Tender Ego

Stocks A to Z
21

Sooo…

As some of you know, I do not like talking about people when it is preferable to talk with them.

A couple of days ago I read a post by Saul saying something along the lines of, ‘I am glad I sold my position in mndy a few weeks ago.’

I looked back and confirmed that he had listed it as a position which constituted roughly 9% of his port at the end of March and again at the end of April.

Now, after mndy had falled precipitously in price, he was claiming he had already sold it at some time during the previous two weeks and was now getting around to telling us about it subsequent to the crash.

So I asked, ‘when exactly did you sell mndy?’

I thought it was a fair question. If he sold the position that he had touted as a good position, what caused him to sell that stock that he had not shared with anybody on the board?

Instead of receiving a reply of any sort, my post was deleted.

Now I am concerned that Saul may be a con man and deleting posts that expose him.

Is that unfair?

35 Likes
22

"I thought it was a fair question. If he sold the position that he had touted as a good position, what caused him to sell that stock that he had not shared with anybody on the board?

Instead of receiving a reply of any sort, my post was deleted.

Now I am concerned that Saul may be a con man and deleting posts that expose him.

Is that unfair?"

Unfair to have your post removed? of course. Unfair to expose the poster? of course not.

In my investing lifetime, and it’s been a long one, starting well before the message board era, I’d be wary of investments from anonymous usernames. ( I know, not a popular opinion)

jk

p.s.

While I’ve never been to this Saul board, the comments here remind me of “Mycroft” for those with long memories, very long memories.

5 Likes
23

I struggle to understand his motives. The only thing I can think of is that there is a social media meme stock advantage to herding his followers into stocks. It’s not in his interest to telescope exits.

1 Like
24

“Mycroft”

I was almost knocked over by that blast! Mycroft never had hundreds of recs for each of his posts.

25

“I was almost knocked over by that blast! Mycroft never had hundreds of recs for each of his posts.”

oh my, I had no clue. So he’s 100x more dangerous than Mycroft.

jik

26

Now I am concerned that Saul may be a con man and deleting posts that expose him.

Is that unfair?

Dunno. However, nobody on this board can do anything about it. Try Improve the Fool:

https://discussion.fool.com/improve-the-fool-100007.aspx

27

I thought it was a fair question.

If you read the intro stuff to Saul’s board and/or any number of his periodic posts re his personal investments, you’ll see that he notes repeatedly that he may buy or sell at any time and takes no obligation to post about it. He specifically does NOT want people buying/selling merely because he does.

I think that’s perfectly fine.

What could be the “con”? He’s not selling anything to anyone.

6 Likes
28

Saul has written over & over & over “do not just follow me, I might change my mind & may not post about it until end of the month”.

However, those who pay attention know that he did post his holdings mid month on 5/12 for transparency, and he was clearly out of MNDY prior to that. MNDY reported on 5/16.

https://discussion.fool.com/mid-month-portfolio-brief-35108593.a…

Your post was clearly inappropriate for that board for numerous reasons.

“Con-man”, that’s just sad.

16 Likes
29

“What could be the “con”? He’s not selling anything to anyone.”

That is a fair question.

But claiming after the fact that you sold a stock that had just dropped precipitously does enable one to fudge their returns in a manner that is not verifiable or falsifiabe.

How can we trust a person’s claimed returns if they are allowed to claim after the fact that they sold a stock that had recently dropped precipitously?

What is the saying? Trust but verify?

2 Likes
30

I read this board for the posts related to Berkshire.

Doesn’t the Saul board - and it’s rules - permit you to talk about them rather than here? Apparently you can’t criticize them on that board.

If so, why not create another board designed to talk about Saul stocks. Why take them here?

I can’t imagine any investment philosophy less related to the BERKSHIRE board.

30 Likes
31

There was a lot of talk about dot com stocks and the perils of growth investing without considering valuation on the Berkshire board back in 1999/2000. I take it as a sign of another great deflation.

1 Like
32

Dunno. However, nobody on this board can do anything about it. Try Improve the Fool:

Nothing you can do about it. Saul board projected Bert hochfeld, writes in Seeking Alpha. When I pointed out the fact that he is felon, who swindled his investor funds, a con man, they trashed me. Deleted my posts, etc. I had much better luck with SA. SA just added that disclosure and moved on.

In other words, the great American culture gave Bert a second chance. However, an honest open discussion about a jailed felon is deleted, suppressed. I don’t know whether Fool’s condone such behavior, but they were willing to overlook Saul’s action and willingly enabled his actions.

It is a conscious decision of TMF. If you think somehow they are going to change it now, is unrealistic. I think it is a waste of time, ignore and move on.

2 Likes
33

There was a lot of talk about dot com stocks and the perils of growth investing without considering valuation on the Berkshire board back in 1999/2000. I take it as a sign of another great deflation.

