NO DooDahs's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/682/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/144346-geico-vs-progressive-selected-10-year-metrics?source=feed#comment-557175 557175 Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:11:58 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/94178-hedge-funds-are-getting-their-butts-kicked-too?source=feed#comment-247193 247193
I hope some readers clicked on their ads because of the title.

Did YOU get any clickthru from it?]]> Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:32:11 -0400
I hope some readers clicked on their ads because of the title.

Did YOU get any clickthru from it?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/94178-hedge-funds-are-getting-their-butts-kicked-too?source=feed#comment-246975 246975
"The average hedge fund is -3.43% ytd compared to -12.65% in the S&P500 ..."

Sounds to me like the average hedge fund was a better buy than the S&P 500.

"... and +1.05% in the Lehman Bros Bond Index."

Do you think bonds have much upside from here, compared to the average hedge fund?

I think either your perspective is so skewed as to be functionally useless, or you're writing about "hedge funds getting their butt kicked" out of sheer sensationalism - which makes your writing functionally useless. ]]> Sat, 06 Sep 2008 12:58:44 -0400
"The average hedge fund is -3.43% ytd compared to -12.65% in the S&P500 ..."

Sounds to me like the average hedge fund was a better buy than the S&P 500.

"... and +1.05% in the Lehman Bros Bond Index."

Do you think bonds have much upside from here, compared to the average hedge fund?

I think either your perspective is so skewed as to be functionally useless, or you're writing about "hedge funds getting their butt kicked" out of sheer sensationalism - which makes your writing functionally useless. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/80217-yet-another-reason-not-to-sell-your-berkshire-hathaway-shares?source=feed#comment-179985 179985
There's no evidence of the trade in any intraday data source I've got available. I've also seen enough bad prints intraday in illiquid stocks and ETFs on my watchlist to know that the data providers will correct those mistakes after the close.

The shame is that so many people picked up on this "BRK-BS" and spread it around.]]> Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:01:59 -0400
There's no evidence of the trade in any intraday data source I've got available. I've also seen enough bad prints intraday in illiquid stocks and ETFs on my watchlist to know that the data providers will correct those mistakes after the close.

The shame is that so many people picked up on this "BRK-BS" and spread it around.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/80261-investing-into-the-end-of-the-hydrocarbon-age?source=feed#comment-179979 179979
The stone age didn't end for a lack of stones. Neither will the hydrocarbon age.

BTW, those electrons are so nice and neat and clean powering those cars ... except for the fact that the electrons were generated by burning hydrocarbons somewhere else.]]> Thu, 05 Jun 2008 19:53:23 -0400
The stone age didn't end for a lack of stones. Neither will the hydrocarbon age.

BTW, those electrons are so nice and neat and clean powering those cars ... except for the fact that the electrons were generated by burning hydrocarbons somewhere else.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/80100-toll-brothers-earnings-prove-there-s-no-case-for-homebuilders?source=feed#comment-179411 179411
None of the information you provide is new. Given that TOL is trading above clear support in the $19-20 range, there's a good chance that market has already discounted everything you've written.]]> Wed, 04 Jun 2008 20:44:34 -0400
None of the information you provide is new. Given that TOL is trading above clear support in the $19-20 range, there's a good chance that market has already discounted everything you've written.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/80025-consumer-sentiment-as-a-contrarian-predictor?source=feed#comment-179407 179407 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

I was all over the contrarian indication of fallen consumer confidence, LAST WEEK.

Welcome to the party, since you're late to it, you should have brought a nice gift.

:)]]> Wed, 04 Jun 2008 20:33:42 -0400 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

I was all over the contrarian indication of fallen consumer confidence, LAST WEEK.

Welcome to the party, since you're late to it, you should have brought a nice gift.

