ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Stock and Investment Talk

Had to google it myself, but:


IBM in 1992 beat Apple by 15 years.
I think the iPhone was the first widely adopted and successful smart phones that revolutionized society.

Better?
:)
 
Next two weeks could be rocky between COVID news cycle and tax selling. Glad I own CVS. May grab Clorox for short-term trade, but wouldn’t be upset if I had to hold on for a while. Hope to pick up MSFT if there is a major dip. I have a feeling that in the not too distant future MSTeams will crush Zoom and MSWord will have an e-sign feature better than DocuSign.
 
Next two weeks could be rocky between COVID news cycle and tax selling. Glad I own CVS. May grab Clorox for short-term trade, but wouldn’t be upset if I had to hold on for a while. Hope to pick up MSFT if there is a major dip. I have a feeling that in the not too distant future MSTeams will crush Zoom and MSWord will have an e-sign feature better than DocuSign.
Got MSFT at $228 last March. Not selling for a long, long, long time.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: redking
Got MSFT at $228 last March. Not selling for a long, long, long time.
MSFT is one that I regret not buying. It was a lay-up. Unless there is some disruptive platform that comes along to service everyday corporate America, I don’t see how MSTeams won’t own that space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rutgersguy1
MSFT is one that I regret not buying. It was a lay-up. Unless there is some disruptive platform that comes along to service everyday corporate America, I don’t see how MSTeams won’t own that space.
I bought all of the big techs except for AAPL. At the time, it didn't drop too much and was still above FMV (based on Morningstar). Could have got it for below $120. Oh well! It was the first time I ever bought stocks. Got AMZN for under $3k, GOOGL for under $2k, FB for $260'ish, and TSLA for $570.
 
Its ironic that Apple was the king of innovation and is now considered cautious and conservative.
Well I think they are innovative (or have been at least..feel like you see features from other manufacturers lately and then Apple comes around) in terms of products. But in terms of the company as a whole and transformational strategy etc not sure they’ve ever really been all that bold on that front.

They literally have a couple hundred billion in cash reserves. If Icahn (I think it was him) didn’t push for share buybacks (not a fan of buybacks myself) and dividends awhile back they’d have even more lol. That’s about the “riskiest” thing they’ve done with their reserves. They’re kind of like me with my investing lol. I can afford to be a little riskier than I am but I’m not haha.

On some level, I don’t blame them. If you’re not sure what to do or don’t have the expertise you just end up wasting money. See Steve Ballmer and his misadventures with Microsoft back in the day. They too had money to burn. But just because you have the money to burn doesn’t mean you should.
 
MSFT is one that I regret not buying. It was a lay-up. Unless there is some disruptive platform that comes along to service everyday corporate America, I don’t see how MSTeams won’t own that space.
I said the same way back when the whole PCs are dying and secular decline thing was really hitting them. I didn’t buy that premise. I’m like they’re in the guts of so many enterprises and no one is removing them even if they don’t like the software etc..it takes too much effort and is too costly. Lo and behold look at how deep they go into enterprise and even more than before.
 
Question is are you always 20% in Cash at all times though...at some point it all has to be invested until you find new cash or sell other positions outright
I typically always keep 10%-20% cash in FZCXX (fidelity gov’t mmkt) mainly as an emergency fund but also to capitalize on opportunities. If I drop below that range I’ll usually replenish it with profit taking or new cash that comes in. Curious to hear other approaches.
 
I typically always keep 10%-20% cash in FZCXX (fidelity gov’t mmkt) mainly as an emergency fund but also to capitalize on opportunities. If I drop below that range I’ll usually replenish it with profit taking or new cash that comes in. Curious to hear other approaches.
The “rule” is 6-12 months of annual expenses. But it really depends on where you are in life. I’m in FOLM mode and keep 20% in cash and 10% in relatively short duration fixed income.
 
The “rule” is 6-12 months of annual expenses. But it really depends on where you are in life. I’m in FOLM mode and keep 20% in cash and 10% in relatively short duration fixed income.
#bear
We think of our cash and investments are 2 completely separate piles of money. Both are on autopilot for saving and contributions. Sometimes we reallocate our extra monthly income to one bucket or another, but that isn't too common.
 
#bear
We think of our cash and investments are 2 completely separate piles of money. Both are on autopilot for saving and contributions. Sometimes we reallocate our extra monthly income to one bucket or another, but that isn't too common.
You mean your investments are 100% invested and your cash is 100% in cash? 😀
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2Kplus20
You mean your investments are 100% invested and your cash is 100% in cash? 😀
1gzf5o.gif
 
Question is are you always 20% in Cash at all times though...at some point it all has to be invested until you find new cash or sell other positions outright
I was 3-4% cash recently. Sold a bunch of losers. Many of which were high beta. Could have sold for a profit just a couple weeks back.


