tech/a
No Ordinary Duck
- Joined
- 14 October 2004
- Posts
- 20,447
- Reactions
- 6,477
Is there anything tangible you can offer about how you came to this conclusion?
Well as tangible as I am comfortable with.
I'm arguing that investors/traders are valuing a company on a daily basis.
KMD is no different.
For it to drop 50% in price and needing a 100% increase to return to old highs
I personally think that My and miners sentiments are being played out in the perceived
value of the company.
You can argue till your blue in the face that book value indicates its a bargain but unless
the masses agree (And one day they might) Its not going to return to anything like old highs.
In Fact it will have trouble closing the last gap---but hey what do the masses know?
If things change Ill see it all in good time---just like everyone else.
View attachment 62708
Currently reading "Margin of Safety" by Seth Klarman of Baupost Capital on the advice of a seemingly retired ASF poster 'Sinner' - who is one seriously high-IQ guy. OMG. Some people here are right out of the box.
DS, very interesting observations as usual.
Funny thing is, I bought $500 worth of gear last weekend at KMD. This seasons stuff is actually quite fashionable and I got suckered into their sales technique - can't resist anything that says 40% off most stock...
I do not get to the snow as often as I would like, but there is no way me or any of my mates would wear Kathmandu
DS, very interesting observations as usual.
I have one question - how have you converted those qualitative observations into a quantitative measure to determine future profitiability of the business? This is something I am currently battling with my fundamental systems I'm developing, I would be interested in hearing how you approach this issue - particularly using KMD as an example.
Funny thing is, I bought $500 worth of gear last weekend at KMD. This seasons stuff is actually quite fashionable and I got suckered into their sales technique - can't resist anything that says 40% off most stock...
Re your question on GDP and EPS...Hussman has done good work on this. If you look at most of his "shorthand" valuation methods (shown here http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc130318.htm) you can see there is an assumption (for US stocks) of 6.3% PA EPS growth.
Thanks for this reference Sinner.
Weird that Hussman would assume EPS growth matches nominal GDP growth (I agree with his assertion that 6.3% is too high for the level of productivity gains being realized nowadays). In a closed economy, that would only happen if all innovation occurred within the existing companies, none from new companies entering the economy. Further, these companies would never dilute as they grew. Certainly, it is plausible for total corporate profits to grow at the same rate as the economy, but that is different to EPS growth.
Something of interest from MSCI Barra:
View attachment 62781
It's an assumption/inference made with full understanding of the shortfalls (the important bit is to know the assumptions and be explicit about them), that basically over the long term, peak to peak (which is a very different measure from correlation between the two timeseries), they match.
From FT:
View attachment 62834
View attachment 62835
I just love how international relations works...
I sympathise with China. It's Eastern approaches are completely controlled by the US. Great powers, and rising super powers need to be given space. America needs to realise this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?