:)]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/78459-debating-fundamental-weighting-and-indexing?source=feed#comment-171886 171886
Not that there's anything wrong with that style of trading! It's great, especially for a fund seeking relative outperformance, to be holding stocks with fundamental or valuation "anomalies," but let's call a spade a spade, it's *mechanical trading.*

I object only to the marketing aspect of its name.]]> Thu, 22 May 2008 12:22:27 -0400
Not that there's anything wrong with that style of trading! It's great, especially for a fund seeking relative outperformance, to be holding stocks with fundamental or valuation "anomalies," but let's call a spade a spade, it's *mechanical trading.*

I object only to the marketing aspect of its name.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/77786-diving-into-the-water-etf?source=feed#comment-170716 170716 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

It may be a "water" index and a "water" ETF, but very few of the companies are pure plays on water and very little of the net revenue of the portfolio represented by the ETF comes from water.

To the commenters: Hey, if you want to trade it technically, go right ahead! It's been a good trade several times! Just don't jerk your own chain and pretend you're really "invested in water" by owning the PHO, because you'll only be fooling yourself. ]]> Tue, 20 May 2008 16:58:21 -0400 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

It may be a "water" index and a "water" ETF, but very few of the companies are pure plays on water and very little of the net revenue of the portfolio represented by the ETF comes from water.

To the commenters: Hey, if you want to trade it technically, go right ahead! It's been a good trade several times! Just don't jerk your own chain and pretend you're really "invested in water" by owning the PHO, because you'll only be fooling yourself. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/78116-choosing-your-portfolio-risk-tolerance?source=feed#comment-170676 170676 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

Personally I believe that your "risk class 2," what I described as "Risk is Not Achieving My Benchmark," is the primary risk that we need to be concerned with when assembling a portfolio or designing an active strategy.

Of the regular contributors to SA, your work is probably THE most helpful to the sophisticated retail trader. Thanks.]]> Tue, 20 May 2008 15:26:46 -0400 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

Personally I believe that your "risk class 2," what I described as "Risk is Not Achieving My Benchmark," is the primary risk that we need to be concerned with when assembling a portfolio or designing an active strategy.

Of the regular contributors to SA, your work is probably THE most helpful to the sophisticated retail trader. Thanks.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/77601-do-momentum-strategies-still-work?source=feed#comment-169426 169426 Sat, 17 May 2008 17:33:34 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/77520-learning-from-bill-miller-s-recent-underperformance?source=feed#comment-168722 168722
This despite his "recent" five-year underperformance vs. the market.

Hussy can only outperform in BEAR markets, which is the flip side of what archman82011 believes about Miller.

Matter of fact, from Jan 2003 through Jan 2008, Miller's fund outperformed Hussman's.

From Jan 2003 through TODAY, both Miller and Hussman have underperformed buy and hold the SPY.

Perhaps both men are given TOO much credit for the lousy jobs they're doing ... ]]> Fri, 16 May 2008 09:47:34 -0400
This despite his "recent" five-year underperformance vs. the market.

Hussy can only outperform in BEAR markets, which is the flip side of what archman82011 believes about Miller.

Matter of fact, from Jan 2003 through Jan 2008, Miller's fund outperformed Hussman's.

From Jan 2003 through TODAY, both Miller and Hussman have underperformed buy and hold the SPY.

Perhaps both men are given TOO much credit for the lousy jobs they're doing ... ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/77193-a-simpler-explanation-for-bill-miller-s-losing-streak?source=feed#comment-167610 167610
Muhuhahahaha!]]> Wed, 14 May 2008 15:01:28 -0400
Muhuhahahaha!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/77193-a-simpler-explanation-for-bill-miller-s-losing-streak?source=feed#comment-167295 167295
I'm not a Bill Miller fan, but it would be nice to see some of the assertions made here backed up, like BM's alleged "style drift," when it occurred, and performance before and after (relative the benchmark index, since that rules for the institutional players that would invest with BM).

This is one of the sloppiest pieces I've seen from David in some time.]]> Wed, 14 May 2008 08:01:32 -0400
I'm not a Bill Miller fan, but it would be nice to see some of the assertions made here backed up, like BM's alleged "style drift," when it occurred, and performance before and after (relative the benchmark index, since that rules for the institutional players that would invest with BM).

This is one of the sloppiest pieces I've seen from David in some time.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76514-keeping-score-of-global-stock-markets-returns-and-valuations?source=feed#comment-164814 164814 Fri, 09 May 2008 10:41:36 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/76481-the-humble-arithmetic-of-portfolio-management?source=feed#comment-164811 164811
When diversified into a variety of asset classes, such as bonds, commodities, foreign developed, emerging markets, and possibly even frontier markets (all but this last one can do with ETFs), the whole idea of "timing THE market" becomes moot.

There still exists the possibility of trying to time EACH market, or overlay a timing component on one or several of the individual classes, such as timing the SPY portion of the portfolio. Taking that as an example case ...

There are two methods of avoiding the timing trap. They both involve admitting that the timing trap is emotional and the result of the "timer" lacking a scientific method.

First is to NOT time the market. This is the easiest to do conceptually but harder to do emotionally, especially if one is a frequent reader of Seeking Alpha, and is besieged daily by a miasma of contradictory information designed to encourage your "activity."

Second, harder to do conceptually but very emotionally satisfying (at least to me), is to confine your timing activity to simple, slow-moving mechanical ideas that have been thoroughly backtested over decades of data. Using single-moving average and moving-average cross ideas involving "slow trading" and moving from the S&P 500 to cash, and back, it's literally child's play to find risk-adjusted returns that beat the market and absolute returns that are very close to market. If one adds other information (volatility, money flow, etc.), one can improve on that timing somewhat.
]]> Fri, 09 May 2008 10:39:15 -0400
When diversified into a variety of asset classes, such as bonds, commodities, foreign developed, emerging markets, and possibly even frontier markets (all but this last one can do with ETFs), the whole idea of "timing THE market" becomes moot.

There still exists the possibility of trying to time EACH market, or overlay a timing component on one or several of the individual classes, such as timing the SPY portion of the portfolio. Taking that as an example case ...

There are two methods of avoiding the timing trap. They both involve admitting that the timing trap is emotional and the result of the "timer" lacking a scientific method.

First is to NOT time the market. This is the easiest to do conceptually but harder to do emotionally, especially if one is a frequent reader of Seeking Alpha, and is besieged daily by a miasma of contradictory information designed to encourage your "activity."

Second, harder to do conceptually but very emotionally satisfying (at least to me), is to confine your timing activity to simple, slow-moving mechanical ideas that have been thoroughly backtested over decades of data. Using single-moving average and moving-average cross ideas involving "slow trading" and moving from the S&P 500 to cash, and back, it's literally child's play to find risk-adjusted returns that beat the market and absolute returns that are very close to market. If one adds other information (volatility, money flow, etc.), one can improve on that timing somewhat.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76286-are-the-commercial-reits-now-stabilizing?source=feed#comment-164428 164428 moneycentral.msn.com/i...]]> Thu, 08 May 2008 17:41:14 -0400 moneycentral.msn.com/i...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/76286-are-the-commercial-reits-now-stabilizing?source=feed#comment-164069 164069
billrempel.com/2008/05.../

"REITs are the biggest gainers in terms of momentum, although as a class they still show negative momentum overall in my timeframe. The biggest gainers in REITs are the retail and industrial/office classes, which (yet again!) shows the confidence that “big money” has in the worst being behind us."]]> Thu, 08 May 2008 09:45:40 -0400
billrempel.com/2008/05.../

"REITs are the biggest gainers in terms of momentum, although as a class they still show negative momentum overall in my timeframe. The biggest gainers in REITs are the retail and industrial/office classes, which (yet again!) shows the confidence that “big money” has in the worst being behind us."]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/74905-defining-alternative-asset-classes?source=feed#comment-159643 159643
Ex; it could be a correlation of 60-minute bars (interval) over the last 22 trading days (timeframe) [yes, a facetious example], it could be daily over the last year, daily over the last two years, etc.

There's nothing to say that what was correlated over the last 22 trading days, year, or two years, has any correlation over the last 10, 15, or 20 years.

If we're talking in general terms about blending non-correlated strategies, it helps to define our terms and get our timeframes of correlation measurement in line with the timeframes over which we execute the strategy ... ]]> Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:42:49 -0400
Ex; it could be a correlation of 60-minute bars (interval) over the last 22 trading days (timeframe) [yes, a facetious example], it could be daily over the last year, daily over the last two years, etc.

