Burger King Holdings Inc. (BKC)

All Comments on BKC

  • commenter
    Dylan Jovine
    Aug 01 04:30 PM
    My Website
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    FYI--The Second Person Who Commented Under My Name starting with the line "Dylan made a mistake when he responded to you" is somebody who works with me and read the back and forth between Gashouse Gorilla and myself.

    While I agree with the person 100% (I wish I would have responded with that argument) I did want to clarify that for the sake of editorial honesty/candor, etc. They should have logged into this site with their own name but they didn't.

    That being said - I couldn't have made the argument better then she did! HEHE

    --DYLAN JOVINE     Reply
  • commenter
    Dylan Jovine
    Aug 01 04:26 PM
    My Website
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    To Gashouse Gorilla,

    Dylan made a mistake when he responded to you - he never even debated some of the "finer points" in your comments. Frankly, I think you've missed the main premise of his whole argument (kind of missing the forest for the trees so to speak).

    --For starters your suggestion that he replace "instead of" with "addition to" completely ignores the basic premise of the article which is to get government out of the lives of citizens. He doesn't think the government should restrict fast food restaurants IN ADDITION TO anything. (By restricting new restaurants all you do is create longer lines at the ones that currently exist).

    --With respect to the "alternatives&quo... you so desperately seek I'll admit - I cannot offer any more then the 3 he already posted. It is not my job as I am not a politician so I haven't given it any more thought then what he's described. I will say that any "alternatives&quo... should be PRIVATE MARKET ALTERNATIVES THAT FOSTER THE KIND OF BUSINESS PRACTICES THAT WOULD PROMOTE THE KIND OF HEALTH RESULT THE GOVERNMENT WISHES TO OBTAIN.
    (i.e. tax breaks for certain kinds of food joints, tax breaks for parents of children deemed to be in good health, etc).

    --Now here is the weakest part of your argument (and proof that you completly did not understand what he said or intended in this article): You say the following:

    "It's hypocritical of you to on the one hand excoriate LA for recognizing many of its citizens make poor decisions when it comes to the food they eat while on the other hand mentioning (among the vague solutions you offer) "education" as the answer. Are there people out there who make bad eating decisions? There must be. Or else you wouldn't be recommending we "educate" them."

    Where did he ever insult the citizens of LA? What he said was that the GOVERNMENT WAS INSULTING ITS OWN CITIZENS FOR ESSENTIALLY TELLING THEM THEY ARE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO MAKE DECISIONS THEMSELVES (i.e. the "nanny state")

    What he is saying is that citizens ARE smart enough to make their own decisions - especially when given proper financial incentives which I am sure you can grasp the concept of (let me guess - you're a wanna be hedge-fund manager, right?).

    --And finally, you finish with your "grand" flourish:

    "So, for daring to recognize that some diners don't know better, do you intend to rip yourself a new one?"

    I'll throw that one back to you: For daring to comment on an article that is beyond your comprehension to understand, do you intend to rip yourself a new one?
     Reply
  • commenter
    kurt walter
    Aug 01 04:13 PM
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    The Nanny State wants to run your life. Who the flip do they think they are? This isn't the Soviet Union -- yet. Reply
  • commenter
    Dylan Jovine
    Aug 01 04:03 PM
    My Website
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    Dear GasHouse Gorilla,

    You've seen right through me - this is EXACTLY how I analyze stocks. How did you know? I feel totally ashamed now that you've "Outted" me.

    All kidding aside: I've been an analyst and professional investor for 20 years.
    I have the kind of track record that makes me feel confident in myself when I look in the mirror.

    I've been a "writer" for a couple of years and I enjoy it immensely. Usually I write articles that study either the cash flow, income statement or balance sheet of any business I'm looking at and I like to think (or at least I've been told) that I do a half-way decent job at it.

    But several months ago I started writing more op-ed pieces on finance where I tried to interject some levity into the discourse. I was pleasantly surprised to find that many readers found what I was writing humorous. So I kept doing it.

    Perhaps it's the current market stress folks are feeling or perhaps it's something that I cannot explain or will never understand but many of these pieces have been well received and have made people laugh. Several of them have been posted on other websites for the same purpose (of making a bloggers readers smile).

    And the truth is that I've gained some pleasure from that. Putting a smile on the face of an investor in this market - or in the context of largely dry financial writing - has made me happy and I have hundreds of notes and emails attesting to that fact.

    Of course that doesn't mean that this kind of article should be used in place of serious financial analysis. But I hope that in the context of this great website that these rarely written (sometimes funny) articles have a small place for a reader who is sick of bad news.

    Have a great day,

    Dylan Jovine     Reply
  • commenter
    gashouse
    gorilla
    Aug 01 03:22 PM
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    >> Instead of
    >> Instead of
    >> Instead of

    No, it's not "instead of". It's "in addition to". With this obvious distinction in mind, maybe you be less outraged.

    >> Instead of looking at parenting or education or home life

    "Looking at..." is not a solution. What's your alternative? Be specific.

    Should they ban watching more than 1 hour of TV or video games a day? Even if it weren't a preposterous idea, how would you police that? Should they spend tax dollars on an anti-junk food campaign?

    What can a local government do? One thing they can do is make the junk food less accessible. It doesn't have to be the only way to combat the problem of obesity. But, it's the kind of decision a local government has some control over.

