Warren Buffet's mantra - 'Buy when no one else is'. So, why aren't you?

Thrugelmir

mewbie wrote: »

Agreed. But it is nice, and cautionary, to know that no one is perfect

Though he didn't get caught in the HPC or BTL market for that matter. :cool:

sabretoothtigger

He owned some irish banks I think.
Whats important is that his bad plays were not significant, if he lost money mostly it was because everything fell in value and he is probably on the same course now that he was ten years ago

Remember Soros bought shares in Lehmans last summer, what happened there I wonder. He must have dumped them quietly

Soros bought 9.5 million shares when Lehman's price averaged $37.42 per share

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/09/12/costly_mistakes/

Thrugelmir

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

He owned some irish banks I think.
Whats important is that his bad plays were not significant, if he lost money mostly it was because everything fell in value and he is probably on the same course now that he was ten years ago

Remember Soros bought shares in Lehmans last summer, what happened there I wonder. He must have dumped them quietly



http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/09/12/costly_mistakes/

As a hedge fund they would have held a contrian investment to mitigate the risk. Though probably didn't budget on a wipeout. The investment in Lehmans was a total punt.

chopperharris

re barcs

A quick back read of my posts mentioned that barcs has problems yet to be realised or disclosed , and that they are highly protective of share price.So I am not a ramper , however I felt i would reply on the share scare they are having.

I think i remember realising that the tea towel helmet mob are only dropping 11 percent of their investment at a 50 odd percent profit.Thats far from dumping thier lot , its barely over 10 percent yet the market gets the skitters.IMO its the day trader small investor that sees a problem , long term outlook and small investors will be ok as will some experienced day traders.

re buffet

for gods sake 30 years of on top and the worst financial year since 29 across the board and everyone doubts his model.Perhaps his model was as good as the markets and 30 percent or more drops are correlative.Not my model , or that of the sigoth's ifa , its a mcdonalds drive through investment product....and theres nowt up with a maccie d when you like maccie d.

re bank shares

The biggest problem of the bank shares are the tories , and that vulture branson.The tories should be backing banks , not threatening wiping out the investor with complete nationalisation when all that does is prevent hmg from also making a profit.

Branson sold off his bank long ago , now wants another at the expense of the taxpayer , and will once again sell it off at the best price in the future.Why didnt he table for those that went belly up , or buy up shares when they were on the floor?Simple answer , look like the underdog , and a free meal to sell off to buy more.This is the same guy that fitted up ba after doing the same , says budget airlines are ruining the planet then wants into f1.

re politics

The tories wont save the economy , think cuts in rich folks taxes and poor folks benefits and jobs.Sure its easy to blame labour for the current economical woes , easy for the papers and media to brainwash the simpleminded into voting in the tories.A vote for the tories is a vote for the shepard , mint sauce that you will be paying for as others eat you.Nationalisation from the tories , the party that privatised everything , and sold it back to those that owned it already....do we have short term memory and blindfolds?

Much as I hate to admit it labour is the best bet for england , even if they arent real labour but "I cant believe its not conservative".You just dont jump off the dead in the water ship for a leaking lifeboat people.Its the sticking plaster question , your gonna have pain so its either short or long , give em one more term before you sell your soul to the tories....by that time im sure they will have a working clone of maggie to save the uk but you will have to wait a while and buy some silver bullets and garlic.

sabretoothtigger

I think branson offered to buy nr but he probably wanted a subsidy. I cant remember, I wish I had paid more attention now

libs are probably the best but people arent that desperate yet

Graham_Devon

Old_Slaphead wrote: »

The herd, given the demand they create, can never buy at the bottom. Once they get interested, the price goes up.

Maybe the 'uberbears' don't practice what they preach and use publicised bearish commentary to keep prices down whilst they buy. Once they've bought then they'll turn bullish.

Not everyone with bear type thoughts does not have a home and are waiting to buy.

I have a home, with a mortgage...am in negative equity. But I still can still seperate the fact of what is going on around me, from my desire to make money on my home.

Conrad

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Never been a fan of unit trusts. Always invested in Investment Trusts over the years. As I like transparency to what the underlying holdings are.

Are you sure you got this the right way round?

I always thought investment trusts were a lot less transparnet than unit trusts as with the former you only own shares in the trust itsself and the trust can gear - up with borrowings adding to risk.

Unit trusts I always thought were merely vessels to the underlying shares, with gearing disallowed.

I'm guessing you are correct, as you seem very knowledgable.

I'll look into the ETF you mentioned, atallman.

chopperharris

sabretoothtigger wrote: »

I think branson offered to buy nr but he probably wanted a subsidy. I cant remember, I wish I had paid more attention now

libs are probably the best but people arent that desperate yet

you mean he wanted paid to take it and have it rebranded?;)

maybe bnp as the only choice , chuck out everyone cept the blue eyed blondes and keep their monies....deficit solved.

Lib dems , now thats a good idea , a world of britas empire instead of the bnp british empire.

hw about the ggilf party yummy lumley and her kurki weilding pensioner bodyguards?

chupov

Really2 wrote: »

I did post on that yesterday and a lot are before auction.
My EA relative is selling Repo semi's that were £130K pre crash for £60-£70K and their is serious demand for them. (As you could imagine)

wow, so

Houses too expensive = no sales.
Houses at decent price = sales.

apart from the bears who have pointed this out for ages who would of guessed?

Really2

chupov wrote: »

wow, so

Houses too expensive = no sales.
Houses at decent price = sales.

apart from the bears who have pointed this out for ages who would of guessed?

Wow thats the most dim witted answer i have seen to something i wrote months ago.

They were selling/sold pre crash for £130K, they are now selling/sold for £60-70k (and being gazumped)

Is that so hard to understand or do you think no houses sold in 2007 and all prices were asking prices?
As far as i know more houses were sold in 2007 than now so are you saying their is more demand when prices are higher?