Sat, Feb 28, 2015, 11:24 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

The Coca-Cola Company Message Board

banmate7 438 posts  |  Last Activity: Feb 25, 2015 7:55 PM Member since: Jun 7, 1999
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    CBI = Convergence of Value and Momentum Growth

    by banmate7 Feb 25, 2015 1:22 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 25, 2015 7:55 PM Flag

    I'm pretty consistent about the aspect of time. I've occasionally quoted Graham and Buffett about "the market being a voting machine in the short term, but a weighing machine in the longer term". Like you, I definitely think CBI will be fairly evaluated in due time...and am waiting for that $90 with smooth patience!

    :)

    I'm also looking to go in again. I'm waiting for perhaps 1 more pullback. I want to average down my $61 average share price. All the best.

  • Reply to

    Saudi/OPEC production cut?

    by bobinseco Feb 23, 2015 3:18 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 25, 2015 2:57 PM Flag

    Bob, I think is my simpler explanation. If for nothing else, there is history here, as the Saudis have moved to crush competition before, especially North American.

    They know our free society corporations are their most formidable opponents. They see a future of competing alternate energies amidst growing North American fossil fuel companies. With the latter leveraging technology in places like Iran, Venezuela, and so, eventually.

    I really believe the Saudis panicked a bit and jumped the gun. I think they'd be better off sacrificing some market share, but yet growing revenue and profit margin. The next few decades will still feature oil, with demand linearly rising, so there is plenty for everybody.

    Last but not least, the Saudis could stand to diversify and liberalize. Commodity oil lets them be lazy and, as you alluded too, a supporter of terrorism. That is something I can't gloss over.

    That's my 2 cents. Whatever the case, fortunately North American oil will prosper. So will us investors. All the best man.

  • Reply to

    Saudi/OPEC production cut?

    by bobinseco Feb 23, 2015 3:18 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 25, 2015 1:55 PM Flag

    The Saudis need $80/barrel to avoid using sovereign dollar reserves to fund operations. I don't know what the burn rate is. But obviously the longer oil stays under this amount, the more they will burn...especially the lower the price of oil.

    Can the Saudis withstand this better than North Americans? Keep in mind the strengths of the latter: operating in a diversified economy, ample capitalization, the ability to scale up and down quickly, and short supply chains. It's fellow OPEC nations that the Saudis actually are throwing under the bus here...and, as discussed, possibly themselves in the longer term.

    I'm obviously betting on the North Americans. TRN is 1 play. I also own AA, AWK, CBI, CNI, DNOW, DOW, DVN, NOV, & RDS-B. I've bought all at deep value. Most are winning handily...but I expect even my losers like CBI to crush the S&P500 over time.

  • Mr. Market is a paranoid schizophrenic. One day he sees an angel. The other day he he see a demon. But occasionally he gets it right and sees a hard working soul.

    I'm now down only 20%. Again, I have am extremely confident of routing the S&P500 with the next 12 - 18 months in CBI. You get a rare combination here of reasonable value and momentum growth chaser potential.

    Sure, the cash flow and debt obfuscated things a bit in the value camp. But I think the smoke is clearing here. I also don't expect any surprises due to the Shaw acquisition. This was one of those times an investor had to dig a bit to evaluate earnings quality.

    It's a philosophical moment for me here. Time and again, the street misleads people by projecting the future. And people with their biases abandon an alleged sinking ship or jump on what is allegedly a rocket...no matter what the price.

    Few ships sink. Few rockets land gently. Price matters.

    Ok, my pontification is over.

    :)

    I'm just happy happy that CBI is a solid company. Patience will reward me.

  • Reply to

    out on a limb

    by on_pphire Feb 20, 2015 10:56 AM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 20, 2015 2:12 PM Flag

    You can't accurately predict the future. At least not in the intermediate. Anything between high frequency time, meaning milliseconds, and at least a few years horizon is random chance.

    I'm basically making a plug for value investing. I react to price movements, as opposed to anticipating them. My only anticipation is that an instrument selling beneath fair value will eventually revert to its normal selling multiple...in due time, beating the S&P500 over the same time horizon when it does...assuming it's a sound business.

    This for me is the highest odds for consistent success. Technical trading? Short term prediction? It just doesn't work consistently for the vast majority...except the big money interests that thrive off of this.

    TRN will do well over the long haul. My initial positions bought in 2007 are now up 144% with a 12.9% CAGR. I added not too long ago at $36. So in total, I'm now up 90% with a 12.4% CAGR...beating the S&P500 in both contexts.

    Keep in mind that when TRN has significant alpha. When it starts to revert to value...from a current PE of 7.7 to a 15 year average PE of 15.6...the gains will really be impressive.

    At least that's how I am playing this. All the best.