There's nothing to say that what was correlated over the last 22 trading days, year, or two years, has any correlation over the last 10, 15, or 20 years.

If we're talking in general terms about blending non-correlated strategies, it helps to define our terms and get our timeframes of correlation measurement in line with the timeframes over which we execute the strategy ... ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73794-4-things-i-just-don-t-get?source=feed#comment-155835 155835
Take a look at Seibels Bruce Group and the South Carolina auto insurance reform as an example of what can happen.]]> Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:47:25 -0400
Take a look at Seibels Bruce Group and the South Carolina auto insurance reform as an example of what can happen.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/73581-a-simple-honest-proposition-housing-data-interpretation-first-conclusions-later?source=feed#comment-155323 155323 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../ Both indices have flaws, but I believe the limited geographic coverage and bias in weighting towards larger homes makes the S&P C-S less reflective of the reality, for the majority of homeowners.

Speaking specifically to the weighting issue, the S&P C-S is value weighted, and the OFHEO is equal-weighted.

Imagine 11 homes, 10 of which are $100K and 1 which is $1mil.

Imagine the $1mil home sells for $800K but several of the $100K homes sell for $100K. A “value weighted index” registers a 10% drop. An “equal weighted index” registers a 1.8% drop. Which is more “accurate?”

Imagine now that all of the $100K homes sell for $90K, but the $1mil home sells for $1.1 mil. The “value weighted index” registers no change. The “equal weighted index” would register a 9.2% drop. Which is more “accurate?”

And what kind of innumerate putz calls a 10-city index "nationwide?" Hey, where's Houston on the C-S? Isn't Houston the fourth-largest city in the U.S.? It's not even on the 20-city index.

List the largest 10 metros in the U.S., and count how many in are in the Putz's 10-city index. Then do the same for the largest 20 metros. See the (OBVIOUS) flaw?

Now, calculate the percentage of U.S. housing units that in the 10-city and 20-city S&P C-S indices. Calculate the percentage of housing units covered by the OFHEO, which uses Fannie and Freddie data. Compare. Which is broader?

Finally, don't use a trading index for economic analysis. That's the same stupid mistake people use all too often on the dollar, see my post www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

I point out the errors in relying on a flawed metric (S&P C-S) as a FAVOR to those individuals who may be following the fearmongers. Not that OFHEO isn't flawed as well, missing the top end of the market, but I'm honest about presenting both metrics, their pros and cons, and why I prefer one to the other. Which is more than you can say for the fearmongers, who present C-S as if it were fact.

Bottom line: people making economic projections based on S&P C-S are deeply misguided. DEEPLY.
]]> Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:52:49 -0400 www.billakanodoodahs.c.../ Both indices have flaws, but I believe the limited geographic coverage and bias in weighting towards larger homes makes the S&P C-S less reflective of the reality, for the majority of homeowners.

Speaking specifically to the weighting issue, the S&P C-S is value weighted, and the OFHEO is equal-weighted.

Imagine 11 homes, 10 of which are $100K and 1 which is $1mil.

Imagine the $1mil home sells for $800K but several of the $100K homes sell for $100K. A “value weighted index” registers a 10% drop. An “equal weighted index” registers a 1.8% drop. Which is more “accurate?”

Imagine now that all of the $100K homes sell for $90K, but the $1mil home sells for $1.1 mil. The “value weighted index” registers no change. The “equal weighted index” would register a 9.2% drop. Which is more “accurate?”

And what kind of innumerate putz calls a 10-city index "nationwide?" Hey, where's Houston on the C-S? Isn't Houston the fourth-largest city in the U.S.? It's not even on the 20-city index.

List the largest 10 metros in the U.S., and count how many in are in the Putz's 10-city index. Then do the same for the largest 20 metros. See the (OBVIOUS) flaw?

Now, calculate the percentage of U.S. housing units that in the 10-city and 20-city S&P C-S indices. Calculate the percentage of housing units covered by the OFHEO, which uses Fannie and Freddie data. Compare. Which is broader?

