Seeking Alpha


Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View curreyr's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Learning From The Masters: Q&A Session With Chowder [View article]
    "And for those of you who don't know, Chowder is my real nickname. It was given to me by a friend who is a Yankee fan. I'm from Boston and he thought it would be funny. I liked it, it stuck, and it's what people call me around these parts."

    I always assumed it was a John D. Rockefeller reference ...
    May 14, 2015. 10:52 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lumber Liquidators... And The Golden Fleece [View article]
    That is so, because the graph and footnote indicates that they found rejects, and instead of sending the lot back (as would be normal) removed 100% of the rejects (not just the rejects in a small sample) and sent a purified lot to the lab for testing."

    That is your supposition/interrepta... Honestly, my first read was similar.
    I believe that a more rational explanation is that the "lot" was rejected. You do realize that LL has probably thousands of sku's and each has hundreds of production runs/lots. Add to that multiple suppliers, each of which have differing reliability percentages, the pre-screen of each lot is a necessity.
    Apr 1, 2015. 09:04 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Lumber Liquidators... And The Golden Fleece [View article]
    Reel ken, you're missing the point. Let us say I'm manufacturing aspirin, I make 1 million pills per 'run', those are sent for qualification and random and representative of THAT run. My next run has some malfunction during manufacturing resulting in a product that doesn't pass a 'sniff' test.
    The second batch is rejected a priori to a qualification testing.

    So, my very bad manufacturing process has a 50% failure rate for these 2 runs, but the first 50% are qualified.
    Apr 1, 2015. 07:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Lumber Liquidators... And The Golden Fleece [View article]
    Perhaps it's a case of the inferior product was returned to the supplier.

    If the manufacturer does X number of manufacturing runs (possibly even different SKUs), and Y number of runs doesn't pass the pre-screen, the LL should reject the Y and submit the X-Y for compliance testing.
    Mar 31, 2015. 12:45 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Dividend Aristocrats: Create Your Own Portfolio Or Invest In NOBL? (Part 2) [View article]
    "Maybe i'm just of the mindset that in order to consistently hit home runs you need to first learn to hit the damn ball. "

    No, you first have to step to the plate.
    Mar 18, 2015. 05:45 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Solazyme Closes The Year With An Arbitration Win For Its Intellectual Property [View article]

    I give absolutely no value to a patent portfolio, unless the 'method' of obtaining the specifics of a patent are a 'trade secret'. That is a tough row to hoe. I am making a point of reviewing theirs to see how much method is revealed (other than the obvious GMO of algae).

    Once a patent is filed, the details are public. The details themselves need to be sufficient in order for award, and in many cases are enough to have the 'invention' replicated. If that's the case, unscrupulous parties go free and get while they can. At award of the patent, the holder has recourse, but as you state, usually only the lawyers win.

    Patents are dinosaurs. It is much easier to control a 'trade secret'. It's possible only a few have access to the 'secret', and if the reveal it for monetary gain, can usually sued personally, resulting in financial ruin.

    One aspect that always makes me shake my head is the 'open source' movement. Apply for the patent, open the source, and then have the lawyers free reign defending it (at their own expense, where they take much of the award). Of course 'patents are evil' is the open source mantra (they simply don't get the fact that a patent is 'open').
    Mar 4, 2015. 04:44 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Common Errors Of A Dividend Growth Forecast [View article]

    I wasn't referring to the 'biased' results, but more to the 'non-biased' results.
    From the P123 data, review the 'trades'. I understand you wont share the data (per the other thread), but are there cases that resulted in a sale via your ruleset that would have been an 'exception' per the CCC ruleset?

    The reason for the questioning is that I recall the flurry of articles/comments about how COP had frozen their dividend ... when in fact it was a raise.

    FWIW, in a modelling scenario, I think the rule should have spinoffs sold when delivered, and the proceeds added to the original investment. Then the measure is, do the dividend dollars received exceed the previous period.

