (TCK) as a play, too. That looks attractive. At 4%, it offers a far lower yield. Less vulnerable to political risk.

     

    I don't know what "Canadian oils" means? Most Canadian oil plays are the MLP's and oil trusts, not integrated oil companies, about which I have reserve-valuation concerns. Any particular names?

     

    Yes, CIG and EBR have more risk than the exporters, but they also offer potential larger rewards. One can debate nationalization, but I have not heard any discussions along that vein. Again, it depends on one's risk appetite.

     

    In essence, I am betting that the politics won't get much worse. Brazil is my most speculative holding, so I enter with my eyes wide open.
    18 Apr 2014, 03:19 PM Reply Like
  • dancing diva
    , contributor
    Comments (2573) | Send Message
     
    Tack - Vale has reduced its dividend every year since 2011; tck has increased its dividend every year since 2010 - so far. Tck reports reports Tues morning, April 22 and should report FH dividend (it issues twice a year) at the same time.
    18 Apr 2014, 05:51 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    DD:

     

    Vale dividends:
    2011 - $1.18
    2012 - $1.14
    2013 - $0.85
    2014 - $0.41 (YTD, first half)

     

    3-year price decline - 58%
    3-year total return - -50.75%

     

    Teck dividends:
    2011 - $0.70
    2012 - $0.85
    2013 - $0.86

     

    3-year price decline - 61%
    3-year total return - -53.97%

     

    Overall, it's pretty much similar for the two companies over the last three years, dividend histories notwithstanding.
    18 Apr 2014, 06:27 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    Let's examine the risk / reward, first for Brazil energy, then Canada.

     

    In brazil I see no political upside, as the govt is likely to be re-elected. In Canada, the energy sector has been completely ignored for a long time.

     

    However, there is a free call option, and that is Keystone pipeline approval. This has dragged on so long, it's been forgotten. The second theres a hint Keystone will be approved -- and I believe it will -- a flood of investment capital is likely to flood into Canadian energy.

     

    I might look into an oily Canadian name, as a free call option on the pipeline.
    18 Apr 2014, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    IMO - another one to look at (FCX) - mining-- mainly copper- and now diversified into oil with their latest purchase of plains exploration.

     

    Div 3.8% and last year they paid a special div of $1 in addition to reg div.
    selling at 10x 2014 estimates ..

     

    out of favor due to all of the noise with China's growth..

     

    I believe they are in better financial shape than many in that sector
    18 Apr 2014, 06:47 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    Here's a list for due diligence: http://bit.ly/1meKc9t
    18 Apr 2014, 06:55 PM Reply Like
  • dancing diva
    , contributor
    Comments (2573) | Send Message
     
    I didn't say they were dissimilar, just that your comment to Macro regarding vale vs tck just mentioned the dividend yield being "far less".

     

    Note if you're simply bullish iron ore in the short term vale is the better play. Over the course of the next few years tck is making substantial investments (owned jointly with suncor) in the energy space in order to get more diversification. So if iron ore prices reverse soon (not likely, but possible) vale would be more inclined to increase their divy substantially than would tck.
    19 Apr 2014, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    One could argue names like (SU) are cheap, but it's just talk as I'm not in them.

     

    My names are weighted to Nat Gas, (ECA) (BIR.TO) (POU.TO) and my driller, (PDS).

     

    Your perspective and risk I am sure is fine for you, for the smaller risk adverse investor reading, I'd keep brazil pretty small.
    18 Apr 2014, 03:29 PM Reply Like
  • Krustyman
    , contributor
    Comments (938) | Send Message
     
    (TAN) seems ready for another up leg.

     

    Krusty
    18 Apr 2014, 05:30 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Krusty

     

    any thoughts on (FSLR) ??
    18 Apr 2014, 06:06 PM Reply Like
  • Krustyman
    , contributor
    Comments (938) | Send Message
     
    Hi Fear,

     

    (FSLR) revenues have been multiplied by almost 1000 from 2003 to present, but the stock did not follow. The reason is that earnings are difficult to predict.

     

    However, (FSLR) will remain a top leader in that industry IMHO. The solar industry is more important than it was 5 years ago and will be even more important in 5 years from now.

     

    The balance sheet as well as the cash flow are strong.

     

    If you want a better worldwide exposure (especially to the China market) you would be better with (TAN).

     

    Cheers! :)
    Krusty
    18 Apr 2014, 08:09 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - Krusty

     

    You've been in solar since last summer -- very good call!!!

     

    I came to the same conclusion and am going to get into (TAN), instead of individual. (I posted my thinking above, so won't repeat here.)

     

    Any thoughts on the production process... as it gets more common, more is made, production costs go down, margins down with that... how will that effect the industry -- and make it a better or worse time to get in?
    19 Apr 2014, 02:19 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - A ridiculously newbie question of mine :)

     

    So (HAL)'s forward earnings are predicted at $5. Current $2.35, with PE 26 at $61/share. How do you predict your future share price expectations?

     

    $5 E x 14x = $70 so 14% growth
    $5 E x 15x = $75 so 23% growth
    but
    $5 E x 10x = $50 so -18% lack of growth

     

    The charts can give some clues using TA. But how on fundamentals do you figure? (I got Yair's suggested book out of the library, but haven't read enough yet :). )
    19 Apr 2014, 02:16 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    LMH I'd skip the entire bond analysis part... the beginning / stock part is long enough as it is.
    19 Apr 2014, 04:27 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Y

     

    Good to know :)
    20 Apr 2014, 01:30 AM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    L,
    (HAL) is a great company in that space.. as u noted from TA , it has already run higher with the market as some of that $5 earnings expectation is now being priced in ..

     

    a simple way is to put the market multiple on it - so 15-17 like u showed in your comment is fine.. and not outrageous..

     

    remember these are estimates.. so its a 'starting" point and may not be "gospel"

     

    another suggestion is to go back and look at the historical PE of a stock ,

     

    some stocks historically sell under the market , others sell over the market avg. and that goes hand in hand with the growth prospects of a company.
    keeping in mind they will also rise or fall in context with the overall market..

