Seeking Alpha

Soleil Bleu

Soleil Bleu
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Soleil Bleu's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • BlackBerry Soon To Leave $10 Behind [View article]
    Omg, Watsa only cares for his own bottomline! What a tragedy!

    Unlike the rest of us, who clearly only invest out of the goodness of our hearts and the well-being of our fellow creatures?

    Give me a break!
    Feb 27 11:24 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • This Oil Major Is Eyeing The World's Second Largest Shale-Oil Basin [View article]
    It’s a risk, for sure, but I wouldn’t place all developing countries in the same basket. Some tend to nationalise frequently, and others work very hard to attract foreign investment. As investors it would not do for us to ignore the growth potential in Asia, Africa, and S. America.
    Jun 30 07:26 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Apple $395: Time To Give Up And Abandon Ship? [View article]
    If you really believe Apple’s stock price will be back up, shouldn’t you buy now, while it’s inexpensive?
    Apr 22 12:06 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Can An Intelligent REIT Investor Over-Diversify? [View article]
    Templeton and Buffett are expressing parts of the same whole from different angles.

    Templeton says that diversification is only unnecessary if one is right every single time, knowing all the facts and interpreting them without any mistake. In other words, fully-informed rational agents.

    Buffett says that diversification is protection against ignorance.

    We may use ‘ignorant’ as a quasi-insult in daily life, but it really ought not to be. Ignorance is perfectly natural when once is faced with an immense volume of information that increases every single day. No one can assimilate all of it and make intelligent decisions.

    Faced with this situation, Buffett’s solution is to be deeply informed about a small subset of all securities, while Templeton’s is to hedge against ignorance by diversifying immensely.

    They would both agree that one can either invest little time and effort into research and hedge against it with diversification, or invest in a selection of intensely-researched securities.
    Feb 11 01:37 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Dead Company Walking: 5 Reasons BlackBerry 10 Marks The End [View article]
    BBRY does not necessarily need to capture the entire market. Just a profitable and sustainable niche.

    That said, I sold enough of my position to recover my initial investment and am playing with pure profit. This is a speculative position. No one should be basing any major portion of their portfolio on it, long or short.

    May be that is why the institutional investors are (wisely) backing off. I would want my pension fund to do the same.
    Feb 4 06:52 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividend Investing: Have A Goal And A Plan On How To Reach It [View article]
    Sigh. I’m 24 and now I’ll need to wait another 40-45 years before rolling in the dough ): When did you start investing?
    Jan 8 04:11 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 More Value Stocks For 2013 [View article]
    I don’t know the author and I agree that it’s unlikely that a few of us can swing the price of a blue-chip but wow, that was rude.
    Jan 8 12:59 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Avoid Paying Taxes The Warren Buffett Way [View article]
    It’s rational for Mr. Buffett to seek to optimise his investment returns by avoiding taxes legally where he can while advocating a higher tax rate for the good of his country.

    He is not saying that he alone should be allowed to take advantage of lower rates and everyone else should pay higher rates. He is saying that everyone should pay higher rates and nobody should be able to get away with the sort of avoidance he confesses to.
    Jan 8 12:31 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Google Won [View article]
    Surprising how nobody seems to consider that Google might simply have won on virtue of being innocent – that they were accused of being monopolistic, and they were found not to be. Everything is apparently either for geopolitical reasons, or because of lobbying.
    Jan 4 12:27 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Has Paul Krugman Gone Too Far This Time? [View article]
    Ah yes, your piddling little business qualifies makes you know better than an academic economist on a point of theory, does it? That’s a bit like a garage mechanic disputing the Nobel in physics, or your neighbourhood drugstore pharmacist mouthing off about the Nobel in medicine.

    The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics is not even awarded by the same committee as the one in Peace.
    Nov 14 11:37 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China Vs. U.S.: Who Is Leading The Natural Gas Transportation Race? [View article]
    I’m sure an abundance of natural gas and a capable distribution network is an advantage, but don’t you think calling it the number one economic advantage is being a bit generous?

    I would say America’s top sources of economic advantage are its well-trained workforce, its universities, the rule of law, immigration, global military capabilities, and English. Natural gas is good to have, but it’s not the most important economic advantage the U.S. has.
    Nov 9 02:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • "You have to ask what's good for the country," but where some see the Jones Act as essential, others see a drag on U.S. growth. The 1920 law requires that any shipment from one U.S. port to another be carried on U.S.-built ships, owned by U.S. citizens, and operated by a U.S. crew. But it can drive up the cost of coastal and inland shipping, push traffic onto rail and trucks, and create other dislocations. [View news story]
    Laws like the Jones Act maintain the linkage between economic activity and household wealth, which has been weakened so much in recent times.

    A healthy US economy needs a strong middle-class, which in turn requires steady, well-compensated employment.

    In light of this, the Jones Act is a good one, and should be extended to other means of commercial transportation. It might mean higher expenses for corporations and fewer millions for the c-suite, but it will also mean more paycheques spent in American communities by employed American families.
    Sep 14 11:07 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The DOJ yesterday sharpened its rhetoric against BP (BP) and Transocean (RIG) over the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, accusing the companies of "gross negligence" in deciphering a key pressure test. Such a finding in an upcoming trial, which is set for January, could almost quadruple the civil damages BP has to pay to $21B. Shares -3.7% in London. [View news story]
    BP’s negligence caused billions in damage to local economies, especially tourism and fisheries. The administration is right to hold them responsible for this mess.

    Company executives are not absolved of the duty to behave responsibly simply because they are acting on behalf of shareholders. Would the people who are screaming socialism here do the same if this were a company found using lead paint on children’s toys?

    Strict governmental regulation hasn’t kept the Chinese, Singaporean or Emirati economies from growing rapidly, and it will not damage the American economy’s ability to deliver either.
    Sep 5 11:24 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • "(The) ability of government to quickly induce changes in behavior of large intermediaries through financial incentives is quite limited," concludes an academic study of why the full force of the federal government has resulted in only 900K mortgage modifications in 3 years. Is that PhD-speak for "central planning doesn't work?" [View news story]
    All the authors are saying is that government intervention has its functions and its limits, like any practice.

    It’s ridiculous to claim that a specific limitation reflects on the ability of the government to do anything at all. And of course, not all government intervention is ‘central planning’ (‘‘Oh my God, the Soviets are here! Panic!’’)
    Sep 5 11:01 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Zynga: No Games, Just The Facts [View article]
    Revenue, revenue, revenue, revenue ... let’s talk about profits, shall we?

    The question isn’t ‘‘Is Zynga a good play or a bad play?’’, the question is ‘‘Are there any better plays in this sector than Zynga?’’, and I think there is. Microsoft has a profit pipeline in Windows and Office, Apple dominates the mobile scene, IBM has its high-end enterprise computing and consulting businesses, and Google, while being dependent on ad revenues, is profitable. If I wanted a risky bet only for the joyride, I’d pick Amazon. Some of these even pay a modest dividend.

    I’ll be pleased to watch Zynga for the sidelines, but why get involved in a company whose moat is so dry?

    [Options, on the other hand....]
    Aug 8 11:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment