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: AsianValueInvestor who wrote (52057)	8/9/2013 9:15:27 AM
From: Jurgis Bekepuris	2 Recommendations Recommended By E_K_S sjemmeri Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78627

value is often well hidden I think we disagree here. I'll go with Buffett and Graham who claim opposite: there is no need to complicated adjustments to numbers. Value is either obvious or it's not there. "It's better to be approximately right than precisely wrong" and all that. :) I've noted before that complicated analyses with adjustments often appear when the market is high, stock prices have moved up, and value investors can't find something to buy that is obviously cheap. Perhaps it's better at such times to keep cash (as your quoted Seth Klarman does) than to pursue complex analyses. I've seen tons of complicated analyses at Value Investor's Congress and similar places. I wonder a lot if these really result in great outperformance. Mostly I did not see them working out (e.g. Sears, JC Penney, IRDM), but perhaps I am just noting negative examples. :) I'll agree with you that 125 year old company with branded consumer products and high ROE might be a good Buffett investment even if it is somewhat expensive. So Kobayashi might do well even though I won't buy it. :) Just out of curiosity: did you actually buy the stock or are you just engaging in intellectual discussion?