Friday File: Another Netflix Wanna-be, plus BOMN and NVDA updates

by Travis Johnson, Stock Gumshoe | April 6, 2018 4:16 pm

Adding one new stock to the Real Money Portfolio, plus some add-on buys... and updates on Boston Omaha, NVIDIA, Alphabet, Facebook, and more...

Sometimes we just need to take a step back. On Tuesday, we were headed into a devastating trade war, with a third of our exports to China subject to punishing tariffs (in response to the tariffs proposed on more than 10% of their exports to the US)… by mid-afternoon on Wednesday, the trade war is over and everyone was happy again and getting along. Friday morning, Trump talks about doubling the list of tariff products and panic returns… and these days, with volatility returning to the market, all the short-term traders are a little nervous about holding anything over the weekend, when they’ll be stuck watching 65 hours of potential Trump tweets (and potential ‘black swans’ of whatever sort) without being able to react.

Sometimes I think it would be much more rational to look at your investments only once a week, on the weekend, when the market is closed — see the full spread of the news of that week in more context, make your decisions, and, if you decide that a change has to be made, submit your limit orders to buy or sell and come back in a week to see if those orders were triggered. That feels like a much more reasonable way to build a portfolio for the long term — the internet has been an incredible boon for society and has made trading much easier, and democratized the access to information… but man, has it ever created a massive amount of crap information in the process.

We are larded with excess data, and yet ever more we are short on wisdom. Wisdom takes time and processing power to achieve, and in the context of our work here the hope is that it fuels good investing decisions, not jitterbug trading. But it’s hard to take the time to build that wisdom if the urge to react to every bit of news is still right there in our face each day.

I wonder whether the next wave of technology will come with a better “off switch” to prevent us from more severely damaging ourselves — will we do a “cleanse” or a “fast” to rid ourselves of excess data and avoid unneeded information, the way that some people try to diet or “clear toxins” from their bodies today? Might we get to the internet version of a “silent retreat?” It’s hard to picture, but it feels to me like that would be really, really good for us as human beings.

A couple weeks ago, I read a great article by Morgan Housel about bad forecasts[1], and it’s worth revisiting every now and then: People, even the most expert people, leading professionals in their field, are terrible at predicting the future. Markets are harder to predict than many things, and incentives are in place to make wild forecasts… as well as to pay attention to wild forecasts, which is what fuels so much of the newsletter industry (especially the “end is nigh” crowd) and the great investing punditocracy in general. In Housel’s words, “When things are calm people believe what they tell themselves. When things are crazy they believe what other people tell them.”

Newsletters and pundits are incentivized to make very aggressive predictions, and to forecast calamity… because that gets them attention, and because it sparks that desire in those of us who feel uninformed to send a few bucks their way in hopes that it will help us to be ready just in case.

I also like Housel’s piece from a while back about expectations vs. forecasts[2]… it gives a good way to think about what kind of fortune telling you’re relying on. Expectations make you sort of prepared for bad (or good) things that will probably happen at some point, because they’ve generally happened with some regularity in the past or are within the probable outcomes… but forecasts lead you to bet on when those things will happen, often with a false sense of certainty because you’ve turned your rational expectation into an irrationally precise forecast.

So with that admonition in mind, meaning that all of this is probably counterproductive blather… what caught my eye in the flood of information this week?


I read through the latest Annual Letter from Boston Omaha (BOMN)[3] this week, and it returns me to the sentiment I have held about this company since I first learned about it after the IPO last year: They talk a really good game, again clearly emulating Berkshire Hathaway and Warren Buffett’s letters to shareholders — including a bad joke or two as well as a pretty open and honest interpretation of the business and their progress in building it (the one thing they don’t really address is their large incentive plan for management, which seems quite a bit more generous than Buffett was with himself at Berkshire in the early days… but BOMN did, at least, improve upon that with some recent adjustments[4], including a compensation cap and a hurdle rate).

The company has an admirable plan to provide national, lower-cost surety insurance, which is what I find most interesting, but they are open about the fact that this might fail — they are doing everything right in setting up an insurer that is nationally licensed and can do its own underwriting, which could (along with a new technology platform) cut out the impact of the high commission to insurance agents in this niche business… but surety insurance is not primary to most people or businesses, and for the most part businesses probably go to their existing insurance agent when they need the surety bond and don’t necessarily “shop around,” so it might be hard to build that new business.

But, to further the comparison to Berkshire Hathaway (a comparison that is completely unjustified at this point, to be clear), GEICO faced the same problems in building a car insurance business without local agents in the 1970s and 80s. GEICO solved that first with a government tie-in that let them market to a niche, government employees, huge cost-cutting and layoffs done by Jack Byrne (father of Patrick Byrne, who we wrote about yesterday), and then, much later, with a massive advertising budget once Buffett and his managers saw how successful the company could be with more customers. Hopefully Boston Omaha will find a marketing niche that lets them dramatically ramp up distribution with what is becoming, they hope, a standardized and national business, but it probably won’t be fast and they are definitely not the only people going after this market.

I still like what they’re trying to do, and I think this is the very definition of a “buy and wait” investment — I like the business plan, I like the strategy, I like the way they talk to shareholders, and I think they have a decent chance of building something real that can grow for a long time… particularly because they have long-term money from their own family investment funds in the company, including a big infusion of cash with this latest private placement. That’s effectively a big insider buy at more than 1.5X book value, which is a positive signal.

But I’m not crazy about the valuation, and do notice that all of that is pretty soft — a strategy and a way of communicating. That’s all the business really is right now, and it’s trading for more than 1.5X book value, even more now that the stock has surged following the attention the annual letter got this week. Does that mean that we’re really getting in early on a business and a management team that will build something worthwhile… or are we getting sucked in by what is effectively marketing? (Writing good letters and emulating Berkshire Hathaway is great marketing, which is not the same as saying that it’s insincere or misleading). One commenter on Twitter caught my eye with a good perspective: For startup funds like this that trade at a premium to cash or book value, the communication with investors has to be good because the shareholder letter is the product.

They could certainly fail, or be mildly successful in a quiet and slow-growth business, and you shouldn’t relish paying 1.5X or 2X book value for an unprofitable investment company/conglomerate unless it can grow substantially over time. Just imagine yourself giving a friend a $20 bill and saying, “I want you to invest this in something that’s worth $14, then we’ll share the profits over time” … it might work, but it’s not immediately attractive unless your friend has unusually great access to investments that you couldn’t buy yourself, and you trust him to manage those investments really well.

So that’s why I’m likely to nibble more if the stock gets cheaper, but mostly just watch and see how management progresses. Hopefully I’ll be making it to one of their annual meetings in Omaha or Boston in the years to come so I can get a little better insight into management’s plans (Omaha will be the next one, in the Fall, they alternate), and hopefully they’ll toil in obscurity for a while and there will be discounted buying opportunities. As with so many other stocks, the story is compelling and interesting and there is something real building underneath that story — but the price you pay matters.

As Great-Uncle Warren likes to say, “Price is what you pay, value is what you get.” And you can only control the price, so don’t give up on that one bit of control you have.


Regarding Facebook (FB), which has mostly traded right around the stop loss level of $157ish, I thought it worthwhile to note, also, that if you’re more pessimistic or prefer to use a “one size fits all” stop loss instead of the volatility quotient stop loss suggested by TradeStops, that for my position a 20% stop loss would be $154.50 or so (which has also been triggered), and a 25% stop loss would be just below $145, which has not been hit yet.

I am comfortable right now with my smaller position, but I will notice if it hits that $145 level. Facebook is one of the greatest advertising networks ever invented, and it’s not going to be easy for the business to collapse, but management has done a terrible job of oversight and damage control, at least until Sheryl Sandberg hit the media circuit full-speed yesterday[5], and the company is extraordinarily leveraged to just this one business, the delivery of targeted advertising… and that type of advertising is still important and still growing, and probably won’t go away in any meaningful way, but the backlash is real[6].

And when it comes to advertising, it might turn out in the end that Amazon (AMZN) and Alphabet (GOOG) (which I added to slightly today) have much stronger and more sustainable core advertising businesses, because they’re selling advertising mostly aimed at people who are looking for something to buy — they use some of the same creepy targeting tools and psychological profiling, and this might be splitting hairs, but they don’t insert it so much into your discussions with your “friends,” so people don’t hate them quite so much right now (other than President Trump, of course, who seems apoplectic over being criticized by Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post and wants revenge on Amazon).

There has been a decline in the amount of time spent on Facebook over the past year or so, even before this latest Cambridge Analytica scandal, and that means there’s room for things to fall apart pretty quickly if the bad news parade lasts — the leverage could be painful on the other side. I’m wary of that, even as I remain amazed at what an astounding business Facebook has built. The next few months will tell us a lot about whether or not that advertising machine will start a new wave of growth, and what sort of impact any regulatory pressure or internal soul-searching at Facebook will have on their financials.


NVIDIA (NVDA) shares took a hit from a lower estimate of GPU demand from Wells Fargo, we’re told — the quote from analyst David Wong[7] was about “multiple risks associated with Nvidia’s exposure to cryptocurrency mining” and “concerns over the sustainability of Nvidia’s gaming, automotive and datacenter growth.” He’s got a $100 price target, which, of course, makes him stand out dramatically apart from the crowd of NVDA analysts, who have an average price target of about $250 (he’s one of only three “sell” or “underperform” recommendations), though the others are roughly split 50/50 between hold and buy… so optimism is not overwhelming.

