looks like we are on target still , sailor boy will be very happy lol
Printable View
Not really, the ones I bought originally had a net present value that I was more than happy with and the ones I have bought subsequently have a a similar net present value but I'm paying much less for them.
You're not taking any hammering at all, if someone yells out to you on the street oi you fat prick, but you're anorexic then you're not going to feel abused are you.
Forget about obsessing over the current market quote and focus on the amount of earnings that your business will generate over the next 10 years and how the assets that you are buying the equity portion of, are funded.
Value the business yourself.
After purchasing any shares, what you should pray for is that they collapse in price on the market while the business either improves or remains the same.
Fifty years ago I was a serious spearfisherman. For pelagics like kingfish, I would start on the surface pretty close to neutrally buoyant with my weights balancing the buoyancy of my wetsuit. I would dive down to 15m or so and my wetsuit would compress so I was overweight and had to fin a bit to stay level and avoid sinking further underwater. I often looked up at the surface and wondered whether I had overestimated my breathholding capacity. It was important to remind myself that I needed to stay relaxed, because to panic would make things worse. If the worst came to the worst, I knew I could always ditch my weights and become positively buoyant to speed my way back to the surface.
In terms of OCA, I am a long way overweight, and a very long way underwater. Fortunately I have enough in reserve so I don't have to ditch my weightbelt and go for the surface just yet!
Interesting analogy.
So if the board of directors presented the company in it's present form to you as the single owner and even gave up their own shares, instead of celebrating with your family, you would regale them with a tale of being at the bottom of the Mariners trench?
Are UBS shareholders currently crying or is it the former Credit Suisse equity and bondholders?
arv trying to catch up to oca , oca better get a move on.
anyway i think the company should tell us if they use kumera or not ?
Often, this happens.
Ultimately, over the long term, and because if nothing else of rising dividends and improving and obvious fundamentals, the market will eventually revalue to intrinsic or above.
What you suggest relies on being able to find another opportunity and be as familiar with it, and that the rise to above intrinsic value happens fast enough that you get your required return on capital and then do this again and again, which is entirely possible but very difficult.
You will make a lot more money if a very high quality business goes on sale and remains so for a while and you reinvest dividends and purchase more as you can, than having a one off revaluation.
Just saying, you're not talking to yourself, there are people here and presumably some lurkers and watchers, who 'get it' about investing long term. Acquiring/accumulating on-market and/or via dividends/DRP, when the market decides to underprice the equity and the company spews out profits as additional equity or money to shareholders every 3-6-12 months by distributing profits. The long terms maths on this is indisputable, assuming the company remains profitable.
This imho and observation though, is a very mature investment approach and can take many years for share market participants to get a grip of, especially mentally when their capital value is being destroyed on paper. Those that do though, really don't concern themselves too much about their current capital portfolio valuation as they have no intention to sell, realising either capital profits or losses. They didn't buy to sell, they bought to lock-in a long term income and/or equity accumulation. They accumulate more by buying or reinvesting dividends.
Thing is though, there are probably a lot more people who are really only focused on the share price and especially so when it goes against their buy-in price, i.e. they're under their buy-price and trying to decide whether to lock in capital losses and move elsewhere. The share price watchers who don't or didn't realise they were really just capital traders, and didn't react early will be hurting. So many though don't have any tools to help with when to exit a capital trade (or get in). It's all gut feel, emotional, subject to whim. All they will see is the red number on their portfolio and counting how much the will lose if they sell. Professional traders are a lot more nimble and move early, getting in, or out.
This place is 'Sharetrader' and its legacy goes back two decades, the debate between hard core investors, casual investors, momentum traders, short term and day traders, noobs and experienced never stops.
The thing I like the most about your posts is that you are very patient about explaining the maths of long term investing in sound prosperous and long term companies. Though sometimes a bit rude and dismissive towards people who don't get it, regardless of their reasons, for example, they want the trade, the quick buck, the thrill of a win.
OCA is and has been for me a long term investment, the repeated extreme capital volatility which I never expected over the past few years has been a windfall enabling me to accumulate a much larger position on-market and via DRP than originally intended based on the original capital I had to invest. Personally I have no intention to sell OCA.
I think people should ponder your expose' of the power of free money that the RV's build up (debt to ORA's) and how that is leveraged. It's quite unlike most industries and core to understanding long term investing in RV's.
What you are saying also holds merit but what will really highlight the perspective I'm advocating is running some math on the respective numbers. I put together a series of scenarios where I showed the outcomes of reinvesting OCA dividends at different prices, somewhere back in this thread. I'll try dig it out.
Also what will give some insight is looking at how Buffett thought about his original Washington Post purchase and the many times he goes on about wanting a stock to fall after buying.
Another thought exercise is to take the S&P500 so that you're not talking about a single business and there is no risk of total loss... the lower the market goes then the higher your future return will then be, if this was the only investment you could make then if you are still in your saving and investing phase then you'd want lower prices.
The higher the market goes all it means is that you're dragging future returns into the present as the market cannot grow forever at a higher rate than the return on capital it produces.
Obviously in some cases falling asset prices are not going to be an opportunity for future gain and this can be a real killer as well.
'One quick example: The Washington Post Company in 1973 wasselling for $80 million in the market. At the time, that day, youcould have sold the assets to any one of ten buyers for not less than$400 million, probably appreciably more. The company owned thePost, Newsweek, plus several television stations in major markets.Those same properties are worth $2 billion now, so the person whowould have paid $400 million would not have been crazy.
Now, if the stock had declined even further to a price that madethe valuation $40 million instead of $80 million, its beta wouldhave been greater. And to people who think beta measures risk, thecheaper price would have made it look riskier. This is truly Alice inWonderland. I have never been able to figure out why it’s riskier tobuy $400 million worth of properties for $40 million than $80 million. And, as a matter of fact, if you buy a group of such securitiesand you know anything at all about business valuation, there isessentially no risk in buying $400 million for $80 million, particularly if you do it by buying ten $40 million piles for $8 million each.Since you don’t have your hands on the $400 million, you want tobe sure you are in with honest and reasonably competent people,but that’s not a difficult job'
I would say extremely rude and dismissive!
Yep if people are in it for the thrill of the win and want to trade I am all for that provided they understand the odds are stacked against them. Gambling after all is a massive industry. It's when people think that it's guaranteed money, or the best way to 'invest' is when I get wound up.
Apologies for quoting myself SailorRob, I tried but can't find your insightful post about how RV's get free money from ORA's (debt income without interest) and leverage it, like insurance company's do by other means. This is the core to the maths of the investment thesis and how RV's distinguish themselves from traditional property developers who have to raise capital, with interest.
Both OCA and ARV have been shortest by the same fundie. The price movements are almost identical
Thanks for posting the Forbar debt analysis GreekWD.( On the" retirement village" thread)
Great to put the capital raising fear out there properly to bed.
It surely must make the OCA -CEO and CFO "employees of the month" for their applied prescience.
While I concur with 99% of the report there is one part I disagree with. Oca has never said anywhere , in any form, that they are throttling back construction. ARV certainly has. In fact OCA have clearly stated and tooled up for increased production the last few years with more staff and capital raises.
If anyone has any info on this I'd love to hear it.
Possibly this...?
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...l=1#post983973
May also be worth reading this also...
https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...ree#post987037
No knowledge specifically. I would think that they would have to wait for an improvement in SP to correctly manage a CR, unless they were desperate or wanted to kill the SP. I am sure the major shareholders would have something to say about that. To help the SP recover throttling back on construction temporarily would have to be on the cards. They would have to make the best and most efficient (profitable) use of the existing assets they have before building more. This would be especially true with the precarious economy, interest rates, property sales demand and prices.
I think that just makes common sense. Must be waiting for end of year results to announce their forward plan.
Couple of things their Sailor.
