Sun, Dec 21, 2014, 12:43 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

Vanguard 500 Index Inv Message Board

jad1148 79 posts  |  Last Activity: 18 hours ago Member since: Dec 8, 2002
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    How does BRKB Outperform....

    by fredrickson01 Dec 18, 2014 9:34 PM

    Chris, as long as WEB is alive AND BRK hasn't begun paying a regular cash dividend AND unscrupulous stock pumpers continue to attempt to con other folks out of their money (also known as"fleecing the sheep"), I will continue to post.

    Happy Holidays to you too.

  • Reply to

    NCZ's huge gain

    by par7551 Dec 19, 2014 1:10 AM

    Just my opinion, but citing a Market Price per share without citing the corresponding NAV per share really is an exercise in pointlessness.

    Yes, the highest price, YTD, occurred on 3Jul2014, and on that date the Price was $10.09 and the NAV was $8.57 which puts the premium at 17.76% (less than 20%).

    The highest premium, YTD, occurred on 9May2014, 18.74% (less than 20%).

  • Reply to

    NCZ's huge gain

    by par7551 Dec 19, 2014 1:10 AM
    jad1148 jad1148 Dec 19, 2014 10:07 PM Flag

    LOL!

    A market price of $9.50 per share would be a 26.5% premium over NAV ($7.51 per share as of 12/18/2014).

    Take a look at the "Fund Premium/Discount to NAV" chart over on the AllianzGI website. NCZ has never even touched 20%, let alone exceeded it.

  • Reply to

    How does BRKB Outperform....

    by fredrickson01 Dec 18, 2014 9:34 PM
    jad1148 jad1148 Dec 19, 2014 6:39 AM Flag

    IMO, BRK-B "the stock", outperforms BRK-B "the business", for the simple reason that people get excited and bid the price up faster than the business actually grows. Just look at the vast majority of folks who post here. Judging them by their posts, they are unabashed stock pumpers. They buy at every increasing prices because the price has been rising, and, the price rises because they continuously buy at every increasing prices. BRK-B has become a momentum stock. Eventually the music will stop, the bubble will burst, and some poor sucker will get stuck holding this hot potato. Enjoy it while you can. JMO.

  • Reply to

    Less T and VZ, More CTL, TMUS, S and Others

    by roygbivwaves Dec 9, 2014 10:00 PM
    jad1148 jad1148 Dec 18, 2014 5:36 AM Flag

    I was looking at this ETF as an alternative to holding T and VZ. But I'm just going to have to pass on it. I can tolerate the small, year-over-year, capital gain of 2.43% (as of 12/17/2014) but NOT the dramatic change in the annual distribution (a decrease of 30%). I'll stick with the individual stocks.

    Amount payable on:
    $2.251 ... 12/24/2014
    $3.243 ... 12/27/2013

  • Reply to

    Why no comments?

    by retiredafe8 Oct 28, 2014 2:44 PM
    jad1148 jad1148 Dec 15, 2014 5:05 AM Flag

    Check the NCZ page on the US AllianzGI website.

    You should be able to locate it using a search engine and the text string (between the guillemets) below:

    « AllianzGI Convertible & Income Fund II (NCZ) »

  • jad1148 jad1148 Dec 13, 2014 2:09 PM Flag

    hc, thanks for thinking of me. The article was interesting.

    For me, portfolio tweaking is pretty much over, so I spend less and less time here and at other financial web sites. I did take the time to look at a closed end fund and junk bonds in general, but I've never had much interest in either, so nothing came of that. I'm curious to see if GMO's hint that 2250 or greater (next year) for the S&P 500 might be the tipping point, but the current oil induced sell off complicates that bet. I like to think about what GMO's rational might be behind that call. The fact that WEB won't pay 120% of BV/s or more for BRK used to fascinate me, but I've solved that one, at least to my satisfaction, so I'm pretty much done with that too. Which is great! That leaves more time to pursue my other interests/hobbies.

  • Reply to

    85% Now, JADdie:

    by spirach2 Dec 8, 2014 11:00 AM
    jad1148 jad1148 Dec 8, 2014 12:03 PM Flag

    LOL, Spirach2.

    I did get a chuckle out of your post, #214340, on the other board today.

    So you now admit that you've been waiting six long years to finally sell your BRK-B. That goes a long ways towards explaining why you're so vile and hateful. By the way, my guess is your reference to hemorrhoids was no doubt subconsciously induced by your own condition. That's what sitting on a trade for that many years will do.

    Just a bit of advice, don't take too long exiting this time, you may have effectively now "rung the bell" on BRK with your nonsense.

    By the way, I see you've been badgering commoncents33 on the other board. I don't remember if it was him or someone else, but whoever labeled you an "Internet Bully", was spot on.

    Hogs & quiches to you too, Sweetums.

  • Reply to

    NCZ & NCV still trading big premiums to NAV

    by nuljava75 Dec 7, 2014 7:28 PM
    jad1148 jad1148 Dec 8, 2014 7:29 AM Flag

    « how does your annualized rate of return look ... »

    I've wondered about that too.

    Based on the historical data on the Allianz website, I've estimated that the annual total return since inception (a little more than 11 years), for someone who has NOT reinvested distributions, has been about 4.3%.

    Date, NAV/s, Mkt P/s:
    07/31/2003, $14.33, $15.00;
    and
    12/05/2014, $7.76, $8.75.
    Total Distributions paid between dates : $15.40562

    ATVPIC-1 = ( ( $15.40562 + $8.75 ) / $15.00 ) ^ ( 365.25 days per year / 4145 days ) - 1 = 4.29%

    By the way, that's not a rigorous "Time Value of Money" calculation, but it is something most folks can relate to.

    But that total return is pretty much in line with what I would expect from a high yield / junk fixed income fund. IMO, you get a high current income yield today in exchange for accepting a slow, gradual loss of capital over time.

  • jad1148 jad1148 Dec 7, 2014 8:15 AM Flag

    Morning, hc.

    The bottom line is spending 35 billion dollars to buy back shares at $115 per share (~119% of BV/s) would DECREASE book value per share by ~2.7%.

    Before : 237.456 B$ / 2.464221 BSO = $96.36

    After : ( 237.456 - 35 B$) / ( 2.464221 - 35 / 115 BSO ) = $93.74

    It really is a shame that WEB and his devote muppetts focus on YOY changes in book value per share because FCFE/s, a crude guesstimate of what could be paid out as a regular dividend, would actually INCREASE by ~14% after that buyback.

    Oh well, maybe you'll just have to wait for WEB's son, HGB, or his grandson, HWB, to make that shareholder friendly move.

    Speaking of lucky grandchildren, if you bored and need a chuckle, check out Ettore's granddaughter, Caroline, driving grandpa's 14 M#$%$ car through the streets of Paris.

    « Bugatti Royale aux grands concours d'élégance de St-Cloud »

  • jad1148 jad1148 Dec 4, 2014 7:10 AM Flag

    yezzmann, your posts remind me of our 11-year old yellow Labrador retriever. She walks 10 feet and then squats to mark her territory, and then she walks another 10 feet and squats again, and then she walks another 10 feet and ..., I'm sure you get the idea.

  • jad1148 jad1148 Dec 4, 2014 6:25 AM Flag

    Good morning hc. The good news is: at least one CEO is honest enought to say it.

    « 2% to 3% growth feels perpetual: Wal-Mart CEO »

  • jad1148 jad1148 Dec 3, 2014 9:48 PM Flag

    « Always the positive mind set. »

    Tom, you and I are polar opposites.

    I see myself as a defensive pessimist.

    If you, or anyone else who might be reading this, cares enough to want to understand what that is, I can recommend the following article (it is online) from The Atlantic:

    OLGA KHAZAN's "The Upside of Pessimism" - The theory of defensive pessimism suggests that imagining—and planning for—worst-case scenarios can be more effective than trying to think positively.

    By the way, I am of the opinion that optimists were partially responsible for the deaths of the crew of the Challenger. If you care to read something in that direction, I can recommend the following (inexpensive paperback):

    Edward R. Tufte's: "Visual and Statistical Thinking: Displays of Evidence for Making Decisions"

  • jad1148 jad1148 Dec 1, 2014 6:53 PM Flag

    Thanks, I just finished reading it. I liked his comparison of cultures, IBM vs JNJ.

  • jad1148 jad1148 Nov 29, 2014 2:29 PM Flag

    Beach understands the point I'm trying to make. If you get RID of the multiple of book value per share metric, and depending on what you decide to replace it with, then you just might be able to make the case that share repurchases increase the value.

    IMO, WEB painted himself into a corner decades ago by over emphasizing book value per share and its year over year growth.

    I really don't want to get into another BRK valuation discussion. I've done this numerous times over more than a decade and it has never, ever, lead to anything remotely useful. But you folks have fun with it. I'll watch from the sidelines.

  • jad1148 jad1148 Nov 29, 2014 10:33 AM Flag

    hc, as long as folks continue to value BRK using some fixed multiple of book value per share, repurchasing shares at a price per share that is greater than book value per share does not make sense, arithmetically. Book value per share decreases after a buyback because the absolute book value (the numerator) falls faster than the number of shares outstanding (the denominator) does. Change the valuation model to something else, something that is NOT based on book value per share, and it can become a very different story. Besides, he has, theoretically speaking, already bought everything that is currently inside of BRK at 1X book value per share. Why would he want to buy it ("the same old same old") a second time at a higher multiple?

    As usual, just my opinions.

  • jad1148 jad1148 Nov 29, 2014 6:34 AM Flag

    Now THAT was funny!

  • Reply to

    New Acquisition?

    by beachlawyer2003 Nov 28, 2014 10:43 AM
    jad1148 jad1148 Nov 29, 2014 6:31 AM Flag

    Yes, hc, it is rare, but sometimes WEB gets the dirty end of the stick, Dexter shoes and GenRe come to mind.

    My first BRK-B purchase was on 28Sep1998, around the time of the GenRe deal. The thinking in the press at the time was that it was a brilliant trade for WEB. He had successfully dumped some of BRK's grossly overvalued equity portfolio (remember KO traded at an average P/E of 51.3 that year) on the unsuspecting GenRe shareholders in exchange for their company and its fairly valued fixed income portfolio. But, IMO, they got the better of him on that deal, their portfolio also included a very wormy derivatives portfolio that took him years to work off.

    Did you notice that the all of the railroad stocks (UNP, NSC, CSX and CNI) fell yesterday? I'm sure [sarcasm intended] that BRK's cheerleaders will insist that what was once BNI, was the lone exception.

  • Reply to

    New Acquisition?

    by beachlawyer2003 Nov 28, 2014 10:43 AM
    jad1148 jad1148 Nov 28, 2014 11:42 AM Flag

    « why do you think an acquisition will include using stock? »

    Seriously, brkahoo, where have you been all these years?

    Isn't it obvious by now, that WEB gets his jollies by taking advantage of potential newbie shareholders by trading them his grossly overvalued stock for their undervalued shares?

    A BNI shareholder who walked away from his deal, sold his shares, and bought UNP instead, would have made almost twice the return he would have made holding BRK-B over the last five years.

    Five year (11/25/2009-11/25/2014) ATRs, based on Yahoo's adjusted closes: UNP, 33.0%; and BRK-B 16.8%.

    I pity the poor fool who is forced to trade with WEB.

  • jad1148 jad1148 Nov 27, 2014 12:40 PM Flag

    Thanks, hc, I'll keep it in mind, and happy holidays to you and yours.

VFINX
190.89+0.87(+0.46%)Dec 19 6:25 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.
Under Armour, Inc.
NYSEFri, Dec 19, 2014 4:04 PM EST
ImmunoGen, Inc.
NASDAQFri, Dec 19, 2014 4:00 PM EST
3M Company
NYSEFri, Dec 19, 2014 4:04 PM EST