     

    I use ycharts for historical PE's

     

    http://ycharts.com
    19 Apr 2014, 02:42 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » FG

     

    Those ycharts are great! Even without a subscription, click the small box next to each stats, and what a great chart of past P/Es.

     

    You've answered my question in general... that I wasn't missing something more concrete and certain to do with these numbers than I've been doing. It's all pretty wishy washy...

     

    Anyone else have suggestions?
    20 Apr 2014, 02:16 AM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    L, (moving this down here)
     
    My frank advice. You are not going to learn this game through (only) getting ideas on this or that.
     
    You need to learn how to think, analyze, and determine a consistent process that works for your personality and tolerance. Otherwise you get twisted by the wind, by other investors opinions, and dont form your own convictions.
     
    To me too many investors do this. They invest in this or that because Buffett is in it. But you don't learn that way. It's funny, I'm in 3 stocks I discovered Carl Icahn is in. Now I'm not in because he is, didn't even realize he was in a couple of them. But it's interesting.
     
    My advice is think. Contemplate the world around you and the developing secular themes, and who might benefit. Then, always buy quality to take advantage of that. Of course, people will debate quality.
     
    I've rarely lost much when I focused on quality. I've lost many many thousands, buying junk or shorting high quality.
     
    And learn who's running the show. We don't buy companies -- we (at least I ) buy the CEO and his /her team.
     
    With EM's I buy the president / government.
     
    Think about it.
    19 Apr 2014, 03:05 PM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    M, just listened to an excellent report on Brazil on CNN by Fareed Zakaria. Brazil had a torrid GDP run up until 2011, fueled by China's growth. China was buying Brazil's commodities, while China grew at an astonishing pace. Now that China has cooled, Brazil went down to less than 2% GDP growth.

     

    Brazil wasted most of that GDP growth $ which is a shame. Corruption ate up over $50 billion. Now with the pressure of the World Cup expenses & the looming Olympics, Brazil is in crisis. The new rail lines and many other projects will not be finished in time for the World Cup. Who knows if the election will be rigged but when Dilma wins, the corruption will not end any time soon.

     

    Fareed made the point that Brazil thought it had solved its economy problems while lifting 40 million people out of poverty. I even noticed that many of the illegal Brazilians here in NJ went home, back in 2010.

     

    (VALE) will remain a holding for me, but if I see it start to falter in the future then I will dump it. Let's hope Brazil starts solving its problems soon.
    20 Apr 2014, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    We know that QE will be ending soon, in Oct/Nov. Another bearish article has been published here on SA warning about what the effect of that will be

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...

     

    Here's how you can protect yourself from a stock declining rapidly: check the valuation of each of your positions at least monthly, if not weekly. When you have a company like (TSCO)
    http://cnb.cx/1gZyigl

     

    that is overvalued (although it's still growing) then you should take some profits. I did this awhile back, and glad I did. This was after reading one of Chuck Carnevale's excellent articles about "when to sell your stock." When you prune your investment positions, selling some stock can help you avoid future losses. Plus, you then have $ to invest in other investments that are under valued.

     

    I'm deciding now whether to buy (TRV) or (DD). Check out the data on CNBC.com Of course you need to do more due diligence than just CNBC.com, but it's a good place to start.

     

    Looking at (DD) the PE ratio is 21.5 and it is already up 36% in the past year. The dividend is 2.69 % and beta is 1.52. Beta is a measure of volatility, the lower the better. Now check the earnings tab. The PEG ratio is 1.4 and the expected earnings per share for the next year is 19%. Dividend is

     

    In comparison, (TRV) has a low PE ratio of 8.9 and has only gone up 1.89% in the past year. The dividend is 2.3%. Beta is 8.1. The earnings per share is expected to decline 12.5% in the next year, with a PEG ratio of 1.76. It's good if the PEG ratio is less than 2, even better if it's less than 1. PEG ratio is the PE ratio divided by the growth rate.

     

    The next step I would take is to read some articles (here on SA and elsewhere) to see which company is expected to make money in the next year, and beyond. Also check their balance statements. Who has less debt, which has more cash, etc.

     

    However at this juncture, I wouldn't buy either stock. The dividends are not that great, and I already own many DGI stocks. If (DD) had a good dip, that would make it more tempting. The growth rate for (TRV) puts me off. Perhaps this stock would look more tempting in the future, when growth is better. A small starter position in (TRV) now would enable me to reap those future gains at a cheaper price, which is attractive. But for now they are both on my watch list.

     

    Keep checking all your positions for any that have made a good profit, and are ripe for pruning. If you have some stocks that are over valued, even if you have not made a profit yet, it may be wise to reduce your exposure.

     

    Once we get some good gains in the market, I will be doing some more pruning and reducing exposure. By October, I want to be about 25 or 30% cash. I do believe we will have a lot of volatility around election time.

     

    The worst thing to do is not be prepared.
    20 Apr 2014, 11:02 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    oops (TRV) has a beta of 0.81.

     

    dividend for (DD) is 2.69%.

     

    you can see a list of all the DOW stocks on CNBC.com's front page, lower left. If you check the PE ratios for the DOW stocks, most of them are quite low. That's a good thing : )
    20 Apr 2014, 11:06 AM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Blue,

     

    Good to see another bearish article -- ;)

     

    what i have mentioned the last couple of weeks on my blog is the theories making the rounds now on the investment manager circles is the mid year election cycle and of course the sell in may go away is now being rolled out .. My thoughts along with the details of those theories are there.

     

    So with that maybe we will see a swoon here in the market soon and then make a run later in year..

     

    I have been cautious for a while and right now i'm only looking at what i call "special" situations" and doing more of the buy /write strategy..

     

    I haven't read the article yet - for the moment all i can say is we have cut QE by 35% and the market is higher..

     

    Here is a comment Tack made to someone on another article and it is the best description i have seen here on SA or elsewhere that explains the fallacies abounding about QE and its effect..

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    20 Apr 2014, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    To those claiming QE has had zero effect on risk asset prices, I'd like to see a rational explanation on the clear correlations outlined in Eric's article.