Yes, it is 101 in hindsight... BUT.....so was us selling houses and paying down debts last year and selling OCA for $1.50. We all see how obvious that was now but to actually act on it at the time is a different story. That is where the directors shone over their competitors who didn't get around to it at the time.
Second thing is the clever stuff in their loans fineprint that Forbar explain really well to us non bankers. The way OCA constructed the loans ( capex vs expenses treatment of interest costs etc)demonstrates skill of a high level of expertise .
I think my question may have been misunderstood Bottom Feeder. I believe , as does Forbar, that no capital raising is required either now or in the future.
Coupled with the mega development Helier about to sell down there will be sufficient cashflow.
My question on here is has anybody heard that OCA is slowing the build rate as per what Forbar are stating.
I read and listen to everything OCA and this is news to me.
Just wondering if I missed something. Nothing OCA has done or said to date indicates it's not business as usual. I also dont forsee any issues that will cause a change in their plan.
I'm not convinced that selling houses trading at 30 x revenues with paper thin margins (non existent) under attack from all angles after a historically unprecedented run up in prices into the lowest interest rates in recorded history required any special insight, I think owning them beforehand though is pretty impressive and took either idiocy or incredible insight (think bitcoin didn't make any sense to begin with but worked out well).
Terming out debt at those rates would have made more sense than paying down, even current rates are massively negative.
All I am saying is that borrowing money and terming it out at historically low rates and raising equity before you need it is common sense.
The equity they raised was still at an inappropriately low price at the time, looks good now and I'm glad they did.
Clever stuff in the loans maybe but at the time the borrowers had the power, agree skillful though.
They did a much better job than their competitors but nothing special here just classic decent business acumen. I guess I am used to America and in NZ this is probably some kind of never before seen ground breaking achievement.
At the half year Brent mentioned they were looking at increasing build rates to 300+ per year. I have seen nothing anywhere that says otherwise.
I look forward to May when they report their Full Year, but mostly look forward to 2023/24 beyond. I love these prices and continue to accumulate much to my Accountants frustration.
I think Mav was simply making a point to the many down rampers and doomsayers this thread has been inundated with, for literally years. OCA has been trashed constantly, more than any other RV provider, and the anti-OCA brigade has consistently criticised management and tried to convince the rest of us that we are living in La La Land, holding this company.
We are not. As you said, OCA management are "doing what they should" - but a bucketload of posters have chosen not to see/acknowledge it.
I've just done that thanks. I suspect they are not allowed to comment , since we are in the blackout period.
Should they respond, I'll pass it on here.( which I have been clear to them about)
It is a very material peice of information as it effects many aspects.
BTW. The industry throttling back production has to be a good thing as future demand goes unsatisfied. If OCA is maintaining its build rate as usual then that's even better.
If the CAGR slows from long term 26% per year it's no hardship.
But more importantly, even if the dollar value of the free pool of money hasn't increased a cent, its value has increased dramatically. And I mean dramatically. Very few will appreciate this but it is a massive factor.
Hope yet for a get out of jail card
In the media-
Merger and acquisition activity in Australia sparked the retirement village sector here. US investment firm Bain Capital has made a A$775m (NZ$829m) takeover offer for aged-care provider Estia Health at $3 a share, a 28% premium to its latest price of A$2.66.
A buck a share for OCA might be welcome
It's not often you make a dick of yourself, but this is scraping the bottom. You must realise that apart from bull****, the 'in crowd' of persistent detractors have moved on elsewhere, and good riddance to them, as they're so poorly informed about the health of OCA, dwelling on myths that are just simply not true.
You reckon the board and management who hold millions of shares would sell for a $1.00? Get real mate, you're losing the plot. By all means post a take over elsewhere, but to extrapolate to OCA and worse, suggest a ridiculous price ... just stop it, it's not doing anything to advance the discussion, or your reputation.
You wanted a reaction, you got it! Post the same drivel on the other RV threads as well, with your acquisition price for them, then I'll know you're not just bashing OCA for some perverse reason or effect.
At least state your reasons for believing a dollar a share would be an attractive price to sell at.
If this is jail then I'd better start committing some serious crimes.
Even Bull can come up with some quasi credible bearish reasoning from the perspective of first order thinking.
W69 habitually picks whatever statistic looks worst and posts it as he loves to stir - it's his special thing.
As for informing his hypothetical 'what if this had been OCA' - extrapolating the takeover premium into an OCA shareprice - he could have looked at the implied price to book and what that price per share outcome would have been.
* Bain reported offer of ~$3/shr
* Estia consensus BVPS at 30 june 2023 of $2.0
* implied price to book of 1.5x
* Consensus BVPS for OCA 1.34
* You can do the math (hint, its twice what w69 threw out).
Disc: i'm not even a loyal OCA holder - have a most deminimus shareholding - and don't what the right answer is and dont really care either way - but found his analysis stunted. There will be a variety of other implied valuation metrics coming from Estia's takeover and it may not even be a good comp given its in a different country with a different set of circumstances.
Happy to let it this dog go at 80c....lol
Is this just because the share price has fallen well below what you paid recently and now you're realising that this is a big boys game and you're out of your depth? You have no idea what you're doing and pray for the day that you can just break even and get out?
Is Oceania Healthcare the 'dog' or is it your lack of understanding of the capital markets that is in fact the mutt?
Better luck next time eh.
The market spoken....72c now...
Retail buyers like u guys...too dumb got suck in above $1....🤣🤣🤣
I've been going through the phone book looking for this dude bull was talking about, lower bollinger, finally got hold of him. He told me $2 by Christmas.
But he refused to say which Christmas.
Nope, My retirement Portfolio Average is $0.5984 per. I have have heaps. This has increased as I have been buying between $0.80 and $0.73.
Maybe your so called dumb retail investors as you called it, are looking at the long term. Why don't you run to your kennel and play with your tail.
no we are not poorly informed ..... we were the smart money and got out at near the top after reading the tea leaves correctly.
Some of your post's , the latest attacking winner come across as someone who is emotionally attached to there stock which is a fundamental mistake in investing , even long term investing
becoming emotional over a stock lead's to irrational decision making in your case you probably brought heaps at the gift of covid lows and now you have lost half your gains because of your love of the stock and failure to read the situation correctly rueing your lost gains in the process and hoping one day you will regain your former riches
another person emotially attached to the stock who has not read the tea leaves correctly and its not sit stirring it giving an oposing view compared to your bullish ramping lol
thats what makes a market opposing sides , one side is the winner the other the loser
Bull, You are only a "loser" on the Sharemarket when you see at a loss, just like a when you a "Winner" you sell at a profit. There are sorts of investors whether it be short, Momentum or Long Term Investor. Each has there own timeline. Nothing to do with tealeaves.
The "lol" you often add to the end of many of your sentences, gives you away more than you realise. You do not post in this thread to help anyone. You post here purely for entertainment purposes. If you and your 12 monitors are so incredibly successful, as you claim, why on earth are you wasting your time hanging out in pointless discussions? Surely you'd have more fun on a world cruise, or swimming with sharks or sipping champagne on your private jet.
You are quite possibly the least credible person in these forums.
But you have a wonderful day!
This is such an active thread that I had to go back to page 1409 for this quote. Does anyone know if any sales have actually been achieved and if so how it is? Anyone aware if properties are listed with a broker and if so which?
Or are we to assume these properties are effectively unsaleable/valueless as operating entities in the current market?
I looked at Note 3.3 to the Interim Financial Statements for the 6 months ended 30 September 2022. Assets are classified as "held for sale" when their carrying amount is to be recovered principally through a sale transaction and a sale is consider highly probable. As at 30 September ten sites " are being actively marketed for sale " and as such meet the definition.
