Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bruwin who wrote (22919)	1/1/2006 11:51:58 AM
From: TimbaBear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78753

bruwin I mostly lurk on this board but have been a regular reader since just after it began. While it is true that this is an unmoderated board, it is usually a most enjoyable experience when posters exercise some humility. Many of us have large enough egos to believe that we can take on all the unknown bright people in the world and find "value" where they have overlooked it. Many of us have been driven by those egos to eventually prove ourselves correct for having made the effort. The definition of value is an elusive one. Each of us has come to our insights as to what that means for us and most have used the offerings of those who have gone before us as the major foundation of the buildings of analysis we have developed. Certainly Graham and Dodd are most commonly cited by those who have journeyed in search of value. Apparently your Dr. Karl Posel has been such a force for your work. Others here have different influential folks they believe have made a lasting impression. However, what I have gleaned from the years of reading the posts here, is that we are all somewhat different in our approach to defining value and all somewhat different in our allocation of assets into the few gems we seem to find. What has made this board work is not so much its rigid adherence to the value proposition specifically as laid out by Graham (as few of us are pure advocates of that methodology). What has made this board able to survive the interplay of countless strong egos over the years is eventual humility. Some of us from time to time get pretty proud and cocky about our accomplishments and seem to get a little more full of ourselves than is tolerable to most of the rest of the mortals here. When that happens, Paul and some of the rest of the members try to reign in the enthusiasm and, eventually, either the person leaves or regains the perspective. You seem to have a lot to offer. However, your approach seems a bit condescending and most of the strong egos find that somewhat offensive as, I imagine, you would find condescension directed at you to be. No matter how much experience we may have, no matter how successful we have been, no matter what station we have achieved, we all have feet of clay. Rest assured, I’m not hear to tell others what to do, but rather to question and debate particular aspects and components of investment strategies. If there is eventual, general consensus, by those with an open mind, that certain aspects are found wanting, then wouldn’t this be to the overall benefit of all ? This is an example of the condescension to which I refer. Embedded in it is the feel that the only worthiness of a value approach lies in the approval by the board (and by you) of the methodology and paradigms incorporated by the presenter. Do you really care whether any of us agree with the methodology you believe gives you your great performance? Do you really think any of us care whether you think our systems have merit? "Of course not!" is the answer to both questions! I don't know who Dr. Karl Posel is, I have not heard of him before your mention and I'm not all that interested in finding out. I have done my education in financial analysis and have reached a comfort zone with approach, risk management and returns. Many here, I suspect, have done the same. If there are ideas of his you wish to share, I'm sure many of us will enjoy reading them. Perhaps they might even inspire some of the more crotchety of us (me) to want to read on from there. Those who call this board "home" like to debate the concepts imbedded in different approaches, but we don't look for concensus, we look for understanding......our own understanding. Some of us have participated in many such discussions over the years and so may not do so again on some of the ideas. As far as the merits of any person's "opportunities" are concerned. Many of us bring our finds here in the hopes that others will look at them and see if there is any merit for their portfolios. Few find widespread enthusiasm. That doesn't imply that few have merit, it just means we all have our own benchmarks we have found relevant for us and few companies survive all of them. It also doesn't guarantee the ones that do find more widespread acceptance here are "sure to outperform" no matter how much our egos would like to think otherwise. Likely...but not sure.... Anyway, your posts have moved me to delurk for a moment. I think you have a lot to offer but I see a lot of friction if you don't treat all ideas here as equal, including your own. What I have discovered over the years is that there are as many valid approaches to finding value by using Graham as there are intelligent folks in search of that value. What makes a board work is the humility to to believe (not just say): "They may be right". I wish for you and yours the very best of all things in the New Year. I wish for the board a prosperous year full of great ideas debated civilly and many "opportunities" shared in the spirit of giving. Timba (going back to lurking mode)