     

    http://bit.ly/PkilX0

     

    I get the fact, that QE has gone into reserves, etc. etc., and therefore could not have impacted asset prices. The fact that QE has gone into excess reserves is not in dispute here.

     

    I want to hear a simple explanation for what looks like multi - year correlation to me. Coincidence -- is not a valid argument.

     

    Next, we are essentially sideways since tapering has actually began, not higher, if you factor all major indexes.

     

    Again why? We are 4 months into the year. What's the issue -- if not tapering? History tells us -- strong years like 2013 are followed by further strength, all things equal.
    20 Apr 2014, 02:20 PM Reply Like
  • dnorm1234
    , contributor
    Comments (1126) | Send Message
     
    >To those claiming QE has had zero effect on risk asset prices

     

    Who/where was this claimed? That's a tough statement to support.

     

    It doesn't seem that complicated, to me; when the Fed says things (and acts) in support of the economy, people are more willing to buy riskier assets.

     

    As far as tapering and the flat market in 2014, who knows? You're hard pressed to draw conclusions from 4 months of data. Half of the traders are preparing for an epic crash any day.
    20 Apr 2014, 02:26 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    d:

     

    I'll stand up and make that claim:

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    20 Apr 2014, 02:29 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    See Tacks linked comment above, this is the common argument -- that as QE has flowed into excess reserves, it's impossible for there to have been any impact on asset prices.

     

    I dispute this, while Tack is technically correct, I believe the excess reserves have been used as collateral for risk taking activities , and therefore there may have been some impact.

     

    Edit to make things "crystal clear"! Recognition of this potential impact on asset prices doesn't make one a "frustrated bear". FWIW.

     

    The correlation in Eric's article, which I have been long aware of--- if projected into the pending conclusion of QE 3, ought to make anyone cautious.

     

    I am long the market, but aware of future impacts to risk appetite and prices.
    20 Apr 2014, 02:33 PM Reply Like
  • dnorm1234
    , contributor
    Comments (1126) | Send Message
     
    Tack:

     

    Perhaps I'm nitpicking, but:

     

    "I think it's done almost none of those things to any degree imagined."

     

    It doesn't sound like you're saying QE has had *zero* effect on asset prices, just that the effects have been greatly exaggerated. Which I can agree with.

     

    But it's also hard for me to believe there's been no effect whatsoever. However, how to parse that effect out from the real recovery is beyond me. Mr. Parnell's charts definitely don't do so.
    20 Apr 2014, 02:37 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    They don't say that "correlation is not proof of causation" for no reason.

     

    It's too bad that you want a new and different explanation than the one that is true, as regards QE, but I'll give you more factual evidence that explains why market are far higher now than 2009.

     

    In April 2009, the S&P500 EPS was $7.85. In December 2013, it was $101.59. Should we think that a 175% recovery in market indices is unjustified when SPX earnings have increased by a factor of almost thirteen (13)?

     

    http://bit.ly/PkkL82
    20 Apr 2014, 02:39 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    I'm not arguing any of the fundamental improvements in earnings or the economy since 2009. (although a lot of buybacks have helped there). I am not even arguing (against ) a secular bull scenario, an acceleration in the "real" economy, capex spending, ect, all of what I have written about. Hey, I'm long here

     

    All I'm looking for is an explanation for a pretty clear looking correlation displayed in Erics article.

     

    Correlation does not prove causation, but (at least partial) causation has not been disproved either.

     

    Certainly the economic and earnings improvement justify a major portion of the rise since 2009, I think most rational investors would agree with that. All of it, though?

     

    Then you get into the realm of PE ratio expansion, and if QE had an effect there. That would be the risk area to me, not so much the real economy but trend in PE ratios.
    20 Apr 2014, 02:49 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    Stating the QE has no effects on markets is ridiculous, anytime you devalue your currency, and lower the risk free rate, you will increase earnings and make competitive financial assets be less lucrative.

     

    Obviously if the earnings weren't there the S&P wouldn't be where it is, but those earnings are of course a function of a weaker currency, and companies abilities to finance debt at extremely low rates.
    20 Apr 2014, 02:54 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    YG:

     

    The U.S. is a net importer, by far, so a weaker currency isn't any major benefit, except for foreign earnings, if they were repatriated in dollars, which they aren't, due to taxation concerns.

     

    There are numerous knowledgeable people, including Fed Governors, themselves, who think the effect of QE, even on interest rates, has been highly exaggerated. I tend to concur and would point to the fact that, as tapering has actually gotten under way, rates have been falling, not rising. They only rose in anticipation of a dramatic rise due to tapering, which clearly isn't in the cards.
    20 Apr 2014, 03:16 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    Lets drop the focus of discussion of potential QE effects on "Interest rates" -- which is not in dispute -- at least by me -- and "economy" (also not in dispute)

     

    Let's solely analyze the effects, if any, on the stock market alone. Are Fed Governors also claiming what you do, that QE has had no effect on stock market appreciation?

     

    I'd really also like to hear a theory, on the apparent correlation in Eric's charts.
    20 Apr 2014, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    Umm...Tack -- the huge foreign earnings may not be repatriated in dollars, but they sure are reported in dollars, are they not? So there is a currency impact.
    20 Apr 2014, 03:25 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    I'm wondering what happened to the folks that stated the market would crumble when the fed decides to taper

     

    Dec 18th start of fed reduction of asset purchases

     

    S & p 1810 today 1864

     

    NASDAQ 4070 today 4095

     

    DOW 16167 today 16408

     

    RUT 1133 today 1137

     

    35% reduction and no collapse in prices like many predicted.

     

    The recent consolidation in the averages is just that -

     

    consolidation after a huge year in 2013 .. and in my view tapering is not playing any part in that at all ....

     

    20 Apr 2014, 03:37 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    There is no explanation, as can be seen by the fact that tapering is 30% underway, and markets haven't budged. You seem to suggest that 30% up years are automatically followed by continued surges, but that doesn't happen, all the time, or even most of the time, especially not when there are so many nervous souls out there and no euphoria in sight anywhere.

     

    QE is exactly like so many previous phobias that melted away without impact, despite innumerable claims of pending disaster:

     

    -- bank bad debt
    -- REO backlog
    -- ARM resets
    -- TARP

     

    QE is being systematically and gradually extinguished, and we're not going to see some sudden over-the-cliff market reversal. Future interest rates and earnings will be driven entirely by fundamental economic matters and not by QE or its absence.
    20 Apr 2014, 03:38 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    I don't suggest huge up years are normally followed by more strength, market history stats indicate this.

     

    As for the rest, we will see. Markets are full of reliable correlations. I'd still like to hear a better theory, not on the reaction to tapering, but to Erics charts specifically.

     

    QE has been tapered, not halted, so to say no correlation to weakness has been proven is premature.

     

    Certainly basis the Russell 2000, the index I have been primarily cautious on, has stalled, then corrected 10%, which we haven't seen in quite some time. This strengthens the correlation argument, as it is the most expensive, most speculative index.

     

    I am not calling tapering a "pending disaster"..... It's however, a potential future valuation factor we all need to be aware of.

     

    This "anyone cautious on any overvalued sectors, (like IWM) is a permabear since 2009, long gold and canned goods, and perpetually calling for a crash" stuff...is not so.

     

    It's not, as has been widely said, an all in or out game.
    20 Apr 2014, 03:56 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    There doesn't have to be a causation reason, just because you want one. Even the Russell's correction is just another sign of a healthy rotation away from overvalued sectors. This is especially reconfirmed by the fact that the unloved sectors started getting some love at the same time. If the decline in the Russell were merely some precursor to a more general major market reversal, we'd see money moving into defensive positions, certainly not speculative and growth-oriented sectors, like emerging markets and energy.

     

    So, either the markets are nuts, and the pundits preaching the QE tapering negatives are right, or vice versa. I think I'll stick with the markets.

     

    You've recently been touting a bunch of long positions. Make up your mind; do you believe in rotation and stability and/or an upward trajectory, or in an overall decline, per the QE phobes? If it's the latter, rotating to emerging markets and energy will be no refuge.
    20 Apr 2014, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    http://bit.ly/1lrfI4K this is in regards to the effects on interest rates.

     

    I would just note before the decrease in interest rates since the beginning of the taper, they rose from a low of ~1.5% to 3.0% that is dramatic.

     

    U.S businesses are very intensive in human high skilled labor, and capital, and their exports are not intensive in the finished products, commodities which are generally imported a weaker currency is clearly a net positive for the U.S corporate earnings, a large portion of which come from abroad today.
    20 Apr 2014, 04:15 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    I'm long, I believe in the longs, rotation and stability, but it's good to carefully examine both sides of potential factors that may input valuation.

     

    I don't see an overall decline right now, I see resiliency, but doesn't stop me from analyzing potential future effects as the year progresses.

     

    We are seeing a lot of money move into defensive positioning now that you mention it -- I think utilities are the leading sector this year.

     

    Its a market of stocks to me, that's how I'm trading it.
    20 Apr 2014, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    Tack, I think this is spinning the conversation,

     

    "QE is being systematically and gradually extinguished, and we're not going to see some sudden over-the-cliff market reversal."

     

    No one stated any of that you just said it as if that is anyones opinion.

     

    QE increasing asset prices doesn't mean taking it away will cause them to crash, as asset prices increase, home prices rise, and the machine starts working again the effect of QE lessens or becomes moot, that hardly means that it didn't increase asset prices.
    20 Apr 2014, 04:18 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    M:

     

    http://bit.ly/1lrhFxY
    20 Apr 2014, 04:24 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » -

     

    If QE tapering is going to impact the economy...it would take time for the impact to show up. Is 5 months really long enough to assess the impact that has to pass through lending all the way through production to sales results?

     

    Also tapering was delayed and timed by the Fed for when the economy could pick up any slack.

     

    I'm not saying tapering had an impact on the economy or didn't -- I'm not in a position to judge that right now -- just adding these two factors into the theory building.

     

    Also there's a third factor that has nothing to do with the economy or earnings... it's the psychological impact QE has had. While every regular poster on this blog hasn't been "QE dependent"... it only takes a quick post in other areas of SA or MW or turning on the media, to see plenty of people who's investing theories are based on "QE is supporting the market." Many aren't even in the market...so when QE doesn't cause Armageddon, maybe they'd even have a rallying effect as they finally jump in...
    20 Apr 2014, 04:30 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    YG:

     

    I am responding across several threads, I guess, wherein the argument is constantly posited that the end of QE will be the end of the markets. I categorically reject that view.

     

    I have previously argued that QE did not directly levitate the economy or markets, either, so those hypnotized by a focus on QE, and now tapering, are likely to have been wrong all along. Many of those, who have anticipated some terrible reversal, almost the whole way up, have severely damaged themselves.

     

    Once again, here's my overall stance:

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    20 Apr 2014, 04:32 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    T,

     

    For the record, I reject the view too that a QE halt sends us all the way back down to 2009, or anywhere close. It's ridiculous. A lot of healing and improvement has occurred across balance sheets. That doesn't disappear.

     

    However, there is a position between that and the one that says, we keeping going up without corrections aka 2013.

     

    I think it's reasonable to assume some extended digestion here, maybe corrective activity, and that QE tapering is either causation or an awfully convenient excuse.

     

    No matter, to me it's year to be nimble and watchful, and perhaps somewhat more defensive than 2013.

     

    The greatest argument against defensiveness, is the fact it's still such a popular call. Hence overall, I think we have quite a ways to go in this bull market. How we get there, I'm not sure. What I do believe is both the real economy, and real economy type stocks, need to lead from here, and likely will. That's my default position until proven otherwise. Quality will need to lead.
    20 Apr 2014, 04:43 PM Reply Like
  • dancing diva
    , contributor
    Comments (2573) | Send Message
     
    Tack, Macro, others:

     

    I'll add my two cents to the QE impact on stock prices.