These sites and their respective land, building, investment property, plant and equipment and liabilities are reclassified for reporting purposes. After deducting around $2.5m for "change in fair value" during the period the balance attributed to these assets was $64.784m. These were no sites classified as held for sale as at 31 March 2022. Currently the Oceania website still lists 47 villages as operated by OCA so by implication no sales have occurred in the intervening period.
As I have pointed out these 10 (unidentified) villages are over 20% of the total number operated by OCA. It is unclear if final divestment of one or more of these villages will result in the realisation of further downward change in fair value than that taken when these villages were determined to be appropriate to list for sale or if significant additional adjustment is required upon realisation what that means for the carry value of OCA's other village assets (or for that matter other RV operators).
I believe this aspect is the most determinant of OCA's current share price.
A idea of what’s happening with property market and property prices out there:
https://www.oneroof.co.nz/news/mortg...8-months-43279
Mortgagee sale - 38% drop in less than 1.5 years from $2.56 m to $1.611m.
The market was nuts at the time. But if I recall rightly and it is something that hasnt really been mentioned so much. New housing density laws was announced late 2021 that allowed intensification virtually anywhere in the main cities. Supply of development land literally increased overnight. Of course rates have increased since, lending and RBNZ rules have tightened. Let's not forget about CCCFA.
I do believe the concentration of risk are for purchases around early late 2020/early 2021 to late 2021. That's just a small percentage of all of NZ properties. I firmly believe most NZers will do ok.
Lookout your place will be up for mortgagee sale soon and it will sell for 38% less than what it was worth a year ago.
Effectively thats what you are suggesting, because it happened once or twice, it going to happen to everyone.
Doom and Gloom based on instances either isolated, or not relevant to most homeowners.
Hate to live in your household, it must be every spare moment in crisis, "Oh my God! Oh No!."
Chill, bottomfeeder.
I posted the article to provide perspective on what's happening out there in the real world where the property market has turned septic for some buyers/speculators.
Real estate valuations are based upon previous sale values so the market is now entering a rapid declining value stage, triggering mortgagee sales as the one in the link.
All except the RVs of course - they just keep posting upward revisions to their valuations?
Are you feeling punch drunk from the fall and fall of OCA's sp, reacting to information which obviously you do not like?
Maybe, but am getting tired of the quoting of sporadic incidents as bding the norm for the future.
One proven result of increased interest rates is a 40 drop in property sales. Now this can also signal that many people are reluctant to sell at reduced prices, because they dont have to and they feel their properties are worth more. This could also be because you cant build new for anything near what you used to, also rents have not decreased and in fact are increasing thus why sell when you can do your own thing and rent your property out.
For the umpteenth time, you can build today much cheaper than before - because the biggest component of a new build these days is LAND. And the price of land has dropped hugely in the last 12 months from the absurd levels they reached in 2021.
You have no idea really, do you of property development dynamics?
That may well be the case, who are we to question a property sector participant, conveyor, or whatever your insights are. What we are waiting for is the correlation of the residential property sector, to the RV sector, which the market has already decided is profound, but in reality is not quite as obvious yet.
SUM say it's not as profound as the market seems to believe, Scott has repeated this at least twice. RYM shat on itself with it's dodgy debt having to repay it with huge penalties, so we're still waiting on their sales figures. ARV look a bit exposed to debt and covenants, we'll have to wait for their reporting. OCA, well the FY is about to end and it'll be a few months until we find out how or whether they've been affected.
Trotting out anecdotal and media reports of incidences where some developer or punter took a bath on their property is interesting, but not necessarily reflective of the whole RV sector. Given that you only post these on OCA, maybe we can take it that you're interested to get some but are also waiting until the share price bottoms out. Can't argue with that if you're onto it with your timing. I'd say, all the best and carry on!
Well that's a brave statement. I was a Chartered Accountant in public practice for 40 years. I dealt with numerous developments, most very successful. Sure some failed due to undercapitalisation, and demand implications, as well as property values at various states of economic difficulties. But you certainly cant tar all with the same brush as you do. Just because one is a dismal failure not all are going to fail. I also experienced profitabiliyy aspects of property development rising dramatically, and others suffering at the same time, for very small nuanced reasons. As you say property markets and developments are dynamic. Have to agree. When there appears to be a rout, there is also a follow through with an improvement and vica versa. Not as you suggest, a few mortgagee sales and then the whole property market is collapsing.
