SI
SI
discoversearch

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
An SI Board Since December 1997
Posts SubjectMarks Bans
4691 296 0
Emcee:  Michael Burry Type:  Unmoderated
Introduction Compact
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
3266Thanks for your comments. I agree that it appears overvalued.dstange-3/12/2003
3265Jurgis hit the big one - "look through earnings" in big positions heldJames Clarke-3/11/2003
3264Good question. I'd like to see it answered in non-smart-alecky way too. The Jurgis Bekepuris-3/11/2003
3263Because everybody screens and buys based on ROE. -g-HighTech-3/11/2003
3262Question on ROE Many posters here and others often discuss the importance of ROdstange-3/11/2003
3261Buffett Keen to Snap Up Cheap Utilities Tuesday March 11, 3:16 pm ET Larry S.-3/11/2003
3260Sysco. Any thoughts? Number 1 wholesale food vendor. Price down sharply on codstange-3/10/2003
3259OT. USAI paperwork rant. I've been buying, owning, selling stocks for manPaul Senior-3/9/2003
3258"yes but you and i are not the only ones reading the thread are we." bozwood-3/4/2003
3257yes but you and i are not the only ones reading the thread are we. ps: the raticfimx-3/4/2003
3256On the gripe course today. :-) Just when you think investor sentiment may be geJurgis Bekepuris-3/4/2003
3255Didn't you read the context that I put it in? I gave you valuation measures,bozwood-3/4/2003
3254it was common for people in 1999, when confronted by others who thought they reccfimx-3/4/2003
3253not sure what you are referring to, but, hey, whatever.bozwood-3/4/2003
3252no. no. you didn't? you did. you said (in so many words) it's DIFFERENT cfimx-3/4/2003
3251Fortune articles on Buffett <OT Soap box on> Ah, I love when everyone gusJurgis Bekepuris-3/4/2003
3250Somewhat, but I don't think the context is the same. Besides, who looks at cbozwood-3/4/2003
3249paul, read the Buffett article on derivatives. He specifically mentions that BIGcfimx-3/4/2003
3248When I look at these financial numbers for banks, I always start with Yahoo and Paul Senior-3/3/2003
3247I don't want to get into an extended discussion on WFSL here, but you postedJames Clarke-3/3/2003
3246In the December 6, 2001 edition of Fortune, Buffett followed up with Carol LoomiMark L.-3/3/2003
3245Words from an Omahan... fortune.com Paul S.Paul Senior-3/3/2003
3244COF - over $200M option(?) exercises of CEO/COO in 2001 per Yahoo Finance do notJurgis Bekepuris-3/3/2003
3243siliconinvestor.com does this not look like a chart from 99?cfimx-3/3/2003
3242ROE and WFSL 1. concerning the ROE debate. I agree with Paul's challenginGrommit-3/3/2003
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News