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 : Buffettology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Investor2 who wrote (1464)	5/15/1999 1:05:00 AM
From: James Clarke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4690

<<Re: "unlikely to have real estate risk - i.e, the company is doing nothing." I don't understand. How can a REIT not have real estate risk? How can a REIT do nothing and still pay a high yield?>> He was not looking for action, not looking for the company with the hot development or acquisition, i.e. nothing going on and no management risk. What he was looking for was real estate kicking off a cash flow, where management could disappear and the value would still be there. Probably the kind of company where you wish management WOULD disappear, i.e. liquidate. A REIT CAN do nothing and pay a high yield. That's what real estate is all about, long term leases. That said, anybody paying over $22 for SKT is an idiot. Buffett bought it for 18-19, with a valuation of 22 or so. SKT and TCT are not "Buffett stocks" the way we use the term. This was a Ben Graham investment - I have no doubt about that. He is laughing his head off right now, and I also have little doubt that he has sold. If he has not sold SKT at 26, it is simply because he does not want to take advantage of fools who "invest" in his name. JJC