  • Reply to

    Shorts responsible for upside breakout on K Y

    by darockbass Feb 18, 2015 8:14 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 19, 2015 10:51 AM Flag

    The lawsuit is simple greed at work. It's a collusion between 3 main parties: a defeated business rival of TRN with an axe to grind; lawyers; and politicians. The smell of money attracts scavengers. Ironically, the term unholy trinity comes to mind in this context.

    One can argue that this is an effective check and balance. It keeps corporations honest. Remember, it goes both ways. Companies have fleeced investors and workers as well.

    It is what it is. An intelligent investor accounts for this. Market vagaries will consistently hurt short term traders. The main defense is to buy shares of solid companies at excellent values and stay the long term course. Otherwise dollar cost average in index funds.

    Alternate ways of investing are more likely to result in under performance or losses. "Shorts" in particular are getting squeezed now. It might sound offensive, but I have no sympathy, as they too are part of the scavengers I described. I never understood why shorting is even allowed, but again, it is what it is.

    Let them feel the pain. Heck, investors like me are enabled by the shorts and short term market manipulating interests. They bring liquidity and create value buying opportunities...which I'll always take advantage of.

    I think TRN is an excellent buy now. I think the lawsuit won't result in serious damages, although I concede it is a low odds possibility. Best of luck.

  • Reply to

    Why up?

    by fred_woodstone Feb 18, 2015 3:19 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 18, 2015 6:36 PM Flag

    You are so right.

    CBI making $.01 in the coming years.

    Thanks for that tip...you genius you.

  • Reply to

    Buffet keeps stake in CBI unchanged

    by rhett_pickles Feb 17, 2015 4:48 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 17, 2015 7:24 PM Flag

    This is not insignificant. Interesting enough as well, Berkshire sold all its stake in Exxon. For me, this corroborates that oil and CBI need not go hand in hand...even if the market seems to think so. Besides, oil seems to be stabilizing in the $50 range.

    I'm still looking to pull the trigger and go in another $5k on top of a $26k basis averaged at $63. I'm confident long term regardless. CBI is a great company from what we can tell. I envy folks getting in at these prices.

  • banmate7 banmate7 Feb 10, 2015 9:06 PM Flag

    Like I said, the trolls reign now.

    :)

  • Reply to

    I hate to say it - But

    by dhudson100 Dec 30, 2014 4:22 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 10, 2015 6:21 PM Flag

    Hi Ski. Good to hear from you.

    I'm not so hard on MM. As we discussed before, I really think he meant well. So did most of the GTAT enthusiasts that posted with us throughout the past few years.

    It all comes back to TG. I'll say it again and again. He shamelessly skimmed shareholder wealth whilst pulling a glorified long term pump and dump.

    Now that the smoke has cleared, there's little chance he didn't understand that GTAT could never deliver sapphire in requisite quantity and quality. It was part of the pump and dump. A hail mary with Apple to keep stoking speculative fires. All so TG and his team could execute their letter of the law sales of equity.

    There is little chance the spirit of the law will prevail. I understand that shares can't be restored, not even to some nominal fractional value. But if it were so inclined, I think the SEC could pin something fraudulent on TG. As we also discussed, there is a lot of berth for executives to do unethical things.

    The last laugh was surely this bonus row. Wow. Even double wow how some posters defended this.

    Good idea with the dividend blue chip idea.

  • Reply to

    Just a Thought - What if Apple

    by dhudson100 Feb 5, 2015 8:49 AM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 10, 2015 11:55 AM Flag

    Brutally correct. Apple gave GTAT to make good on claims of producing sapphire in sufficient quantity and quality. GTAT obviously failed.

    GLW continues to develop the smart device cover screen space. In concert with Apple. Never discount 100+ years of history in materials science space that has a significant barrier to entry.

    Always treat speculatively any newcomer into the space. As was obviously with GTAT.

  • Reply to

    I hate to say it - But

    by dhudson100 Dec 30, 2014 4:22 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 9, 2015 10:16 PM Flag

    I guess any equipment in producing sapphire suddenly has not much compelling value. At least not in mobile device covers.

    GTAT continues to be a farcical endeavor. This is indeed Dante's "Divine Comedy". Only when the comedy is macabre, it's literally not divine. Diabolical really.

    I wish the SEC would do something about this.

  • Reply to

    Guard Rails are safe!

    by cohen_hs Feb 6, 2015 10:39 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 9, 2015 11:15 AM Flag

    Bob, I shared your fears. Actually, I still do. To your point, I don't underestimate the greed of legislators, lawyers, & plaintiffs colluding to suck money out of even the innocent.

    But it does increasingly look like TRN is innocent of any wrongdoing...except for not notifying the proper agencies of changes in design. I doubt that this can result in a significant assessment against TRN, but of course one never knows.

    Right now, I'm more positive. Fingers crossed.