     

    While I don't agree with the Eric Parnell article that says the end of QE will precipitate the end of the bull market, I do believe the last round of QE was so massive it did have an important psychological impact (the Fed has my back, don't fight the Fed), giving some market participants the courage to foray into stocks, ie, it increased the demand for stocks. From the time QE3 was announced to the present time the forward p/e of the S&P went from a below average p/e of about 12.5 to the current level of 15.2 - roughly 10% above the ten year average. And since no one knows the impact what the cessation of Fed buying will do, it should have a negative psychological impact, making buyers less aggressive to buy minor price declines.

     

    As long as the economy is growing, earnings will as well, and that will keep people in stocks and the market firm. However, the multiple may take a bit of a hit - to perhaps the 10 year average - on the idea the Fed isn't providing as much liquidity and the end of the super low rates is closer. And the market could spend quite a bit of time range bound.

     

    As the US economy now looks, I don't think it can handle a 4% 10 year rate, so it probably won't happen anytime soon. Already with the pop in home prices and the increase in mortgage rates there has been a noticeable slowdown in home sales growth. So dividend stocks should be well supported.

     

    What I'll be looking for to potentially begin a bear market is the escalation of food and energy prices globally. In the past this has precipitated recessions. Higher energy prices could come in the form of a geopolitical event or even a slowdown in fracking (potentially we could hear news of groundwater contamination or more earthquakes as time passes - let's face it hydraulic fracturing is too new to say it's completely safe in massive amounts); food prices on adverse weather. I have no idea when this may occur.

     

    By the way, the reason I consider the 10 year average p/e to be more important than a longer time frame is that was the last time a major tax code change occurred. In 2003 Congress brought the dividend tax rate down to 15% from the level of your marginal tax rate from 1985 to 2002). This should have elevated the demand of defensive dividend paying stocks versus bonds since bond income (from all except municipal bonds) is taxed at ordinary income rates and dividends at a much lower rate for those in middle and upper income brackets. Note for the top bracket this was just increased to 20%, but it still beats the hell out of the top marginal rate on ordinary income of close to 40%.
    20 Apr 2014, 07:22 PM Reply Like
  • Robert Duval
    , contributor
    Comments (5802) | Send Message
     
    DD,

     

    I essentially agree and think high energy/ food will ultimately be the issue. We may already be on the way there. Hence I have 40% of my portfolio in energy/ materials.

     

    If ANY sustained doubt appears regarding fracking -- what fortunes will be made in conventional Nat gas and coal. That is a possibility.

     

    QE has not made me a frustrated bear but more accurately frustrated more with the continuing low volatility. I willingly admit I have underperformed in the QE environment, because of the ridiculously small dips in years like 2013.

     

    My best returns come in periods of higher anxiety and volatility, a higher emotional environment, and I am confident while the bull market will not likely end, volatility will pick up.

     

    Great opportunites for the prepared and those that can stand higher volatility.
    20 Apr 2014, 08:05 PM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    Macro: Volatility as measured by the VIX has been continuously moving below 20 which has been consistent with prior multi-year up moves in the market.

     

    The same kind of movement was present between 1991 to October 1997 and from late in 2003 to August 2007.

     

    I have a chart for both the S & P 500 and the VIX between 1991 to October 1997 showing the correlation of persistently below average volatility numbers with the stock market moving up:

     

    VIX and S & P Compared 1990 to 1997 (May 2009)
    http://bit.ly/XIe6mR

     

    The same is true for the 2004 to August 2007 period.

     

    The DJIA and S & P 100 volatility numbers will trend lower than the VIX.

     

    VXD for the DJIA or ^VXD at YF
    VXO for the S & P 100

     

    The Russell 2000 will be one of the more volatile indexes which proved useful for me in 2008 when I was looking for a hedge.

     

    RVX for Russell 2000
    20 Apr 2014, 08:29 PM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    BlueSky: It would not be surprising to see the market decline in anticipation of QE's demise, which I would welcome.

     

    Any decline, even one of 3%, will bring out the Hussman True Believers en masse, welcoming the upcoming slaughter of anyone who has actually participated in all or most of the S & P 500's 180% rise since March 2009.

     

    I would not focus on that issue too much, however.

     

    For one, the excess money will be around for some time thereafter. Bernanke has already stated that the FED will not be selling the mortgage backed securities and will hold them to maturity.

     

    http://1.usa.gov/15FpiDe

     

    A large quantity of the treasury securities are short and intermediate term so they can be allowed to run off too. Possibly there may be some sporadic selling of longer term issues.

     

    Fed Holdings-Click "T Notes and T Bonds"
    http://nyfed.org/12yg38A

     

    This ST. Louis FED publication discusses some of the issues relating to unwinding the bloated balance sheet:

     

    The Fed’s Strategy for Exiting from Unconventional Policy: Key Principles, Potential Challenges
    http://bit.ly/1qQpvjV

     

    Instead, I would focus on the longer term secular forces that drive stock prices and valuations. The kind of correction that we had in the summer of 2011, which almost hit 20%, is not that important long term, except for someone who may have picked up a good long term value then or sold out prematurely.

     

    What caused the rise in P/E multiples? Is it the excess money floating out there somewhere, doing something or nothing depending on who is guessing? Or are there fundamental reasons that the market sees that have nothing to do with money supply?

     

    One long term secular force underlying current valuations is a prolonged period of low inflation/low interest rates. The pricing in the 10, 20 and even the 30 year TIPs reflects a consensus opinion that inflation will remain benign for a long time, hovering just over a 2% average annual rate over the next ten years as reflected in the 10 year TIP break-even spread, which has been relatively constant for some time now.

     

    With inflation being non-problematic, interest rates will remain unusually low for an extended period of time. This will encourage business to expand using debt and to hire more workers over time. It will also impact the valuations of stocks.

     

    The earnings risk premium still favors stocks over bonds even as markets hit new highs.

     

    http://bit.ly/1eTrL8j

     

    First Two Pages NY FED Analysis:
    http://nyfed.org/1myF8Nf

     

    Low discount rates increase the attractiveness of stocks particularly those that I generally like more than others. I am referring to those that increase dividends at a much faster rate than inflation and have payout ratios preferably less than 50% at the time of purchase.