Finally, don't use a trading index for economic analysis. That's the same stupid mistake people use all too often on the dollar, see my post www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

I point out the errors in relying on a flawed metric (S&P C-S) as a FAVOR to those individuals who may be following the fearmongers. Not that OFHEO isn't flawed as well, missing the top end of the market, but I'm honest about presenting both metrics, their pros and cons, and why I prefer one to the other. Which is more than you can say for the fearmongers, who present C-S as if it were fact.

Bottom line: people making economic projections based on S&P C-S are deeply misguided. DEEPLY.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/72877-the-housing-problem-what-inning-is-it?source=feed#comment-152896 152896
Blame Seeking Alpha's editorial staff for the lack of citation on the AP-AOL survey. Jeff is VERY good about linking articles, and the citation is clearly linked at the original page -
oldprof.typepad.com/a_...]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 10:43:08 -0400
Blame Seeking Alpha's editorial staff for the lack of citation on the AP-AOL survey. Jeff is VERY good about linking articles, and the citation is clearly linked at the original page -
oldprof.typepad.com/a_...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/72877-the-housing-problem-what-inning-is-it?source=feed#comment-152761 152761
I say "Evidently, Johnny boy wants the recession that he predicted for three years to last as long as Hussman had to wait to finally see it - assuming it ever eventually 'officially' gets here."]]> Fri, 18 Apr 2008 07:39:57 -0400
I say "Evidently, Johnny boy wants the recession that he predicted for three years to last as long as Hussman had to wait to finally see it - assuming it ever eventually 'officially' gets here."]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/71946-what-is-diversification-worth?source=feed#comment-149245 149245
"Buy and hold this asset class" is a STRATEGY.

One can get a diversification benefit by allocating money to different strategies in the same asset or asset class, i.e. short and long-term market timing techniques, Piotroski value and CANSLIM, etc.]]> Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:54:28 -0400
"Buy and hold this asset class" is a STRATEGY.

One can get a diversification benefit by allocating money to different strategies in the same asset or asset class, i.e. short and long-term market timing techniques, Piotroski value and CANSLIM, etc.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/71966-7-reasons-march-was-not-the-bottom?source=feed#comment-149241 149241 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 17:49:06 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/71783-blogonomics-the-seeking-alpha-model?source=feed#comment-149108 149108
Regarding the idea of taking a cut of that quarterly loss ~ I doubt you're taking any losses without anticipation of future gain, either through selling the site to a larger company (TSCM?) or through eventual profitability. Tell you what, determine how big a share you want to offer me, open up the books for me to evaluate it as an investment, and I'll let you know. Keep in mind that I'm swinging a retail account here, so if you need a big, meaningful investment, that might rule me out.

Regarding the idea of a full time job ~ send a serious offer. I can do several individual-stock posts weekly, from a hard-core value perspective, from a CANSLIM perspective, from a GARP perspective, or from a "examine the hot stock today" perspective. These kind of things don't interest me as much as retail trader system design, market commentary, or politics, but I'd be willing to do them for money. Tell me your requirements in terms of length and frequency of posts, and price per word, and I'll run it by someone to see if it's fair and then see if making the switch meets my budget needs.

Regarding your current unprofitability, I have several suggestions:

~ You could stop paying your editors. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their editing skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards looking for editing talent.

~ You could stop paying your conference call transcribers. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their transcribing skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards transcribing for editing talent.

~ You could stop paying your web hosting service. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their web hosting skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards looking for web hosting talent.

~ You could stop paying your programmers. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their programming skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards looking for programming talent.

Those four steps would be assured to bring SA to profitability, and then the editors, transcribers, web hosts, and programmers would all be on a par with the contributors. After all, if the content of a media company dealing with financial markets is so unimportant as to not pay the content providers, how important can editing, transcribing, web hosting, and programming be?

Don't get me wrong, Seeking Alpha is a great site from a reader perspective, with a clean look and lots of bells, whistles, and doodads (not to be confused with DooDahs), and there's demand for the content. David, your marketing of the site, and dealmaking regarding its promotion, are absolutely top-drawer, and you're to be commended for those accomplishments.

