91–100 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Not surprised at all. Neither result would be surprising, that is why this issue requires research.
Actually, there's plenty reason to be surprised here since it flies in the face of the efficient market hypothesis a bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? The reasons for having their own datacenters are either legacy or needing some sort of specialized hardware that is not available at a cloud provider. Mana which is a new pure quant fund uses AWS extensively.
> Why? Because you don't want anyone to have access to your code and data. If you found out that Facebook is running on AWS, wouldn't you find that strange?
>"Perhaps most surprising, the researchers found the median fund-month download amount is only four filings while the mean was 672, suggesting that relatively few funds are accessing vastly more information." Interesting...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there were less political intervention into financial markets then solid financial analysis would win almost every time. Maybe that's the way the world should be. Since the GFC a lot of macro bets in both US and EU have been bets on political will and central bank actions. In late 2010 Bank of America was technically insolvent (based on analysis similar to yours), but the Fed went to work and backstopped the marke…
>If there were less political intervention into financial markets then solid financial analysis would win almost every time What empirical evidence exists to support this belief?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why? Because you don't want anyone to have access to your code and data. If you found out that Facebook is running on AWS, wouldn't you find that strange?
AWS, Google, Microsoft, all have lots of customers. Why are those customers not strange but FB would be?
Therefore, A) companies that operate at a scale where the only upside disappears, and B) companies where the cloud saving outweights their expected liability cost, both will have their own datacenters. Facebook is clearly in category A, RenTech is clearly in category B. This is my understanding anyway.
Isn't all Warren Buffet & Charlie Munger do for a good portion of the day, like 6 hours is 'READ & THINK'. Then do nothing else.
- Warren Buffett
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Around 2008, I read some public filings by banks. I made only two back-of-the-napkin adjustments: 1) I combined off-balance sheet assets and liabilities into the balance sheet, and 2) I changed the expected % losses to approximately that of Wells Fargo. With those two simple adjustments, I saw that some big banks were in the hole by (combined) tens of billions of dollars. The market prices for these banks made it c…
Eh. It works if you're a bear. You get in early, you sell in 2006 while shaking your head. Maybe you leave a bit in with extra exposure to volatility so you win either way, maybe not. Then when 2009 hits you pile in again. It's pretty easy to make way above average returns on the stock market. Just look for the classic signs that it is peaking (low unemployment, high P/E, high leverage, bad demographic trends, etc).
Not surprised at all. Anecdote: A friend and I used to run a website that tracked activist short sellers and their campaigns, and published all that information as a nice centralized database basically. Hedge funds were, by far, the most interested in this - which was surprising to us, our original target audiences were auditors and legal firms. My impression from this experience is that the more successful hedge fun…
Is there a good resource to help understand how to read/interpret SEC filings?