And it’s worth noting, for those of us who get a little too interested in the very recent past, that NVIDIA was under $100 less than a year ago — it’s not as completely bizarre an assessment as it may sound, though he’s clearly less optimistic about gaming and datacenter demand than I am (the headline is that cryptocurrency demand is collapsing, partly because of new mining-only chips[8], which will hurt NVIDIA’s core GPU gaming chips, and that may be so — but I have no idea which way cryptocurrency will go, we don’t know much of the GPU retail demand was actually for mining and not for video gamers, and I don’t count on it driving NVIDIA’s results either way).

Wong’s earnings forecast is quite a bit below the average expectation for this year, as well, he lowered it from $5.39 to $5.26 (the analyst average is $6.78), so a $100 price target is really just giving NVDA a still above-average current-year PE of 19 (the S&P average forward PE is roughly 17). I think he’s wrong about NVDA, and that the company is worth a substantial premium valuation because of their strength in gaming and AI processing, but that’s mostly because of the “network effect” they get in data science. Most AI scientists and startups use NVIDIA’s software and hardware because it’s faster and widely accepted, and they are not particularly incentivized to learn any other framework, which means the next great systems and businesses are also likely to be built on NVIDA platforms.

That’s far from being a guarantee of success, particularly with Intel breathing down their neck, but the weakness at NVIDIA’s closest GPU competitor AMD, with its possibly brand-damaging security issues[9], might take away some of the competitive pressure even if falling cryptocurrency prices and mining-specific chip introductions that compete with GPUs mean that there’s less demand for NVIDIA’s core gaming chips.

So I added slightly to my NVIDIA position on this latest dip in the $215 neighborhood, but that’s not a particularly high-conviction move, just some opportunistic dip buying — I will still pay close attention to my stop loss trigger price in the low $180s.


In the “not so sexy” part of the market, I’ve ben watching another mutual conversion — Columbia Financial (ticker will be CLBK) is doing a minority equity sale and has completed its offering to accountholders, with details about the deal (which almost certainly would have been oversubscribed) fairly soon, I expect. The likelihood is that the stock will commence trading on the public markets quite soon — certainly within a month or two, and possibly as early as next week.

Mutual conversions like this, where a depositor-owned institution becomes a stockholder-owned institution, can be wonderful buying opportunities for those who have a few years to wait and value a “steady as she goes” investment… though that’s a generalization that doesn’t necessarily apply to every single conversion. And there haven’t been many of them in the past couple years, so PCSB got a lot of attention last year and I think CLBK probably will this year, as well, partly because both are visible in the NYC metro area and will have a bunch of financial industry folks as depositors and customers.

These mutual conversions are not always great stocks to buy on the first day, like PCSB Financial (PCSB) was for us, particularly if many of those who bought shares in the conversion are wont to “flip” their shares at the much higher public price (the offering was at $10, the shares always open much higher than that when they start trading)… but often a strong bank at a premium to book value will still be underpriced because of the huge gap between the offering price to their insiders and the actual value of the company, including the big slug of capital they get from the offering to their accountholders.

That can especially be true if the market in general is weak, or if interest rate concerns have bank stocks soft at the time that the initial listing happens, so I’ll hold out some hope that the shares go public quietly and inexpensively — Columbia Financial is not as obviously appealing as PCSB, since it’s not in quite as wealthy an area, but it’s certainly no slouch and is much larger (48 branches throughout New Jersey, $5.8 billion in assets) and could be another appealing acquisition for the regional banks who are trying to expand (or, of course, could do acquisitions on its own and try to become more of a regional bank).

I haven’t read the filings carefully yet to see what the price/book valuation might be following the completion of that offering, but it’s on my list and given the size of the equity raise relative to the asset base it should be compelling if the price doesn’t spike too high on IPO day. Ticker should end up being CLBK, and I’ll let you know if I learn more.

Interestingly, they compete with Clifton Bancorp (was CSBK), which was one of the stocks I was watching last year[10] because it was getting close to the end of its three-year moratorium following its mutual conversion (mutual conversions have to wait three years before they can be acquired), and Clifton did end up getting acquired, but the acquisition was not at a huge premium (acquirer was Kearny, KRNY — implied takeover price was $18, better than a 10% premium, but it was an all-stock buy and KRNY is off 15% or so from its highs now, so if you held the KRNY shares for a few more months after the acquisition you’d currently be in the red).