    I spent a small amount of time playing with P123, and can see the power, but establishing 'proper' rules does seem complex. Your efforts here are welcome, and I hope my questing doesn't seem like criticism of that effort.
    Mar 4, 2015. 03:17 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Dividend Aristocrats: Should They Be A Part Of Your Investing Decision? (Part 1) [View article]
    David, what you mention about the 'cost' of NOBL is one I have a hard time with as well.
    Being that it is fairly 'new', I wonder how hard it would be to reconcile a DIY version.
    For example say $100k invested in:
    A) NOBL, dividends reinvested on pay date.
    B) Replicate the allocation and re-balance schedule, figure a $10 commission for trades, a modest slippage (large cap volumes and low beta shouldn't have much slippage), and dividends reinvested on pay date.

    I suspect that the difference would fall more toward the yield produced by B versus that provided via A.

    If that is true, the 'cost' of NOBL is much more than the management fee.
    Mar 4, 2015. 02:38 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • 5 Common Errors Of A Dividend Growth Forecast [View article]

    I think one difference as you noted in another recent article is that the guidelines you use are not quite the same as those of the CCC list. The differences are somewhat subtle and may not be something that can be modelled in P123.

    On the notes page of the CCC sheet, Mr. Fish describes what is considered a streak and what constitutes a 'cut/freeze' on the notes tab.

    For example, the CCC list doesn't consider a 'cut/freeze' on the 1yr anniversary of the previous raise. There are other situations I suspect your modelling fails to equal (e.g. splits).

    That said, I appreciate the effort you have done in your articles. A simulation of the rule of "cull if dividend is cut or frozen" seems simple, but in reality can be difficult (e.g. the 'early payers' of 2012, or the 'freeze' of COP after the spinoff, etc).
    Mar 4, 2015. 02:02 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Roth Advantage No One Talks About [View article]
    This is how I maintain my "emergency account".
    Feb 26, 2015. 11:42 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • The Roth Advantage No One Talks About [View article]
    The 5 year waiting period is only for those <59.5 who desire to withdraw their contributions without penalty. Note, gains would be subject to penalty.
    It is also from the first contribution (i.e. last years contribution can be withdrawn if the Roth was start prior to 5 years ago).
    Conversions have their own 5 year "clock" at which point they can be withdrawn without penalty.
    After 59.5, there isn't a 5 year waiting period.
    Feb 26, 2015. 11:40 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Retirement Portfolios: Income Is Critical, But You Need Growth Too [View article]

    I think you miss a part of what bonds can also provide to a portfolio.

    Yes, the income is fixed, but they also have a market value. It is THAT which can be beneficial. They aren't entirely a buy and hold to maturity, more buy and monitor (just like an equity).

    Say you purchased a $10k ~5% bond, collected it's income till now. What's its 'worth'? It depends on the maturity AND the demand. If the equity market plummets due to 'something', you may be wanting some capital to pick up the equity 'bargains'. Guess what, that bond may be worth $12k you can sell to a willing buyer. You have a capital gain as well as the income at precisely the point you want to allocate that into equities.

    I'm a value investor. Show me something 'undervalued' I'm interested. In the mid '90s bonds were cheap, equities not so much. In late '08 when people were running to 'safety', equities were getting oversold and buyers lining up for those '90's long bonds.

    Would I be a net buyer of bonds today? Nope, I don't see the value proposition at this moment due to the rates available.

    Would I be a net buyer of equities today? Possibly, there are some individual choices that are attractive, but I wouldn't say it's a buying spree moment.

    Would I be holding cash? Somewhat, but only for a short duration until an alternative becomes attractive.

    What to do? Personally, I'm easing into what I find least distasteful in the equity markets (of which I'm overweight due to the ongoing bull). Honestly, it kinda sucks.
    Feb 19, 2015. 03:24 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Dividend Champions: 15 Increases Expected In The Next 11 Weeks [View article]
    I think of them as being in the 'Hall of Fame'
    Feb 19, 2015. 01:29 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Project $3 Million Dividend Results - Objectives [View article]
    I also have been through spinoffs, but this one seems odd ...

    At the time, a (roughly) 1/8 spinoff had NO effect on the price of KMB. Wha???

    I expect the 'book' valuation of KMB was considered a wash, but I now have shares in a $2B company for 'free' :)
    Feb 5, 2015. 08:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Project $3 Million Dividend Results - Objectives [View article]
    Surprised no one has mentioned KMB and HYH ...
    Feb 5, 2015. 08:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment