JOE is very well positioned for the future. The company has massive valuable assets with low carrying costs and high cash reserves. The company's management is well-connected and business deals involving the assets have been coming and will continue to grow according to most experts.
There have been big mouths on this board who say that there is no inflation and inflation is nothing to worry about. Well, that's just plain stupid. If you look at the current account deficits and/or know anything about history you will know that Florida land is one of the best investments you can make in terms of inflation protection and capital preservation if and only if you know real estate like the back of your hand. I would not bet against JOE.
I thought Einhorn was intelligent and so I assumed he would drop his JOE nonsense about 1-2 years ago or so. It looks like I was wrong and Einhorn is very stubborn and lacks judgement. If he had half of a brain he would go long on JOE. Mark this post. GLTA.
we should believe that you are brilliant enough to mark your post and that Einhorn doesn't have half a brain?
and that is supposed to help the stock. i would say your post is pretty smart if you are really short JOE because it is so utterly naive.
the first chart shows that Einhorn has done well over the past two years short of JOE; the second and third show that the loudmouth`JOE negatives who have been around since 2005 like nam, indypass and myself continue to be right on. on the other hand, many JOE long loudmouths who have come and gone over those years, who have predicted $450 share price and demanded "mark this post" have demonstrated little or no understanding of this incredible shrinking company.
Thank you for the message. You are concentrating on the past whilst I am concentrating on the future in terms of JOE. Times change, my friend. Times change. Ever hear of the business cycle? I was expecting you to mention CPI and PPI but it sounds like you are conceding the inflation argument and simply resting on Eihorn's dated research along with the past history of the company (under different leadership). Is this correct? Please don't miss the forest for the trees. The bear assumption should be that XYZ RE Co is land rich and cash poor and by shorting the stock or opening bearish positions XYZ RE Co will be forced to make ackward financial arrangements or destructive arrangements at which point the stock would drop very low and the bears would close out the position and perhaps go long. This cannot easily happen at JOE since Berk took over. This situation is almost impossible now. JOE is cash rich and land rich. Land is wealth. JOE has incredible wealth and has shown fine leadership in terms of the new team. I think it's unfair to lump the new JOE with the old JOE. I'm pretty sure you are one of the folks who said don't worry about inflation. It sounds like changing your story now and that's smart. You have to be flexible to make money.
That said, I don't disagree with you that RE might be a better bet than JOE stock. Making general and uneducated negative statements about JOE (a common occurrence on this board and in the WSJ and other trash rags for that matter) is counterintuitive and shows lack of long view insight in my humble opinion. A few years ago when Einhorn did his research things were different. GLTYA.