Seeking Alpha

eddieojr

eddieojr
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View eddieojr's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Omega Healthcare Is A Classic Textbook Model Of Repeatability [View article]
    Thanks for the interesting article. The relatively high amount of reliance on federal reimbursement for services has always been a risk of investing in OHI. Will the merger with AVIV result in less reliance on government reimbursements? Thanks again.
    Apr 1, 2015. 07:28 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Dividend Investors Could Withdraw More Than 4% Of Their Portfolio [View article]
    Great article. To do as you suggest, an investor could have some faster growing and lower yielding dividend stocks like V, WBA, CSX etc that you could sell to generate the capital gains part of a portfolio. These could be sold in the future, while retaining the slower growing and higher yielding stocks (T, MO, KMI etc) for their dividend production. You could collect some capital gains while retaining the stocks primarily responsible for production of dividends. Very interesting options to consider.
    Mar 23, 2015. 05:53 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • American Addiction Centers: Addicted To Fraudulent Drug Testing? [View article]
    Incredible. These people hold themselves out as compassionate professionals that only want to help those with addiction problems. To jail with them all!
    Mar 3, 2015. 11:49 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Awash In Crude: Are Inventories The Only Thing That Matters? [View article]
    Andrew,
    Thanks for the interesting article. It seems to me that the US will have ample supplies of oil. Refining capacity will not increase (only 1 refinery I know of being built by CLMT) and current refining capacity is maxed out. So lots of inexpensive input, with little to no ability to increase refinery through put. So, refiners should do well in this environment, especially if demand increases as well. Any comments on my logic would be appreciated. Thanks again.
    Feb 23, 2015. 06:55 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Warren Buffett's Big Oil Mistake And What His Response Tells Us [View article]
    Interesting article, thank you. When I think of my investments, I consider that I have a pool of capital. I can deploy this capital in an almost infinite number of ways. Thus, each investment decision boils down to capital allocation. I constantly ask myself the question, "Am I allocating my capital in the most effective way to reach my financial goals? It's all about capital allocation.
    Feb 11, 2015. 11:35 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Mednax: Investment Thesis Intact, Discount Is Gone [View article]
    Thanks for the interesting article. I am a recently retired anesthesiologist. My view of the future for anesthesiology is less optimistic than your view. The reality is that patients, hospitals, insurance companies and the government all want to pay less for medical services. They say they care about quality, and will pay based on outcomes, but they really do not care about the quality. The only thing that matter is the dollars going out the door. Consolidation is occurring among anesthesia practices, with many practices merging to make bigger practices that will be better able to negotiate with payers. My impression is that the large anesthesia practices are more akin to competitors with MD, rather than potential targets to consolidate. There is little to entice a large, successful, regional practice to join MD. Thus, in anesthesiology, I only see the smaller practices, or the larger ones in financial difficulty, consolidating into MD. If that is the case, I do not see the anesthesiology part of MD business being a major contributor to MD's profitability. My insight comes from my former practice (large and financially sound)discussing consolidation with MD. It just was not a good deal unless you are small and concerned that larger groups may displace your practice, or your practice is in financial trouble. Most anesthesia groups today are survivors and are planning for their future. A group like this does not need MD. Thanks again for the article.
    Feb 3, 2015. 09:24 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • There's A Lot Of Value In The Information Technology Sector: The S&P 500 2015: Part 3 [View article]
    Thanks for another interesting article. My biggest issue with investing in any of these companies is that the starting yield is almost always less than 2%. This is even the case with the stocks presented in this article that are not wildly over valued. I could buy T, CVX, COP, BBL,O,OHI etc that would all start out with yields of 4% and up. It would take decades for a low yielding tech company to catch up with the dollars generated by the examples I have listed, especially if you reinvested the dividends received. In addition, to catch up, the growth in the tech companies would need to continue at a rapid pace over the decades, a less than certain outcome. Thus, even if the tech companies are good values, IMHO you are better served by getting more dividends today, than accepting the hope that business will be good enough a couple of decades from now, to reward taking the risk of the lower dividend today. Heck, neither I nor the tech company are assured existence in a decade, let alone two decades from now! Thanks again!
    Jan 22, 2015. 04:11 PM | 11 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Use Social Security Benefits To Enhance Portfolio Returns [View article]
    Thanks for a great article. I too have come to the conclusion that taking social security the second one is eligible is probably the best way to have the most income for retirement. The only scenario where delaying social security until age 70 makes sense to me is if you KNOW FOR SURE you or your spouse will live past age 90. If you have planned your retirement well, this extra income at age 90 will not be as valuable to me as it is at age 67. That's just my perspective. Thanks again!
    Jan 20, 2015. 01:43 PM | 6 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Chevron: A Crude Awakening Looms [View article]
    FGT,
    Thanks for the response. It seems to me that if you wait to buy or add to your CVX position, some "safety" could be found if you wait until the dividend yield gets to the 4.5% and up range, especially if during other bust cycles the Mr. Market did not allow CVX's yield to exceed the yield of 4.75% you quote for 2009. Thanks again!
    Jan 16, 2015. 03:35 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Chevron: A Crude Awakening Looms [View article]
    Mr. Clark,
    Thanks for another interesting article. During the bust part of the cycles, do you know how high did CVX's yield got? Thanks!
    Jan 16, 2015. 02:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Portola anticoagulant antidote successful in clinical study [View news story]
    If the drug works safely, it would be a major improvement in preoperative management of surgical patients. As a recently retired anesthesiologist, one of the most vexing clinical issues is what to do with a patient that was severely bleeding or needed emergency surgery that was on one of the new anticoagulant medication. The old drugs, coumadin and heparin, you could measure how anti coagulated a patient was and you had antidotes (Vitamin K and protamine) that could be given if the patient was bleeding or needed emergency surgery. The new drugs are better at preventing thromboembolic events, BUT, you can not easily assess to what degree a patient was anti coagulated NOR could you reverse the effect with an antidote. An antidote to the new drugs and a quick and easy way to assess to what degree a patient is anticoagulated would be very helpful.
    Jan 9, 2015. 08:43 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Retirement Strategy: Funding Your Retirement Portfolio Now To Increase Income Quickly [View article]
    Thanks for the interesting article. My portfolio and overall investment philosophy is very similar to what you present in the FMBP. In my 20 years of investing, anecdotally, I have observed that the number of shares you own is as important, if not more important, than the rate at which dividends grow from your current holdings. Thus, owning companies like T, that have a high current payout, makes a lot of sense since you can use the dividends to increase the total number of shares you own. I would be very interested in any academic research on this subject.
    I also agree that owning shares of companies with long track records of increasing dividend streaks is more important that getting too concerned about concentration risk. That has always been in the back of my mind, not the front, and it has served me well. Thanks again!
    Jan 9, 2015. 08:30 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Retirement: Income Only Or Total Return? Part 2 [View article]
    Dave,
    That is a terrific accomplishment. What you have done is what I am close to doing. I recently retired and am able to meet my current expenses with my dividend income. As you say, with dividend increases over the years the income will over come the expenses. When that happens, no matter how much money you happen to have, you are truly rich. Congratulations!
    Jan 8, 2015. 05:28 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Retirement: Income Only Or Total Return? Part 2 [View article]
    Thanks for a very interesting article. I am in the income only camp. My plan is to live off my dividends. I have always known that this would allow me to spend less then with the RMD method. This suits my less than average tolerance for risk. From your tables it seems that a person such as myself may well have a large enough balance at some point in life to begin spending some principle on things you may value later in life. If you do that, you might even have more total cash available to spend than you would with the RMD method. The price would be that this money would not be safely available till a point in your life where you may not be able well enough, mentally or physically, to enjoy it.
    Jan 8, 2015. 03:15 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Oil And Gas: USA 1, OPEC 0 [View article]
    Great article, thank you very much. Until recently, it had been too expensive and/or technologically unfeasible to extract oil from shale, tar sands etc. US technology figured out how to do it in a cost effective way. These same efforts will continue, applying continuous downward pressure on the cost to produce oil in the US. I have been discussing the US technological advantage with my investing friends. Your article is the first I know of to discuss this. Thanks again.
    Dec 3, 2014. 10:57 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
67 Comments
261 Likes