    >> Instead of lowering taxes for people so that they can afford to eat better foods, they thought it wiser to prevent any more Carl's Junior (SYM: CKE) or Burger King (BKC) restaurants from appearing.

    If certain restaurants serve junk, why should the majority of educated people not prevent them from opening and hurting the health of their "uneducated" patrons? *

    * It's hypocritical of you to on the one hand excoriate LA for recognizing many of its citizens make poor decisions when it comes to the food they eat while on the other hand mentioning (among the vague solutions you offer) "education" as the answer. Are there people out there who make bad eating decisions? There must be. Or else you wouldn't be recommending we "educate" them.

    So, for daring to recognize that some diners don't know better, do you intend to rip yourself a new one?

    >> Instead of creating incentives for businesses to come to Los Angeles to ...

    Again, it's not "instead of". You're viewing these as "exclusive choices" when they're not.

    ...

    Lastly, is this the kind of analysis and reasoning you use to evaluate investments? This sounds more like straight political argument. It's an issue worth debating. But, it seems out of place for "Seeking Alpha".     Reply
  • commenter
    bearfund
    Aug 01 10:51 AM
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    Many people who eat fast food don't do so "once or twice each year". If they did, you wouldn't be writing this article because these companies wouldn't have tickers and no one would ever have heard of them. There are plenty of Americans out there who eat fast food several times a week. Some hardly eat anything else. It's cheap and they've grown up with it and developed a taste for it.

    If this described a mere handful of people with deeply unhealthy habits, it would be no great cause for concern. It's more than a handful. And if everyone were held responsible for his or her own health and medical costs, it would be irrelevant as a matter of public policy. Who am I to tell someone what he may or may not eat, right? Wrong. That happy state of affairs went out the window when taxpayer-funded medicine replaced charity hospitals in the business of caring for the poor (and the not so poor). If you want to take 1.45% of my pay for Medicare - a fraction sure to rise in the future - and use it to pay costs directly associated with the habits of others, you have also given me the right to dictate how those people may live to the extent that their choices affect the cost to me of providing that medicine. Same goes for Medicaid and other similar programs. If you don't like being told what to eat, lose the tax. I surely don't give a flying f**k what some random person in Los Angeles eats for dinner tonight. I'd very much prefer that it be none of my business. For now, however, it very much is my business.

    Everything else you wrote is of course spot on. This is one of the dumbest possible ways to solve the problem. It manages to distort the market in a patently unfair way while also guaranteeing that it will not achieve any useful purpose. Bravo!     Reply
  • commenter
    maelstrom
    Aug 01 09:18 AM
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    Your article voices what anyone with a wit of common sense knows.The local and Federal governments are made up of utopian idiots ..all thinking they alone(government) is the answer to all problems when in fact they cause all problems. Social engineering and the lack of personal responsibility has been the greatest detriment to America I can think of. Reply
  • commenter
    imhotep
    Aug 01 08:53 AM
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    I wish this article could be read on CNN/MSNBC/FOX News, America needs this type of education!! Keep telling the truth. Reply
  • commenter
    steerage
    Aug 01 08:27 AM
    Los Angeles Declares War on Colonel Sanders (and Your Portfolio) [view article]
    Amen, brother!!! Reply
  • commenter
    Jim
    Hawthorne
    Jun 12 12:16 AM
    Lehman's a Lemon - Fast Money Recap (6/9/08) [view article]
    The banks have bottomed???? Yeah, right!
    I'll let you guys snap them up, okay?     Reply
  • commenter
    User 171852
    Jun 11 02:01 AM
    Raw Data Report: Restaurants [view article]
    Note to Bachelor or Science:
    The points you make on Chili's may be correct. Our coverage of EAT in this article speaks to the On the Border Mexican Cantina and Grill and not Chili's. We did post a report on Chili's separately that raise issues about how well that brand is doing.     Reply
  • commenter
    User 171852
    Jun 11 01:59 AM
    Raw Data Report: Restaurants [view article]
    Note to Swingline.
    Not sure why you believe that TickerMine's research is the worst ever. Your calculation on the number of Burger King's we spoke with is about right - 0.03% of all U.S. outlets. We are the only persistent and mass available primary research service. Our thoughts include using our data in conjunction with other sources that you use to drive your investment process.     Reply
  • commenter
    icandoitdon
    Jun 10 03:51 PM
    Lehman's a Lemon - Fast Money Recap (6/9/08) [view article]
    hahaha...

    yes, najarian is full of great calls. a perfect reverse barometer.     Reply
  • commenter
    screwed
    Jun 10 11:10 AM
    Lehman's a Lemon - Fast Money Recap (6/9/08) [view article]
    (Another) Great call by Najarian on TIE . I think it's ridiculous that CNBC allows him to "frontrun" his positions before he airs them on Fast Money without any constraints. Obviously, they recognize the conflicts of interest because they place constraints on others including Cramer. What do you want to bet that Pete won't say anything about TIE on today's show ?? Reply
  • commenter
    User 66973
    Jun 08 01:58 PM
    Provocative Finding: Fast Food Doesn't Make You Fat [view article]
    Thrre were a lot fewer McDonalds and Burger Kings in 1956. We had to drive 30 miles tothe closest one. Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: