Hi Saul,
I’ll chime in as well, please don’t stop posting. These posts are inspirational and motivational! I’m new to this board (wish I came across it sooner) and have been busy catching up on all numerous the great posts (and posters) here.
Best,
Matt
Would you buy any of these now at these higher prices if you had no positions in any of them?
Lucky Dog
To quote Saul…“Don’t let the dollar rises make you lose perspective, by the way: a $15 rise from $186 to $201 over the course of a month, for example, is exactly the same as as a $1.50 rise from $18.60 to $20.10 over the course of a month”.
I kicked myself for the last 2 years in selling out of Amazon, albeit having done extremely well over the previous 8 years and brought back in at 965.00. Brought Arista at 175. I think and from what I have learned on this board more than any others, if one believes in a Company, stick with it until the story changes, trim along the way if needs be, but don’t be put off with a share price just because the price is high…BRK-A anyone?
Would you buy any of these now at these higher prices if you had no positions in any of them?
The issue isn’t the current stock price. As Saul said, it’s about recurring revenue, large runways, rapid growth of revenue, insider ownership, moat, etc … so has that changed for the worse, for the better, or is unchanged, should determine the suitability of buy-in.
Saul:
Its not bragging when you are so transparent, tell everyone what you are looking for in a stock, find the stock and tell us how big a position you own.
Its called reporting the news, and I’m confident if the news was bad, you would report that too. But the news is off the charts - good.
I started paying attention to you in June, and I’m up over 85% this year, and like you up over 15% in October and over 20% in November. I can’t believe my good fortune, and a substantial amount of the credit goes to you, Bear, Gaucho Chris and the rest of the people that post ideas on this board regularly. I have been in the business world all my life, and am just now ready to retire, and the people on this board make more sense and understand stocks better than anyone I have followed my entire life.
Even when I don’t buy a stock they are high on, at least I know I just read a reasoned position on why they bought the stock. Most other people just like, people here like the reasons the stock and the business will do well. Its a big difference.
Keep up the good work.
I started paying attention to you in June, and I’m up over 85% this year, and like you up over 15% in October and over 20% in November. I can’t believe my good fortune, and a substantial amount of the credit goes to you, Bear, Gaucho Chris and the rest of the people that post ideas on this board regularly. I have been in the business world all my life, and am just now ready to retire, and the people on this board make more sense and understand stocks better than anyone I have followed my entire life.
Thanks Don, That’s a nice compliment to all those on the board who cooperate and work hard to make this board a special place. And welcome to the board!
Saul
Saul (and other readers of this board),
First of all, congratulations on outstanding performance this year to date. As you stated, this has been an extraordinary and no one should expect a repeat performance in 2018. But, that does not negate the fact that you are up 97% this year. How much of that can be attributed to methodology and how much is serendipity is impossible to determine. But, when comparing performance to any reasonable benchmark the role of methodology must be considered very significant.
Just for the sake of comparison and a slightly different perspective on the role of methodology, I am happy (almost giddy) to report that I have become an adherent to your methods, as best as I can adopt them and I too am up 97% to date. I will not bother with recording my holdings. Every equity I hold has been discussed at length on this board other than four, very tiny speculative positions which cumulatively amount to less than 1% of my portfolio (note, cash is one of those positions).
I would also like to note that Saul’s portfolio and mine are not mirror images. True, I hold several of the same positions that Saul does, but I also hold significant positions that Saul does not hold. Additionally, the weight of my positions are quite different from Saul’s. I say this only to demonstrate that application of the method does not dictate the specific choices, one can approach similar performance goals by following a different but parallel path.
I’ve long been meaning to write a post about what I’ve learned by following this board and trying to adhere to Saul’s methodology. I say “trying” because I don’t feel that I am able to fully adopt this approach, despite the fact that my performance this year is far beyond anything I had hoped to achieve at the beginning of the year, I still consider myself a fortunate beginner, but a beginner nonetheless.q1
Saul, congratulations.
And please do not stop posting these summaries! I appreciate the humbleness and disclaimer. I also find these updates fantastic for both education and inspiration. You have a fantastic common sense way of describing your investing decisions which has continually inspired my own pursuit to learn more about investing.
Thank you and congratulations!
P.P.S., how do you know the limit is 50%? Many of these are early-stage companies – you could
lose everything. I did once. I’d hate to see it happen to you.
Ears,
Do you mean you lost everything you’d invested in a single company, or are you saying you lost every penny in your entire portfolio? If the latter, how? I am by no means saying 50% is the limit. But I also don’t see all the companies I own suddenly going bankrupt.
Bear
Just for the sake of comparison and a slightly different perspective on the role of methodology, I am happy (almost giddy) to report that I have become an adherent to your methods, as best as I can adopt them and I too am up 97% to date…I would also like to note that Saul’s portfolio and mine are not mirror images. True, I hold several of the same positions that Saul does, but I also hold significant positions that Saul does not hold. Additionally, the weight of my positions are quite different from Saul’s. I say this only to demonstrate that application of the method does not dictate the specific choices, one can approach similar performance goals by following a different but parallel path.
Wow! That’s great, Brittlerock! Congratulations!
Saul
I have been lurking around this board for about years now, and I’m beginning to make progress in my portfolio primarily because of the influence of active contributors, most of whom have chimed in on this thread.
I am deeply indebted to each of you and appreciate the generosity and expertise shared here. At some point I hope to begin participate more meaningfully.
Saul, as Don alluded to above, I quote Dizzy Dean, “It ain’t braggin’ if you done it!” Your style of managing and mentoring this board is simply amazing. I am sure many others like me have benefited more than you can know. Please keep on with your presence here.
Gary
Saul:
Personally, I am disappointed in your returns. After all, you did beat this in 1999: 115.5%, 2003: 124.5% and 2009: 110.7%.
So it would appear you have lost your luster and people should just move on.
In all seriousness though, congratulations on a great year!
Keep your head up…you still have another month to try to beat those other three years…and just in case anyone thought this was an anomaly…you seem to have repeated the “anomaly” 3 other times.
I was interested in your TLND position and decision to add to your position on the downturn…not sure if you are familiar with the discussion we have had at the NPI (and brought up by Moneyman originally), but there is some concern about the recent stock approval that essentially ? dilutes the market cap to allow insiders to sell out. Obviously this also adds some liquidity to the stock as well but it anticipates a doubling of stock in the market through these sales.
That recent drop was the unloading of 2 million shares and there is another 8 million yet to go.
It was very interesting price action that has nearly recovered from that drop:
http://www.stockta.com/cgi-bin/analysis.pl?symb=TLND&cob…
Not sure when the other traunches will occur but it did cause a 10% drop in stock price.
Here was the discussion at the NPI if you are interested:
http://discussion.fool.com/tlnd-knew-it-was-coming-32896188.aspx…
http://discussion.fool.com/talend-revisted-32838364.aspx?sort=wh…
Perhaps the TLND discussion should be moved off to another thread but I suspect there will be more dips in the future with each release of stock traunches until fully divested.
You will continue to hold and buy through this unloading?
That recent drop was the unloading of 2 million shares and there is another 8 million yet to go.
Based upon some recent discussions here, it was my understanding the company is not benefitting from the sale of the shares and no dilution is taking place. This is merely a way for insiders to unload their shares for profits. I guess these shares are essentially retired.
This is from memory. I’d need to go back to the thread.
I will say I stayed away from TLND for this reason. However, I anticipated this to be dilutive. If it is not dilutive, it is a different story and may be worth a second look.
Why is the market hitting the stock if this isn’t dilutive?
Thanks,
A.J.
Based upon some recent discussions here, it was my understanding the company is not benefitting from the sale of the shares and no dilution is taking place.
That is what I think as well. I said so at the NPI board but no one paid any attention to me. 
Insiders (VCs?) selling out is not dilution. I think the confusion comes from the registering of the shares. If I’m not mistaken, shares held by insiders and not for trading don’t have to be registered, they were issued before the company’s IPO, but they need to be registered when they are to be offered on the public market. But these are not NEW shares.
Denny Schlesinger
Bear,
A single company. But a very large position. I was overconfident and underestimated the risk.
Going bankrupt isn’t the only risk. For example, a couple of years back some folks here were high
on AudioEye (AEYE). Recurring revenue, phenomenal growth. Problem was it was mostly all faked. There
are many risks when you invest in individual firms, and some of them will surprise you.
Ears
Right…I think I created some confusion by classifying these 10 million shares as dilutive overall to the company.
But what they clearly do is dilute the float…hence the scenario wherein there are far more selling than buying shares…and thus the price drop.
This “additional” float was nearly the equivalent of 50% of the then-market cap of the company…that is a whole lotta shares unloaded on the market now in circulation.
Why would you think that wouldn’t negatively impact the price as these shares are dumped on the market?
Why would you think that wouldn’t negatively impact the price as these shares are dumped on the market?
Why would you think it would, Duma? After the additional shares hit the market, aren’t we back to homeostasis, so to speak?
Bear
That is what I think as well. I said so at the NPI board but no one paid any attention to me.
My bandwidth is admittedly somewhat limited.
I think the confusion comes from the registering of the shares. If I’m not mistaken, shares held by insiders and not for trading don’t have to be registered, they were issued before the company’s IPO, but they need to be registered when they are to be offered on the public market. But these are not NEW shares.
I honestly didn’t research the issue and was going on other’s opinions. If there aren’t new shares being issued to the public market, it seems non-dilutive to me.
Here is another question though as I look at the issue of dilution. There was a recent thread on dilution that got too long. I hope this question is specific enough so as not to start too much chatter on it.
I prefer to look at dilution only based on the difference in shares outstanding. There are companies that seem to spend excessive dollars on SBC, yet the shares outstanding don’t increase much. The same is true for the opposite case. A couple of different ways to look at SBC are as a percent of revenue and as a percent of market cap.
So, I just look at the number of shares. Is that right or wrong? Any insight is appreciated.
Thanks,
A.J.
who hopes he didn’t open a can of worms with that question…
Why would you think it would, Duma? After the additional shares hit the market, aren’t we back to homeostasis, so to speak?
Bear
Because the average daily trading volume is only 170,000 shares and they dumped this first traunch with 2 million shares with 8 million more to go.
I was interested in your TLND position and decision to add to your position on the downturn…not sure if you are familiar with the discussion we have had at the NPI (and brought up by Moneyman originally), but there is some concern about the recent stock approval that essentially ? dilutes the market cap to allow insiders to sell out.
Hi Duma,
I read the first of those threads. Denny made the key observation: There is no dilution when the venture capitalists sell. In other words, the stock existed and was counted all the time in the market cap and the share count. They are just selling through a secondary instead of on the open market, where it would be harder to sell 2 million shares. You knew that,
Saul