Edit: this is strictly my investing assets. I do have additional cash in the bank. About 15%, though I did just have a big house expense which will put a dent in that.
 
Last edited:
CW giving the haters the middle finger. Good stuff!

I have wondered, given where these stocks were, with the lofty valuations, why not rotate(at that point) towards more value, let those valuations come in, and then jump back in. But that's not what she is. She's an investor of fwd looking disruptive companies. She doesn't change who she is based on the valuations. For good or bad.

Now the haters like to point to this year as evidence that she does not know what she is doing. But you look at the whole body of work and the haters have a very flimsy argument. Though it will be interesting to see how she performs over the next 5 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2Kplus20
I have wondered, given where these stocks were, why not rotate(at that point) towards more value, but that's not what she is. She's an investor of fwd looking disruptive companies. She doesn't change who she is based on the valuations. For good or bad.

Now the haters like to point to this year as evidence that she does not know what she is doing. But you look at the whole body of work and the haters have a very flimsy argument. Though it will be interesting to see how she performs over the next 5 years.
Agreed. The 5-year window is key to assess performance. I continue to eye ARKG as a small spec play to go along with my PRHSX. A lot of these companies will hit in the genomic space and will revolutionize medicine. Which ones? No idea, so an ETF is the way to go. I may go for it if it drops below $60 again.
 
I have wondered, given where these stocks were, with the lofty valuations, why not rotate(at that point) towards more value, let those valuations come in, and then jump back in. But that's not what she is. She's an investor of fwd looking disruptive companies. She doesn't change who she is based on the valuations. For good or bad.

Now the haters like to point to this year as evidence that she does not know what she is doing. But you look at the whole body of work and the haters have a very flimsy argument. Though it will be interesting to see how she performs over the next 5 years.
CNBC did analysis on some of C-Dubs positions last week and compared them to certain companies in and around the dot.com bubble. Not every company launched in the early 2000s became pets.com. BUT, many of those companies took 15+ years to work back into their valuations. There are certain companies in ARKK that may never recover.
 
CNBC did analysis on some of C-Dubs positions last week and compared them to certain companies in and around the dot.com bubble. Not every company launched in the early 2000s became pets.com. BUT, many of those companies took 15+ years to work back into their valuations. There are certain companies in ARKK that may never recover.
Some ARK companies will definitely go under/bankrupt because they don't have products yet. There is that risk. However, most of the large holding companies are generating billions in revenue, but not profitable yet. These companies will likely be fine.
 
The CW article had me looking through some different high flyer stocks.

And looking at ZM it's not nearly as expensive as I thought.

50x P/E. But having seen a near 50% rev growth 2021-2022 their PEG ratio is a little over 1. Which is very reasonable.

AMZN by comparison has an 80x P/E. And saw negative growth yoy.

Now the market is fwd looking, and AMZN is expected to grow earnings around 25% next year, while ZM is expected to see stagnant earnings for the next 3 years(though it's rev's are expected to grow 20% yoy).

Now of course there can be beats or misses. AMZN actually missed big on its' last earnings, while ZM has beat on its' last 11 qtr's. Though those beats went from very impressive, 50% beat a couple quarters ago, to a 2% beat in the most recent qtr.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redking
CNBC did analysis on some of C-Dubs positions last week and compared them to certain companies in and around the dot.com bubble. Not every company launched in the early 2000s became pets.com. BUT, many of those companies took 15+ years to work back into their valuations. There are certain companies in ARKK that may never recover.
As has been noted, sometimes negatively, ARK has ridden largely on the back of companies like TSLA and Shopify (amongst others) and their incredible performance, I imagine there have been plenty of duds in the ARK funds ove the years. ARK doesn't need them all to hit. Just some big winners. And there are always big winners, the question is can she find them.

Much different investment philosophy then someone running a dividend fund for instance. Who isn't looking for winners at all.
 
The CW article had me looking through some different high flyer stocks.

And looking at ZM it's not nearly as expensive as I thought.

50x P/E. But having seen a near 50% rev growth 2021-2022 their PEG ratio is a little over 1. Which is very reasonable.

AMZN by comparison has an 80x P/E. And saw negative growth yoy.

Now the market is fwd looking, and AMZN is expected to grow earnings around 25% next year, while ZM is expected to see stagnant earnings for the next 3 years(though it's rev's are expected to grow 20% yoy).

Now of course there can be beats or misses. AMZN actually missed big on its' last earnings, while ZM has beat on its' last 11 qtr's. Though those beats went from very impressive, 50% beat a couple quarters ago, to a 2% beat in the most recent qtr.
Take a look at TDOC. It was below $90 before Friday's pop. It may be a good trade if omicron screws things up for a few weeks. TDOC was one of my March purchases, but I dumped it a month or two later due to a poor earnings report. I go back and forth with it. I like that they are partnering with payers and health systems to offer the service instead of going it alone.
 