  • Reply to

    Guard Rails are safe!

    by cohen_hs Feb 6, 2015 10:39 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 9, 2015 11:13 AM Flag

    This is extremely positive news. This again takes away the only legitimate factor speaking against TRN. The current price is excellent in this context...as fundamentals look very good, especially at this valuation.

    TRN is more than oil transportation.

  • banmate7 banmate7 Feb 7, 2015 3:34 PM Flag

    I know you're trolling. But here's something for thoughtful posters.

    Here are my 2 GLW positions:

    date shares total price $/share
    13-Feb-2011 210 $2,810.35 $13.38 basis
    14-Dec-2011 152 $2,003.19 $13.18 basis
    30-Mar-2012 1.94 $27.15 $13.98 div
    29-Jun-2012 2.13 $27.30 $12.84 div
    28-Sep-2012 2.1 $27.46 $13.08 div
    14-Dec-2012 2.62 $33.14 $12.62 div
    28-Mar-2013 2.52 $33.37 $13.23 div
    28-Jun-2013 2.64 $37.33 $14.15 div
    30-Sep-2013 2.58 $37.60 $14.57 div
    13-Dec-2013 2.22 $37.85 $17.06 div
    31-Mar-2014 1.82 $38.08 $20.89 div
    30-Jun-2014 1.743 $38.26 $21.94 div
    30-Sep-2014 1.929 $38.43 $19.92 div
    12-Dec-2014 1.797 $38.62 $21.49 div

    total gain: 95.17%
    CAGR: 20.09%

    GLW shares total price $/share
    28-Apr-2008 100 $2,581.95 $25.82 basis
    28-Apr-2008 100 $2,570.00 $25.70 basis
    30-Jun-2008 0.43 $10.00 $23.26 div
    30-Sep-2008 0.66 $10.02 $15.14 div
    16-Dec-2008 1.14 $10.05 $8.83 div
    31-Mar-2009 0.76 $10.11 $13.22 div
    30-Jun-2009 0.63 $10.15 $16.01 div
    30-Sep-2009 0.67 $10.18 $15.13 div
    18-Dec-2009 0.55 $10.22 $18.58 div
    31-Mar-2010 0.51 $10.24 $20.20 div
    30-Jun-2010 0.63 $10.27 $16.33 div
    30-Sep-2010 0.56 $10.30 $18.33 div
    17-Dec-2010 0.55 $10.33 $18.75 div
    31-Mar-2011 0.5 $10.36 $20.85 div
    30-Jun-2011 0.58 $10.38 $17.96 div
    9-Aug-2011 300 $4,220.65 $14.07 basis
    30-Sep-2011 2.03 $25.41 $12.52 div
    16-Dec-2011 2.89 $38.27 $13.24 div
    25-Jan-2012 381 $5,003.86 $13.13 basis
    30-Mar-2012 4.8 $67.06 $13.98 div
    29-Jun-2012 5.25 $67.42 $12.84 div
    28-Sep-2012 5.18 $67.81 $13.08 div
    1-Nov-2012 425 $5,101.70 $12.00 basis
    14-Dec-2012 9.52 $120.09 $12.62 div
    28-Mar-2013 9.14 $120.95 $13.23 div
    28-Jun-2013 9.56 $135.30 $14.15 div
    30-Sep-2013 9.35 $136.25 $14.57 div
    13-Dec-2013 8.05 $137.19 $17.05 div
    31-Mar-2014 6.608 $137.99 $20.88 div
    30-Jun-2014 6.319 $138.65 $21.94 div
    30-Sep-2014 6.993 $139.29 $19.92 div
    12-Dec-2014 6.514 $139.99 $21.49 div

    total gain: 74.80%
    CAGR: 14.41%

    GLW is a great company led by find leadership.

  • Reply to

    GLW is Steady, If Not Spectacular

    by banmate7 Feb 7, 2015 12:49 AM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 7, 2015 1:55 PM Flag

    I'm reading "The Intelligent Investor" by Benjamin Graham. I'm basically a value investor. I also adapt, as suggested by Graham, his principles to current conditions...like Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger do as well.

    That latter 2 said: it's better to pay a fair price for a great company rather than a great price for a fair company".

    GLW is a great company. It will be in my portfolio probably for the rest of my life. I'll keep buying on dips, at or below fair value. And then let time work its magic.

  • I'm here again to pay my respects. Especially now that GTAT is officially done and buried. Hence I lay down a metaphorical bouquet of flowers.

    But I still hope for justice. Tom Gutierrez still is laughing. Probably maniacally.

    Can the SEC do something? Or even if they could, would they? Probably not.

    GTAT management got away with a serious crime. At least in the realm of ethics. But in the realm of the law...hell, welcome to wall street.

  • Reply to

    GLW is Steady, If Not Spectacular

    by banmate7 Feb 7, 2015 12:49 AM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 7, 2015 12:56 AM Flag

    What I want to illustrate here is value investing. I didn't do too shabby with GLW. Both CAGRs are well above the S&P500 historical average of 8%. Mind you, I get that this index has handily beaten GLW in the time frame of my 2nd position...but not against my 1st position.

    But let's see in another 5 years. I expect GLW to gradually come to closer to a valuation worthy of a decent dividend bearing blue chip. I think GLW will maintain impressive CAGRs.

    All the best.

  • Here are my 2 positions:

    GLW shares total price $/share
    13-Feb-2011 210 $2,810.35 $13.38 basis
    14-Dec-2011 152 $2,003.19 $13.18 basis
    30-Mar-2012 1.94 $27.15 $13.98 div
    29-Jun-2012 2.13 $27.30 $12.84 div
    28-Sep-2012 2.1 $27.46 $13.08 div
    14-Dec-2012 2.62 $33.14 $12.62 div
    28-Mar-2013 2.52 $33.37 $13.23 div
    28-Jun-2013 2.64 $37.33 $14.15 div
    30-Sep-2013 2.58 $37.60 $14.57 div
    13-Dec-2013 2.22 $37.85 $17.06 div
    31-Mar-2014 1.82 $38.08 $20.89 div
    30-Jun-2014 1.743 $38.26 $21.94 div
    30-Sep-2014 1.929 $38.43 $19.92 div
    12-Dec-2014 1.797 $38.62 $21.49 div

    total gain: 95.17%
    CAGR: 20.09%

    GLW shares total price $/share
    28-Apr-2008 100 $2,581.95 $25.82 basis
    28-Apr-2008 100 $2,570.00 $25.70 basis
    30-Jun-2008 0.43 $10.00 $23.26 div
    30-Sep-2008 0.66 $10.02 $15.14 div
    16-Dec-2008 1.14 $10.05 $8.83 div
    31-Mar-2009 0.76 $10.11 $13.22 div
    30-Jun-2009 0.63 $10.15 $16.01 div
    30-Sep-2009 0.67 $10.18 $15.13 div
    18-Dec-2009 0.55 $10.22 $18.58 div
    31-Mar-2010 0.51 $10.24 $20.20 div
    30-Jun-2010 0.63 $10.27 $16.33 div
    30-Sep-2010 0.56 $10.30 $18.33 div
    17-Dec-2010 0.55 $10.33 $18.75 div
    31-Mar-2011 0.5 $10.36 $20.85 div
    30-Jun-2011 0.58 $10.38 $17.96 div
    9-Aug-2011 300 $4,220.65 $14.07 basis
    30-Sep-2011 2.03 $25.41 $12.52 div
    16-Dec-2011 2.89 $38.27 $13.24 div
    25-Jan-2012 381 $5,003.86 $13.13 basis
    30-Mar-2012 4.8 $67.06 $13.98 div
    29-Jun-2012 5.25 $67.42 $12.84 div
    28-Sep-2012 5.18 $67.81 $13.08 div
    1-Nov-2012 425 $5,101.70 $12.00 basis
    14-Dec-2012 9.52 $120.09 $12.62 div
    28-Mar-2013 9.14 $120.95 $13.23 div
    28-Jun-2013 9.56 $135.30 $14.15 div
    30-Sep-2013 9.35 $136.25 $14.57 div
    13-Dec-2013 8.05 $137.19 $17.05 div
    31-Mar-2014 6.608 $137.99 $20.88 div
    30-Jun-2014 6.319 $138.65 $21.94 div
    30-Sep-2014 6.993 $139.29 $19.92 div
    12-Dec-2014 6.514 $139.99 $21.49 div

    total gain: 74.80%
    CAGR: 14.41%

  • Reply to

    Test results just out

    by lionelman17 Feb 6, 2015 12:19 PM
    banmate7 banmate7 Feb 6, 2015 7:12 PM Flag

    This is very POSITIVE new for us TRN investors. Now I am really confident and assured.

    I've owned TRN since 2006. I will keep owning it. I ultimately buy the business, not the market. Suffice it to say, TRN is a great business.

    By the way, I'm reading "The Intelligent Investor" by Benjamin Graham. Methodically. Taking notes. Putting together a concise summary that I use in my analysis.

    I've always been a value investor. But reading the definitive text of the greatest proponent of value investing is illuminating. Especially in the context of TRN.

    Now's the time to go on the offensive with TRN. I'm averaged in at $16, as I bought at $36 a few months ago...but I have dry powder and am willing to deploy it here. We will see.

KO
43.30+0.84(+1.98%)Feb 27 4:01 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Aruba Networks, Inc.
NASDAQFri, Feb 27, 2015 4:00 PM EST