Doesn't pay to be too optimistic, but I think the worse scenario to investing is overt and continuous pessimism, which will definitely restrict your capabilities to see and judge clearly.
Interestingly the market is valuing Argosy, which is a dog of a business model, at 62% of book.
And OCA at 27% of book value (when you understand how to actually measure book value).
Even under GAAP OCA is being valued at 53% of book.
Now I realise 0.62 book for Argosy is probably far too high (I would never pay that) but even so, very interesting.
Two completely different businesses. One far superior to the other.
Debt holding back retirement village sector - report
It said three of the bigger firms in the sector listed on the stock exchange - Ryman Healthcare, Arvida and Oceania Healthcare - have tripled the amount of debt they are carrying over the past five years, more than any other sector.
But analyst and report co-author Aaron Ibbotson said the companies have probably taken on too much debt.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/...-sector-report
get the cash right's issue under way before its too late :scared:
Or maybe they simply do what we have already discussed, as mentioned in the article:
"If interest rates and construction costs remain high, we estimate that the sector has an attractive 'out' by not starting any new build projects.
"This could result in the sector becoming largely debt-free."
Forsyth Barr said the three operators had each indicated they would scale back on development and take a more cautious approach.
"If these operators are able… to pay down debt alongside the development rundown… there would be a sizeable upside to the equity value over the next three to four years," it said.
While I agree with your statement about cashflows, share prices have been down significantly for the past three years. Prices for this sector in particular, have fluctuated up and down between the same general range of price, over that period, so your apparent claim that pulling back on development is the reason for today's prices, is not credible.
no i dont get emotional over stock's
the article you posted had some shortcoming's in that it focused mainly on debt
i thought i would highlight the article again because of the analyst's short coming in relation to not spending enough time on cashflow's going forward which of course has some relation to debt among other factors
i dont agree with your statement arv has more to worry about than oca i think they are all equal to worry
Bull is right, Oceania didn't take on anywhere near enough debt at the rates that they got, this is hindsight but they could have borrowed far more and bought it back again if they wanted, or preferably stock.
Meanwhile I want to take my holding up to 150,000 shares. If I was 95% of people on share trader I would want to pay more for the extra shares I need.
I want to get up to 150k by spending as little as possible.
Before you all pile on Bull, let's remember this is a person who has an astounding long term record and has made enough to easily retire but chooses to put in 60 hours a week working with handicapped children.
They say the kids can relate to him.
It is always a good sign/reflection of a person if animals and kids relate well.
Good on ya Bull.
I sense the experience is enriching that's beyond monetary. So it should be.
Any chance you disclosing your track record.
Promise won't accuse you of bragging.
Jokes....all good if you want to keep it to yourself. I understand the purpose is to improve oneself and not compare to us.
Contemplating topping up at current price but thinking cash is King at the moment. In other words how low can OCA go and when will sector come back in favour. Guess it will bounce back as soon as it can be shown that real estate values are going up again and an end to the war in Ukraine is eminent. Against that should any more Banks roll over or a manipulated crash occur then there is scope for further downturn. Nothing changes and history repeats. It has been said, falling house prices, rising sharemarket. Interesting times not for the faint hearted.
Arvida, rayman, OCA ..need to be delisted....what a waste...
Agree fully with you, BlackPeter. People shouldn't make statements without qualifying their reasons for doing so.
Such statements are not helpful... to anyone.
No offence intended and I understand your thoughts, however if you have the ability to be able to make that choice (holding cash vs OCA until you get a better shot) and you can consistently make these decisions, you will be on the NZ rich list followed shortly by the global one.
If you have that ability then you should go to 100% cash and then when you know the time is right, lever up massively.
If you can prove you have this ability I will give you all of my money as well and pay you a very hansom fee.
Mavericks post from a year ago, the readjustment was certainly not complete. Timing is so tough that nobody can do it.
While I respect Mavs analysis and input on OCA as much as anyone and freely admit that he knows more about this company than I ever will, I take extreme umbrage at the comment;
'You know I'm all about the value and have a long time horizon but don't you worry , I still feel these falls as keenly as anybody'.
Any long time horizon value investor who understands OCA should not 'feel these falls keenly', the falls should instead get their heart racing and filled with joy. It should be the very best outcome they could hope for.
Maverick is smart and I am right, this is why he will agree with me.
I think X-men felt deprived of attention. We love you bro and you are a valuable member of our community.
you know the funny thing about all your analysis about how lovely it is to have the price lower and lower and to keep buying cause this wonderful amazing company is so cheap long term is the fact in all your analysis you fail to mention one risk where it could all go wrong and you will lose a very large amount of money. no investment is risk free
how about you enlighten us of the risks you see where you could lose your money
Ok, good question Bull.
Firstly, the lower the price is then the less risk there is, provided there hasn't been a major change in the business.
As far as losing a very large amount of money - this cannot happen to me with OCA as it is sized such that even a total loss would be relatively inconsequential and on top of that I believe the risk of total loss to be virtually non existent.
Having said that, why am I not more invested in this company then? Well a couple of reasons, one being opportunities elsewhere and the other being what you are talking about which is OCA specific risks (and NZ) which of course exist.
The main risk that I see is regulation, if any regulation is put in place that effects the 'float' or the billion dollars of interest free non callable unconditional financing then that's a change that would make me no longer interested in the business. Given that many people don't understand this aspect of it, including the pros and how much negativity is already in the price, if these types of regulations were implemented then possibly would not have too dramatic short term effect? I don't know.
The second risk is of industry overbuilding, which I think has been dramatically de risked of late.
Third risk is of the type that we have recently seen at Ryman, god awful capital allocation. I think we can quantify that risk reasonably well.
Fourth risk is of fraud or some major financing screw up - again easily quantifiable.
And then another major risk factor for me is having any investment in a quasi communist country where profit is a dirty word and the government can and does pass any law they like overnight under urgency and more importantly the populace does not care or perhaps even understand. We could easily see a massive debasement in our currency or a true financial crisis here the likes of which cannot be imagined.
I control this risk by having only one single investment in the commie paradise which is OCA.
Speaking of risk, damn will you look at that Russian banks share price!
Bull, the share trader with his screens so bright,
His fingers move with speed, his eyes alight.
He knows each chart like the back of his hand,
With precision he trades across the land.
No matter the time or the place he may be,
Bull can make money, just wait and see.
From London to Tokyo, his trades take flight,
Profit and success are always in sight.
The numbers, the trends, they all speak to him,
With every tick he feels the market's whim.
He's a master of the game, a true pro,
In the world of trading, he's a hero.
His twelve screens are his windows to wealth,
Bull's expertise and skill are his greatest wealth.
He knows the tricks of the trade, the secrets too,
His knowledge and instincts always guide him true.
So if you're ever in need of some stock advice,
Seek out Bull, the master of the financial slice.
His charts and graphs will show the way,
To riches and success every single day.
good to see someone controlling there risk and admitting there is risk.
One risk you have not mentioned taking in regard you say this company is truely amazing is the risk of the price continuing to fall and then there is a takeover of this truely amazing company
sailor says 75c is a bargain even cheaper is better
eg lets say the price falls to 40c your underwater 50% on your initial investment ( which is probably true for sailor) but no worries sailor says cheaper shares i love that :t_up:
then a suitor comes along and offers to takeover the company at 60c a 50% premium to the prevailing price :scared: of 40c , 50% premium wow
the company succeeds and takeover is complete of this truely amazing company , poor sailor has lost even though he thought buying lower was amazing value
5th risk is the entire business model works on appreciating capital value.