The flaw is and has always been the content acquisition part of the model. Maybe it's just not possible to pay writers on this scale and make a viable business out of it? Maybe it is? Dunno. But as long as the content providers aren't paid directly, you've got a core market of providers for whom the deal makes sense: those monetizing expensive services, those auditioning for paid writing gigs, and those who are willing to forgo payment for "exposure."
]]> Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:55:04 -0400
Regarding the idea of taking a cut of that quarterly loss ~ I doubt you're taking any losses without anticipation of future gain, either through selling the site to a larger company (TSCM?) or through eventual profitability. Tell you what, determine how big a share you want to offer me, open up the books for me to evaluate it as an investment, and I'll let you know. Keep in mind that I'm swinging a retail account here, so if you need a big, meaningful investment, that might rule me out.

Regarding the idea of a full time job ~ send a serious offer. I can do several individual-stock posts weekly, from a hard-core value perspective, from a CANSLIM perspective, from a GARP perspective, or from a "examine the hot stock today" perspective. These kind of things don't interest me as much as retail trader system design, market commentary, or politics, but I'd be willing to do them for money. Tell me your requirements in terms of length and frequency of posts, and price per word, and I'll run it by someone to see if it's fair and then see if making the switch meets my budget needs.

Regarding your current unprofitability, I have several suggestions:

~ You could stop paying your editors. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their editing skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards looking for editing talent.

~ You could stop paying your conference call transcribers. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their transcribing skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards transcribing for editing talent.

~ You could stop paying your web hosting service. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their web hosting skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards looking for web hosting talent.

~ You could stop paying your programmers. Tell them that participation in SA is a platform to get their programming skill noticed, and people like Jim Cramer troll the boards looking for programming talent.

Those four steps would be assured to bring SA to profitability, and then the editors, transcribers, web hosts, and programmers would all be on a par with the contributors. After all, if the content of a media company dealing with financial markets is so unimportant as to not pay the content providers, how important can editing, transcribing, web hosting, and programming be?

Don't get me wrong, Seeking Alpha is a great site from a reader perspective, with a clean look and lots of bells, whistles, and doodads (not to be confused with DooDahs), and there's demand for the content. David, your marketing of the site, and dealmaking regarding its promotion, are absolutely top-drawer, and you're to be commended for those accomplishments.

The flaw is and has always been the content acquisition part of the model. Maybe it's just not possible to pay writers on this scale and make a viable business out of it? Maybe it is? Dunno. But as long as the content providers aren't paid directly, you've got a core market of providers for whom the deal makes sense: those monetizing expensive services, those auditioning for paid writing gigs, and those who are willing to forgo payment for "exposure."
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/71783-blogonomics-the-seeking-alpha-model?source=feed#comment-148405 148405
I invite the readers to judge the tone and content of my previous posts about SA's business model for themselves, and not from your, or my, comments about them, or your remembrance of them.

www.billakanodoodahs.c...
www.billakanodoodahs.c...
www.billakanodoodahs.c...

Please, feel free to expound upon the investment required! Revenues per page view, page view totals, clickthru to authors' homepages, income, expenses, etc. I'm all ears! Then we might have a discussion about what level of revenue-sharing was possible, or whether contributors might instead get options on percentage ownership of the site, so they might profit if it is bought out.

I am not campaigning against the option existing. Far from it! If I were monetizing content well enough to be happy with one page view for the many dozens I gave you as a contributor; if I were auditioning for a paid writing job; if I just wanted a lot more people to read my work; you, David, would be the first person I would email. There's no antipathy, it's just that I saw y'all getting money off of my work, and I wanted a cut.

As it is, if you offered revenue share and some tracking for readership and clickthru rates, or a salary, I would probably come back! I'm DEAD serious there.

Ask your editor who emailed me during your last recruitment drive, what was my FIRST question? Revenue share. My SECOND questions (left unanswered) were precisely about the dollars and cents of the business model, so if I've underestimated the investment required, it wasn't because I didn't ask y'all.
]]> Thu, 10 Apr 2008 13:55:17 -0400
I invite the readers to judge the tone and content of my previous posts about SA's business model for themselves, and not from your, or my, comments about them, or your remembrance of them.

www.billakanodoodahs.c...
www.billakanodoodahs.c...
www.billakanodoodahs.c...

Please, feel free to expound upon the investment required! Revenues per page view, page view totals, clickthru to authors' homepages, income, expenses, etc. I'm all ears! Then we might have a discussion about what level of revenue-sharing was possible, or whether contributors might instead get options on percentage ownership of the site, so they might profit if it is bought out.

I am not campaigning against the option existing. Far from it! If I were monetizing content well enough to be happy with one page view for the many dozens I gave you as a contributor; if I were auditioning for a paid writing job; if I just wanted a lot more people to read my work; you, David, would be the first person I would email. There's no antipathy, it's just that I saw y'all getting money off of my work, and I wanted a cut.

As it is, if you offered revenue share and some tracking for readership and clickthru rates, or a salary, I would probably come back! I'm DEAD serious there.

Ask your editor who emailed me during your last recruitment drive, what was my FIRST question? Revenue share. My SECOND questions (left unanswered) were precisely about the dollars and cents of the business model, so if I've underestimated the investment required, it wasn't because I didn't ask y'all.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/71863-stocks-are-the-place-to-be-google-and-apple-in-particular?source=feed#comment-148231 148231
:-)

Mark has 10 months of posts on Seeking Alpha, and a market blog at www.vestopia.com/Blogs... that goes back about a year.

I suggest you do some "due diligence" by reading his material and judging the quality of the content for yourself, without regards to his pedigree.]]> Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:16:57 -0400
:-)

Mark has 10 months of posts on Seeking Alpha, and a market blog at www.vestopia.com/Blogs... that goes back about a year.

I suggest you do some "due diligence" by reading his material and judging the quality of the content for yourself, without regards to his pedigree.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/71783-blogonomics-the-seeking-alpha-model?source=feed#comment-148221 148221
www.billakanodoodahs.c.../
www.billakanodoodahs.c.../
www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

It's a good business model for some writers; for example, if they can monetize the exposure through a very expensive service (newsletters, managing money), if they're auditioning for a writing job, or if they just like being made famous while others make money from it.

Obviously, it's not a good business model for writers that don't fit those categories.]]> Thu, 10 Apr 2008 10:10:42 -0400
www.billakanodoodahs.c.../
www.billakanodoodahs.c.../
www.billakanodoodahs.c.../

It's a good business model for some writers; for example, if they can monetize the exposure through a very expensive service (newsletters, managing money), if they're auditioning for a writing job, or if they just like being made famous while others make money from it.

Obviously, it's not a good business model for writers that don't fit those categories.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/71530-us-ranked-102-in-total-tax-rate-survey?source=feed#comment-146950 146950
The flaw in the WB/PWC study is similar, because they look at the taxes "paid" by a corporation. Listen to me now and believe me later, corporations DON'T PAY TAXES. They COLLECT TAXES and pass them on to their customers. Only INDIVIDUALS pay taxes. Therefore, a country with a scheme that is "better" from the POV of their "modest-sized firm" may actually be a worse abuser, tax-wise, than some other country that didn't do well on this study. They are looking at only PART of the picture.

I believe the only aggregate method that would work for evaluating tax regimes, from a logistical and equitable standpoint, is to measure SPENDING by total government (including local municipalities), in relation to total income for the population. That captures all the taxation, including the inflation/deficit taxation, and captures all the population that is taxed.]]> Tue, 08 Apr 2008 10:39:26 -0400
The flaw in the WB/PWC study is similar, because they look at the taxes "paid" by a corporation. Listen to me now and believe me later, corporations DON'T PAY TAXES. They COLLECT TAXES and pass them on to their customers. Only INDIVIDUALS pay taxes. Therefore, a country with a scheme that is "better" from the POV of their "modest-sized firm" may actually be a worse abuser, tax-wise, than some other country that didn't do well on this study. They are looking at only PART of the picture.

I believe the only aggregate method that would work for evaluating tax regimes, from a logistical and equitable standpoint, is to measure SPENDING by total government (including local municipalities), in relation to total income for the population. That captures all the taxation, including the inflation/deficit taxation, and captures all the population that is taxed.]]>