As has been noted, sometimes negatively, ARK has ridden largely on the back of companies like TSLA and Shopify (amongst others) and their incredible performance, I imagine there have been plenty of duds in the ARK funds ove the years. ARK doesn't need them all to hit. Just some big winners. And there are always big winners, the question is can she find them.

Much different investment philosophy then someone running a dividend fund for instance. Who isn't looking for winners at all.
Totally agree - but the problem is that ARKK is so far off it’s recent ATH and many of her core positions that carried the fund are losing steam. If she doesn’t find the next Tesla and/or some of her spec plays don’t pan out, it’s going to be a painful next few years.
 
Problem with TDOC is there is NO moat and everyone and their brother could start a telemedicine business with little investment.
Doesn't matter if it's just a trade (which I think 05 is looking for). ZOOM would be fine for a trade as well.
 
Totally agree - but the problem is that ARKK is so far off it’s recent ATH and many of her core positions that carried the fund are losing steam. If she doesn’t find the next Tesla and/or some of her spec plays don’t pan out, it’s going to be a painful next few years.
Well is being so far off it's recent highs a bad thing? The ATH's were the bad time to get in. Is now a good time to get back in? That's the question.

I still think it's too early, but if they continue to drop they do become attractive.

Also note, as CW points out, and I think this backs up what I am saying here is, ZM is down 50% or whatever it is, but the company had 30 or 50% increase in rev's and earnings yoy. At some point that valuation makes sense. It might already be there.
 
The “rule” is 6-12 months of annual expenses. But it really depends on where you are in life. I’m in FOLM mode and keep 20% in cash and 10% in relatively short duration fixed income.
Yeah it’s why I asked…

I have a cash account which is about 20% of overall cash/taxable brokerage

then in my brokerage account I have anywhere from 15-20% in cash for buying opportunities. My emergency fund is across both of these but have safer investments in the brokerage/cash that make up that 6-9mth allocation
 
Yeah it’s why I asked…

I have a cash account which is about 20% of overall cash/taxable brokerage

then in my brokerage account I have anywhere from 15-20% in cash for buying opportunities. My emergency fund is across both of these but have safer investments in the brokerage/cash that make up that 6-9mth allocation
Seems like you are well positioned to buy the dip! We may have an artificial mini-COVID correction that will quickly snap back like it did in 2020. Hard to predict the absolute bottom, but there should be plenty of attractive opportunities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUBlackout
Well is being so far off it's recent highs a bad thing? The ATH's were the bad time to get in. Is now a good time to get back in? That's the question.

I still think it's too early, but if they continue to drop they do become attractive.

Also note, as CW points out, and I think this backs up what I am saying here is, ZM is down 50% or whatever it is, but the company had 30 or 50% increase in rev's and earnings yoy. At some point that valuation makes sense. It might already be there.
Hard to say where ARKK lands because, now that the dust has settled (may be), it’s clear that her fund was carried by certain stocks like Tesla and Shopify - and she, like all of us, benefited from a huge run-up fueled by the Fed with a dose of COVID triggered innovation (at least IMO). As her fund currently stands, I don’t like her positions over the next 12-24 months. I hear what you are saying on ZOOM but it’s a one trick pony and there is a much better horse in the barn = MSFT. ZOOM needs another product. Now, if C-Dub finds a few gene therapy, climate change, etc. gems than I’d be interested for sure.
 
Hard to say where ARKK lands because, now that the dust has settled (may be), it’s clear that her fund was carried by certain stocks like Tesla and Shopify - and she, like all of us, benefited from a huge run-up fueled by the Fed with a dose of COVID triggered innovation (at least IMO). As her fund currently stands, I don’t like her positions over the next 12-24 months. I hear what you are saying on ZOOM but it’s a one trick pony and there is a much better horse in the barn = MSFT. ZOOM needs another product. Now, if C-Dub finds a few gene therapy, climate change, etc. gems than I’d be interested for sure.
I know MSFT is the elephant in the room, but is it the better product?

Zoom also has some significant name recognition. I agree they need to diversify, but they should have a boat load of money to work with now.
 
I know MSFT is the elephant in the room, but is it the better product?

Zoom also has some significant name recognition. I agree they need to diversify, but they should have a boat load of money to work with now.
I’m no expert on ZOOM, but I put them in the right place, right time category. there is nothing proprietary about what ZOOM does so right now name recognition is key. My gut tells me that video will become built into EVERY platform going forward so anything from Slack to Sharepoint to Teams will have it as basic feature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rutgersguy1
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT