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: Elroy who wrote (78722)	12/13/2025 11:03:03 AM
From: Madharry	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78741

Seems funny to me that after you almost hit the nail on the head with your answer of 5% probability of a random stock outperforming the market you are willing to pick google against a portfolio picked by a bunch of smart guys. Last year the worst decision I made was selling META . This year the worst decision i made was selling GOOG, Both times I followed the lead of pundits as opposed trusting that management was smart enough to figure it out. Maybe I will learn from this. OT I feel bad for the hundreds of people who perished and the HK fire and their families. Shocked that it could and should have never happened. The residents warned the authorities and the renovators repeatedly about the fire hazards of putting styrofoam over windows and the netting., but it was just ignored or dismissed. Perhaps there is something to be said for not ignoring the obvious.

To: Elroy who wrote (78722)	12/13/2025 1:47:31 PM
From: Paul Senior	1 Recommendation Recommended By Harshu Vyas Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78741

I am liking both approaches simultaneously. For me this involves holding these winners, and still having enough capital and a continued interest in exploring for new "value" opportunities. I've bought some of these good companies that just keep rolling on -- KLAC, AVGO, DAC (How'd that shipping co get in there? -g-) -- and I'm just holding on. 1. That, as Munger (and you) might say, is plenty good enough. Sell when they fail on some level. Perhaps like bruwin, holding decades, only selling when criteria says. 2. But what about somebody like Harshu Vyas just starting out? What companies could he, should he, begin with given all these "great stocks or great companies" are already so way high? I have no definitive answer. 3. We'd want something that can do well, for years, decades. Ideally something in its beginning growth phase. I don't have an idea. But maybe GOOG still? (I'm reinvesting my dividends.) I know Christmas shopping is with us, and Holy Cow -- Costco is unbelievably busy. The stock's at a 12-mo low, but still so expensive. Seems to have a very good runway - they're still opening stores. In ten years the stock "should be" considerably higher. Buy some, keep as core position. But so difficult to commit to something like this when stock already so high, AND capital to invest is little. Holding a stock like COST that does nothing or even declines for a year, just seems to have a high opportunity cost when your capital is very limited. Some flexibility short term gain though if stock rises here from lows. (No options here on this value subjectmark!). 4. If we are looking for something that has a runway to 100% gain in 18-24 months, my bets are on drill ships (limited supply) for oil exploration, and met coal for steel/infrastructure demand. This for me is the benefit of decades of saving/investing: Having performance that's maybe "just average" or "satisfactory" - having enough capital to keep the great stocks/companies in the portfolio while still having enough "excess" to make these type bets.

To: Elroy who wrote (78722)	12/13/2025 4:08:25 PM
From: Marco Vincenzo	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 78741

I recently got out of ideas and started looking for stocks of Brazilian companies( which is where I'm originally from so I thought I had an edge there) that are listed here and "discovered" a pretty solid high-growth fintech company - I didn't discover it because I consistently used their services when I went to Brazil 3 months before but just didn't pay attention to it at all - and found out that they were ranked 4th fastest growing company in the world, and at the time, the most recent news about it here was like a month old (which, from my perspective, just reinforced my analysis that it was an undervalued stock), with only like half a dozen smaller websites saying why or why not you should buy it. Turns out that a month or so after I invested in it many news channels started talking about it. The stock is up 12.3% since I bought it around 2 months ago I think sometimes we get so engaged in something that we ignore some very simple leads. It reminds me of Lynch's example of L'eggs (or some other similar company) that he listened to his wife comment about a lot of times and just didn't pay enough attention to it until everyone started talking about it and investing on it. I've been pretty content with what trying to pay a little more attention to my surroundings instead of only focusing on what's in front of me can do. It may seem a pretty simple and obvious thing to do, but I believe many times we forget to execute those simples strategies that can lead to great opportunities. *** About Burry, I don't know about his strategies before the house market crash, but I have the feeling that since then he tries to replicate that success by shorting everything he considers overvalued, ignoring the fact that the way he "shorted" the house market was - at least from what I know - through CDSs where he paid FIXED premiums. From my understanding, those were expected losses - that even though were risky, at least they were more controllable risks - which is different than shorting a stock where a simple buying frenzy caused by whatever reason can squeeze you out - as it recently happened with him shorting Nvidia and Palantir.(Do I necessarily disagree with some of his points justifying this recent position?No. But sometimes the best move is just do nothing instead of being reckless like I think he was). I believe his condition mentioned by Paul makes him believe everyone is seeing things like he is, which then leads him to think that his position turning out to be succesful is just a matter of time, ignoring a possible irrational market. Marco.

To: Elroy who wrote (78722)	12/13/2025 10:27:43 PM
From: Madharry	Respond to of 78741

but if you have most of your assets in non taxable vehicles you dont have to worry about turnover.

To: Elroy who wrote (78722)	12/13/2025 10:32:38 PM
From: Madharry	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78741

Bank of America, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, wants its wealth management clients to consider digital assets exposure, according to Yahoo Finance. Starting next year, investment strategies at Bank of America’s Merrill, Bank of America Private Bank, and Merrill Edge platforms will support clients who want to allocate up to 4% of their portfolios to cryptocurrencies, the outlet reported. “For investors with a strong interest in thematic innovation and comfort with elevated volatility, a modest allocation of 1% to 4% in digital assets could be appropriate,” Chris Hyzy, Bank of America Private Bank’s chief investment officer, reportedly said in a statement. Hyzy reportedly described “the lower end of this range” as suitable for investors with a conservative risk profile, with 4% being appropriate for those with high risk tolerances. On Jan. 5, Bank of America’s wealth management clients will also initiate coverage of Bitcoin exchange-traded funds from Bitwise, Fidelity, Grayscale, and BlackRock, according to Yahoo Finance. (I find it hilarious that in a business where traders bet billions of dollars in microseconds, Bank of America makes a decision like this but feels its ok to wait til January to implement it- when the price of Bitcoin could be way higher.)