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: Graham Osborn who wrote (56501)	12/31/2015 7:48:45 PM
From: Paul Senior	Respond to of 78751

Tangible BV. We've noticed that's what you use, from the many of your posts which mention tbv. I can't say if you're correct in a practical way as well as also being financially more realistic. That is, in my experience using bv and tbv over several decades and hundreds of buys, it seems (I have no facts) that it hasn't made much of a difference in the results I've got, whether I've used tbv or stated bv. I have got burned a few times (can't remember the situations) by not using tbv when I should have. Otoh, I have missed entering some good opportunities by using tbv in my analysis when I should've/could've used stated bv. Maybe the truth of it is, it's just a lot easier to find and compare stated bv's than tbv's, and so that's the route I'm taking. ==== Aside: Somewhere along the road, maybe 5-10 years ago, I got into a discussion here about bv -- something about I/we weren't clear about the bv numbers I/we were using. Upshot is that in my posts about bv, I try to remember to write p/stated bv and not just p/bv.