Or jealousy?

34

But claiming after the fact that you sold a stock that had just dropped precipitously does enable one to fudge their returns in a manner that is not verifiable or falsifiabe.

How can we trust a person’s claimed returns if they are allowed to claim after the fact that they sold a stock that had recently dropped precipitously?

Iampops, your moral bankruptcy is showing.

You think it is OK to accuse someone of fraud because you are disappointed that they won’t give you a level of detail about their transactions that they have REPEATEDLY REPEATEDLY REPEATEDLY warned that they have no intention of giving, even as they continue to give more information than they promised.

I might as well accuse you of pedophilia because you violate my own ideas about what is right and wrong. By your own standards, how could I even trust you if you denied it?

As to “how can you trust…”? You could do what I did and audit two years of Saul’s monthly reports in order to see if the transactions he reported monthly are consistent with the returns he claimed. My own results: they are. But the point isn’t that he is NOT a fraud, although that seems important. The point is you are willing to accuse him so cruelly because you didn’t get what you wanted from him even as you got more from him than from virtually any other investor around and you were repeatedly warned by him that he would make trades in between his monthly reports on them.

And of course, you paid him nothing for his services but still felt entitled to something he made it clear he was not providing.

And that makes HIM a fraud?

Sheesh.

R:

7 Likes
35

Ralph, well stated.
I wanted to reinforce your message with more than a rec.

Saul and his managers run a pretty tight ship, with specific rules that are presented weekly, delineating the specific focus and interests of the board.

He is remarkably transparent with his trades and results. Far more than anyone on a FREE board is required to do, and his results are easily verified if one is willing to follow his monthly reports, or go back and check them, as you have.

The accusations of fraud, unethical behavior, crimes against unwary investors, and/or malpractice for not allowing discussions of FA, TA, portfolio management are, at best, lazy misreadings of his stated intentions.

I’m glad Motley Fool doesn’t limit the frowny faces one can use.

Thanks for the post.

Lead

3 Likes
36

So I asked, ‘when exactly did you sell mndy?’… Now I am concerned that Saul may be a con man and deleting posts that expose him. Is that unfair?

Yes, I would call that unfair. Saul posts his portfolio more often than most mutual funds, and more often than Berkshire. Saul bought MNDY around $360, and sold around $95 to $110. Does it really matter if it was $95 or $140? A losing trade anyway you look at it.

Saul posted on May 12th a zero position in MNDY. Volume was high from May 11th to May 16th. Price was low (relative to DDOG) from May 11th to May 13th. I would guess Saul sold around May 11th, and the price has rebounded since then. The price fell from around $400 in November to $100 now, and so a 10% price change over a few days is a small part of the overall drop.

More of a concern might be that the money following Saul is moving the market price. Undisciplined buying and selling can get bad fills. Anyone following Saul’s board might want to wait a week to avoid crowded trades.

            MNDY   MNDY    MNDY        DDOG   DDOG     DDOG       MNDY/DDOG
  Date     Close   %Chg    Volume     Close   %Chg    Volume        Close
5/26/2022  105.79   1%    453,189      90.3    2%   3,880,296       1.17
5/25/2022  104.94   5%    540,200     88.73    3%   5,822,800       1.18
5/24/2022  99.75   -11%   661,400     85.81   -9%   4,988,000       1.16
5/23/2022  111.56  -2%    447,400     93.93   -1%   4,170,900       1.19
5/20/2022  114.27   1%    761,900     94.79   -2%   6,090,900       1.21
5/19/2022  112.79  11%    993,600     96.53   10%   8,148,900       1.17
5/18/2022  101.62  -4%    544,300     88.07   -7%   9,012,000       1.15
5/17/2022  105.88   1%    690,600     95.05   -2%   9,610,300       1.11
5/16/2022  105.05  -5%   **1,897,000**   97.19   -11%  6,186,100       1.08
5/13/2022  110.38  11%   **1,564,100**   108.86  10%   6,217,000      **1.01**
5/12/2022  99.75    5%   **1,360,000**   98.83    1%   7,124,000      **1.01**
5/11/2022  94.57   -14%  **1,707,500**   97.87    0%   7,493,100      **0.97**
5/10/2022  109.79  -2%    711,800     98.31    1%   7,323,400       1.12
5/9/2022   112.32  -9%   1,185,700    97.53   -11%  8,865,800       1.15
5/6/2022   123.55  -6%    634,400       110   -2%   8,274,700       1.12
5/5/2022   131.78  -7%    758,700     111.87  -6%   11,141,900      1.18
5/4/2022   141.82  10%    761,600       119    4%   6,707,700       1.19
5/3/2022   129.15  -3%    390,000     114.89  -4%   5,419,400       1.12
5/2/2022   133.28   3%    671,800     120.2    0%   4,289,200       1.11
2 Likes