     

    There are other long term positive forces that are more important than the end of QE and ZIRP.

     

    As I have said in the past, the DSR chart reflects one of those long term positive forces:

     

    Household Debt Service Payments as a Percent of Disposable Personal Income

     

    http://bit.ly/MiNM1D

     

    Abundant low cost land, relatively low cost natural gas, the rule of law (better than most places for sure) and a good infrastructure transportation network will cause more U.S. manufacturers to remain in the U.S. and for others to move back.

     

    The parabolic rise in emerging market middle class consumers is another long term positive force that will help generate higher worldwide GDP growth, compared to the recent past, which will become more apparent when Europe quits being a drag and starts to contribute more and some EM countries work through some temporary hiccups.
    20 Apr 2014, 08:56 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    DD:

     

    Are you really predicating a recession and bear market on fracking contamination and/or earthquakes? If that's all we have to worry about, then it's clear sailing.

     

    There isn't going to be any recession until such time as we have much stronger credit formation and signs of actual, not imaginary, inflation. Even then, the economy and markets will trend higher while the Fed chases the economy with a series or rate increases. Only after this cycle of increases finally causes an inversion will be be set for the next down cycle.
    20 Apr 2014, 09:26 PM Reply Like
  • Tack
    , contributor
    Comments (14131) | Send Message
     
    s:

     

    Tapering's fifteen minutes of fame is already over. It's heyday was the second half of last year, where rates skyrocketed in fear from may to near the year end. Now, that tapering is well under way and absolutely nothing is happening, nobody will pay the slightest attention to any fed announcement reconfirming taper.
    20 Apr 2014, 09:28 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    DD,

     

    my .02 on QE is a bit different from your comment that

     

    "QE was so massive it did have an important psychological impact (the Fed has my back, don't fight the Fed), giving some market participants the courage to foray into stocks,?

     

    in my view while u may be right with that statement , i believe its completely offset by the crowd that said "its all fed induced and therefore i'm staying away from this market,",

     

    because when they ( the fed) pulls the plug . this market will fall apart --

     

    as indicated by eric parnells article
    20 Apr 2014, 09:29 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    South,

     

    your comment
    "One long term secular force underlying current valuations is a prolonged period of low inflation/low interest rates. "

     

    that is rarely mentioned but has a profound effect on stock valuations..

     

    before this is all done, folks are going to be amazed at the multiples this market may attain ,,

     

    That is when the party may be over - IMO we are a long way from that
    20 Apr 2014, 09:33 PM Reply Like
  • extremebanker
    , contributor
    Comments (1733) | Send Message
     
    Tack:

     

    I agree on the taper issue. This was last year's news. The market has already rebounded strongly from the over correction on taper news.

     

    However, I believe our economy is limping along and subject to long term slow growth. I am bullish due to recent performance however, productivity will be key going forward. It has been a very, very long time since we have had the demographics that our aging population poses today. Success going forward will be rewarded to those who can become more productive than their competitors.

     

    Our President has raised minimum wage on Federal employees to $10.00 per hour. if this is good for productivity and our economy then lets not stop there. A minimum wage of $20 per hour should be twice as good as $10. Better yet $40 per hour should be twice as good as $20. We should only wish it was that simple.

     

    South, I am still waiting to collect my wager.
    20 Apr 2014, 09:58 PM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    Tack: Maybe the fifteen minutes of fame is over for tapering, maybe not.

     

    Either way, it is nothing to worry about long term.

     

    Rates will remain low for a long time, based on what the market now sees, since inflation is running low and inflation expectations are benign for stocks and okay long term for bonds. I believe that is what the market sees now, most of the time. This can change and inflation expectations need to be constantly monitored.

     

    There will be some positive benefits flowing from slightly higher rates. Savers will earn more and consequently have more to spend.

     

    Possibly more important from a macro perspective, regional banks may loosen up lending some when there is an increase in their net interest margin caused by persistently low short term rates for deposits and a rise in intermediate and long term lending rates to a level that is not problematic for the economy or stocks.

     

    Net interest margins are not exactly conducive to much risk taking at the moment.

     

    Net Interest Margin for all U.S. Banks
    http://bit.ly/WbVzih

     

    Since the FED announced that it would taper $10B on December 18, 2013, stocks have gone up and rates have come down. Go figure. So it is not quite correct to say that "absolutely nothing is happening"

     

    Taper Announcement: 12/18/13
    http://1.usa.gov/1jkTX32

     

    10 Year Treasury Yield on 12/19/13=2.94%
    4/17/14: 2.73%
    http://1.usa.gov/ZV7BAT

     

    S & P 500 4/17/14=1864.85
    12/18/13= 1810.65

     

    Up 3% in 4 months
    20 Apr 2014, 10:08 PM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    Extreme: I am having one of the more frequently occurring senior moments. Do we have a wager? Perhaps, you need to make those with my 91 year old mother who has a better memory than me.

     

    Personally, I think everyone should just go to work for the government and forget about all of this private sector nonsense. The pay and benefits are better than private sector jobs, and sometimes it is hard to see the results. Try calling the IRS. I just received my refund check for 2012 and I filed that return in April 2013.

     

    I was struck by a story in the USAToday back in late 2009 which I summarized in an old blog as follows:

     

    "our civil servants making more than a $100,000 jumped from 14% to 19% of the federal workforce during the recession's first 18 months. The total number making more than $100,000 increased by 382,758 during that period. In our Transportation department, there was 1 person making more than $170,000 at the start of the recession, and there were 1690 employees making more than that sum after eighteen months of the worse recession since the Big D. Yes, our infrastructure may be crumbling, a subject of Bob Herbert's column in the NYT on Saturday, but we at least have enough borrowed money to feed the beast."

     

    USA Today Article:
    http://usat.ly/1qLTdHr

     

    The Federal Housing Finance Agency's last refinancing report for the GSE's was for November 2013. How difficult would it be to collect that data more expeditiously, and how many civil servants work on preparing that monthly report.
    21 Apr 2014, 01:28 PM Reply Like
  • dancing diva
    , contributor
    Comments (2573) | Send Message
     
    No, don't be ridiculous Tack. What I said is that a good number of recessions have been caused when energy and food prices spike. If that happens, the odds of a bear market and recession are good.

     

    I only mentioned contamination and earthquakes because other than a geopolitical event, it's the only thing I can see that would cause US energy prices to go much higher if something precipitated a curtailment in fracking.
    21 Apr 2014, 03:33 PM Reply Like
  • User 7415181
    , contributor
    Comments (825) | Send Message
     
    I will not have new money to invest for a couple of weeks, but here's a cef I was thinking about buying a couple of months ago and opted for something else instead. I looked it up again out of curiosity today. Might interest someone.

     

    (PEO)

     

    At a 15% discount. About a 6% distribution which tends to be paid out at year's end. CVX and XOM are the largest components and also has other big oil companies.

     

    Here's a link to their homepage:

     

    http://www.peteres.com

     

    As an experiment, I've been utilizing ma crossovers on the nav of funds I screen. Here's a chart:

     

    http://bit.ly/1gZA94H

     

    Like I said, I don't own it and wouldn't be able to buy it for a couple of weeks, but probably would if I had some extra money.
    20 Apr 2014, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    USER: I have owned PEO in the past and would view it as the best natural resource CEF. I sold my shares in August 2013. I later used the proceeds to buy Royal Dutch, and then sold RDS/a which received a tailwind from the rise in the Euro vs. the USD and bought COP earlier this year.

     

    PEO has sold at a persistently large discount to net asset value per share since around 2005.

     

    I would recommend going to the CEFConnect, click the pricing information tab and expand the chart to "since inception".

     

    http://bit.ly/I1LnI1

     

    So, you are not likely to receive a meaningful improvement in price based on a shrinkage in that discount, possibly that may change into a longer term bull move in energy stocks.

     

    Instead, the improvement in market price will likely be fairly closely correlated with net asset value per share changes.

     

    Moreover, PEO would not present much of an opportunity to profit from a significant narrowing of the discount occurring when its net asset value is rising, one reason why the Old Geezer crowd buys CEFs.

     

    I prefer buying them at much larger discounts to historical norms, and then hopefully paring or eliminating the position when I receive a substantial narrowing of that discount hopefully coupled with a rise in net asset value per share unadjusted for subsequent dividend payments plus the capture of some dividends.

     

    Bond CEFs present that kind of trading opportunity now more than pure stock CEFs.

     

    The average 1 year discount is -14.82%; -13.71% for 3 years and -13.02% for five years.

     

    I would also compare its total returns with a dumb index funds like XLE which would be more tax efficient. PEO has a managed distribution policy that will generate 6%+ in taxable distributions. Most of that distribution will be a year end capital distribution. Some investors might like the income while others would prefer to avoid those taxable events. And depending on the market price for the year distribution, the only significant one, there may be an opportunity to improve the total return some by a favorable reinvestment price for that year end distribution.

     

    I went to the PEO website to pull its annualized total return information based on net asset value per share, which I would use over market price per share:

     

    http://bit.ly/Xlki56
    YTD: 2.4%
    1 Year: 17.8%
    3 Year: 5.2%
    5 years: 17.2%
    10 Years: 11.3%

     

    XLE Numbers from MSN Money:
    http://on-msn.com/PkQaHt
    YTD: 1.23%
    1 Year: 27.65%
    3 Years: 8.24%
    5 Years: 17.28%
    10 Years: 13.52%

     

    The past may not be prologue but is PEO or XLE the better historical choice, forgetting for a moment the dividend difference and dividends would be factored into the total return numbers?

     

    I own VGHGX over Vanguard's Health ETF VHT due to the relatively small total return numbers that favor the mutual fund vs. the ETF over a long period of time and most shorter periods. Sometimes, usually not often, active management pays off. The following difference in annualized returns over a 10 year period is material:

     

    10.9% Annualized for 10 Years VGHGX
    8.79% Annualized VGT.

     

    2% per year is a big number in my opinion.

     

    Fidelity has a new energy sector ETF that I bought, FENY, which has a .12% expense ratio which can be bought commission free at Fidelity. The low cost Vanguard Energy ETF VDE has similar returns to XLE and can be bought at Vanguard and TD Ameritrade commission free after signing up for TD's commission free ETF program.

     

    Sponsor's site for FENY
    http://bit.ly/1g7fB9I

     

    Vanguard Website: VDE
    http://bit.ly/PkQcz3

     

    All of those energy ETFs will have large weightings in CVX and XOM.

     

    That is the kind of analysis that I will use in a making a stock fund selection. I still might go with PEO since I prefer having the income rather than selling shares to basically pay myself a good dividend.

     

    My last two energy company purchases were COP last February at $63.68 (2/10/14 Post) and CNQ at $31.88 (12/23/13 Post)

     

    I do have a long term position in the CEF ADX, primarily due to my comfort level with the value tilt. ADX owns 2,186,774 PEO shares as of 12/31/13 and those two CEFs share office space and personnel.

     

    ADX Annual Report:
    http://bit.ly/PkQaXL

     

    Both PEO and ADX were created shortly before the 1929 crash that bankrupted the highly leveraged CEFs. ADX, GAM, TY, PEO, CET and a couple more survived.

     

    John Kenneth Galbraith told the story of that collapse in his readable book "The Great Crash 1929"

     

    http://amzn.to/PkQaXN

     

    ADX was the first CEF that I bought, pre-dating 1984, and it is sort of like my old catcher's mitt from Little League days, something that I will likely keep, occasionally selling some shares and buying when appropriate.

     

    20 Apr 2014, 05:58 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Welcome SG!

     

    To those who haven't met SG (from ages ago when he posted on IT"s blog) -- he's owned an amazing number of stocks. Knows a ton and often posts long explanations that can be very helpful at assessing equities.
    20 Apr 2014, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    LMH: Yes, I tend be on the wordy side,with long explanations that may need an editor, and sometimes, provided you look hard enough, there may even be something useful in them.

     

    As noted in another comment which deals with the market, it is important to assess the big picture since that will have a powerful impact on my asset allocations.

     

    I would be doing something else entirely different than now with a problematic inflation trend similar to the period when I started to invest back in the 1960s. The current low inflation/low interest rate forecast being made by the market, and showing up in CPI and PCE price indexes, provides an entirely different and far more positive backdrop and milieu for both stocks and the economy, particularly when coupled with other powerful long term forces.

     

    This is a view from the mountaintop rather than focusing on each twig or tree in a forest.
    20 Apr 2014, 09:16 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - SG

     

    I find something useful in your comments!! :). I was trying to do an intro... so folks would know to check out your posts!...and a clue why some of us act like we know you already :)

     

    The big picture being the macro environment... matters to stocks of course. I'm trying to learn how to collect twigs (since I'm newer having used ETFs so much for years), as well as work on the forest. So that twig info is important to me too :).
    20 Apr 2014, 09:41 PM Reply Like
  • User 7415181
    , contributor
    Comments (825) | Send Message
     
    South,

     

    Hello again and thanks for some more names to research. I just remembered coming across peo a couple of months ago before deciding to go with another cef at the time. And earlier comments by others in the blog regarding energy doing well inspired me to go back and look at it.

     

    I ran a chart of the nav and moving averages over it and noticed the 50 had crossed above the 200 in the last couple of weeks. Actually, that is true for the market price as well, but since the distributions will be paid out of the nav, I wanted to look at that.

     

    I agree that I would be surprised if that discount ever narrows significantly. Management would have to increase the distribution or something. I think with the nav in a good uptrend, the market price should go up for a while as well. If I do end up buying some shares, it would be for a fairly short term trade - probably with the plan to sell before the end of the year distribution.
    21 Apr 2014, 07:30 AM Reply Like
  • South Gent
    , contributor
    Comments (4026) | Send Message
     
    User: The PEO distribution is good already, and it has adopted a managed distribution plan. I suspect that the discount will remain high until there is a prolonged secular up move in energy stocks and the PEO performance improves over low cost ETFs.

     

    With the surge in low cost energy ETFs over the past decade, which are outperforming PEO most of the time, the demand for PEO shares has probably decreased for those investors willing to consider the CEF alternative.

     

    Like ADX, another issue for a new buyer would be the large unrealized capital gains, which are harvested yearly and create tax events for new buyers who were not on board when those gains were created by the fund.

     

    ****

     

    One thing for everyone to keep in mind, when buying the common stock of a foreign energy company, is that currency exchange can have a significant impact on the ADR price.

     

    I mentioned selling the ADR RDS/a after receiving a tailwind from the EURO gaining in value against the USD. The ordinary shares are priced in Euros. The following linked chart will hopefully show how the NYSE listed shares, priced in USDs, have outperformed the Amsterdam listed shares, priced in Euros, even though the shares are the same except for the currency in which they are priced.

     

    http://bit.ly/1mrxL7S

     

    The same would be true for RDS/B shares whose counterpart is priced in British pounds which has also gained against the USD over the past year.

     

    CNQ, the U.S. listed shares for Canadian Natural Resources, which I own, have underperformed the Toronto listed shares over the past year due to the decline in the CAD/USD:

     

    http://bit.ly/1mrxIJo

     

    The decline in CAD/USD exchange rate is about 10% which flows through into the 10% underperformance of the USD priced shares.

     

    Sometimes those comparison charts do not link properly. If two lines are not shown, then simply enter at Marketwatch CNQ and enter CA:CNQ in the compare box.
    21 Apr 2014, 08:27 AM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » Happy Easter to all our Easter celebrators!!! Have a good dinner and family time...!

     

    I'm off to eat maztoh brie. Add enough frying to anything... and it stops tasting like sawdust.
    20 Apr 2014, 11:21 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    Thanks L, we are going to eat an all Italian feast today. Nice sunny day, looking forward to long walk later.
    20 Apr 2014, 11:36 AM Reply Like
  • BlueSkyForever
    , contributor
    Comments (2103) | Send Message
     
    (TSCO) already has 1,296 stores in the US. I don't see a lot of room to open more, as (WMT) would be a big competitor for them. Unless (TSCO) decides to go international, this stock is not going to keep growing. With a PE ratio of 29, this stock is currently over valued. This is one I will be selling later this spring. In the short term, it should go up a little more with spring revenues driving it higher. Fingers crossed.

     

    When I bought (TSCO) last year, it had a nice run up and I did take 50% of the profits already.

     

    As a long term hold, (TSCO) does not meet my requirements: a growing dividend of 2% or better. Sustainable growth of over 8% (the chowder rule would say 10% growth minimum, so that the dividend plus the growth rate = 12% or better). The chowder rule helps you to pick stocks that are growing and will give you 100% return every 5 years. A good way to rev up your portfolio's growth rate.

     

    It would actually be dangerous to hold onto (TSCO) with its over valuation. This is one stock that would have a substantial pull back any time we see the market dip. Check the chart, you can see exactly that during the last 2 dips we just had.

     

    My posts are not for you seasoned investors, as you know what you are doing. But these posts do help me to figure out what I need to do, and hopefully help anyone who is learning too.
    20 Apr 2014, 11:49 AM Reply Like
  • Eudaimonia
    , contributor
    Comments (845) | Send Message
     
    Anyone have any thoughts on (QSII) or the sector?
    20 Apr 2014, 04:42 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - I don't, anyone else?

     

    What sector or subsector is it in?
    20 Apr 2014, 09:42 PM Reply Like
  • Fear & Greed Trader
    , contributor
    Comments (6274) | Send Message
     
    Food for thought

     

    http://bv.ms/1tpR7yw
    20 Apr 2014, 05:04 PM Reply Like
  • Land of Milk and Honey
    , contributor
    Comments (5222) | Send Message
     
    Author’s reply » - This is long, so here's the next Chapter #19!

     

    http://seekingalpha.co...
    20 Apr 2014, 08:40 PM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

StockTalks

More »
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.