So, mutual conversions are not magical, price still matters, and they don’t always beat the market, but on average they are very stable and profitable. I’m still holding my PCSB position, partly because of the potential for a takeover in a couple years, but I wouldn’t rush to buy at current prices near $21 — my estimate is that the downside is limited to about $17 in a “regular” market environment and the upside to about $26, so you get a better risk/reward scenario when you can buy it below $20.


Following up on my thoughts about Fairfax India[11] (and India in general) last week, I should note that Flipkart, often rumored as a takeover target by a big international company, is now possibly the subject of a bidding war. The reports earlier this year were that Walmart was in advanced talks to buy a large minority stake (40%), presumably as a way to step in front of Amazon, which is competing with Flipkart in India… and now the rumors are that Amazon might also bid on Flipkart[12], with talk of the valuation surpassing $20 billion.

That would be a pretty nice gain for Naspers (NPSNY), giving their 16% stake a value of roughly $3 billion, though they’d probably prefer to remain a shareholder given FlipKart’s long-term potential and recent momentum. And as with everything Naspers, it pales in import compared to their Tencent stake (which is currently worth about $150 billion).

It does serve to remind us that India is the big uncorrelated, un-tariff’ed growth story in the world right now… which doesn’t mean that all will be sunshine and roses, there are lots of problems in India, from authoritarian tendencies to terrible inequality to bureaucratic absurdities and wildly insufficient infrastructure, but it does mean that investor attention on the subcontinent continues to grow, and that seems likely to me to push valuations higher over time, particularly in the service industries that benefit from the rise of the Indian consumer. Travel and financial services and ecommerce are all appealing, which is why I put more into Fairfax India (financial services and airports, among other investments) last week, and why I like the Naspers exposure to India, including their large positions in MakeMyTrip (MMYT) an Flipkart, and the potential for little Yatra Online (YTRA) to grow into something substantial in the shadow of MakeMyTrip.

It seems odd to refer to India or China as “emerging” economies these days, since they’re both huge, much larger than Japan or Germany and, in China’s case, larger than the US… though, of course, the per-capital GDP is far smaller because of the massive, massive number of “capitas” in those countries.

But what I keep coming back to is that India, unlike China, has a young population… which means growth potential is far higher (China has a similar demographic cliff to the US and Europe, with lots of folks entering their retirement years, and while that portends a demographics-led slowdown in the industrialized world as people retire and consume less, in China it’s arguably also helping to fuel “too much” savings thanks to the lack of a social safety net… though that’s countered by the massive debt binge that Chinese companies have been on). So I’m more optimistic about growth in India, Vietnam and Nigeria than I am about growth in the US or Japan or Europe… but, of course, I’m also much less confident in the rule of law and steady regulation and an equal playing field in those emerging countries, too, and they are likely to be highly volatile.

We used to hear lots of reference to “BRICs” (Brazil, Russia, India, China), and more recently I’m seeing a somewhat larger group referred to as the “E7” (China, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and Turkey), though there are lots of groupings. Those countries plus Vietnam and Nigeria are the most compelling, probably, when it comes to a combination of meaningful size and rapid growth potential, though there are also lots of smaller countries who are also trying to break into the big leagues. It’s going to be an interesting couple of decades — the democratization of the US economy, where everyone dreams of being a Shopify entrepreneur, is being mirrored in the global economy, where everyone dreams of building a sustainable middle class using some combination of labor arbitrage, natural resources, education, and luck.

That can be turned backward pretty quickly, of course, if the world starts to reverse the globalization that has driven economic growth for the past 30 years… and maybe it should, I don’t know, there are obvious and real trade-offs to globalization, it has clearly been a huge benefit to many of the very richest and the very poorest of the world, but the perception, at least, is that it hasn’t done much for the “lower middle” in terms of quality of life. I am probably a poster child for Normalcy Bias, since my first response to most panics is to think we’ll “muddle through” and things will be OK — but sometimes they ain’t, and sometimes there are global recessions and sometimes there isn’t a fast recovery. Sometimes we even have world wars.


So where do we find appealing growth? I sometimes like to dig around in the pile of “IPOs that people hated” to find possible bargains during times of scary sentiment… and the result of that digging this week is that I’m adding another stock to the portfolio with a tiny buy. This one’s very high risk but trades at a price that I think incorporates that risk pretty well: I bought a few shares of iQiyi (IQ), which is a “Chinese Netflix” spinoff of Baidu (and still controlled by Baidu).

The risk is that they will probably need to raise a lot more money as, not unlike Netflix, they go through a massive content-creation investment phase… and, unlike Netflix, they have some huge and extremely well-funded competitors in Alibaba and Tencent who are also going after this market. And though here in the US we’re accustomed to the idea of subscribers being “sticky”, my impression is that there’s a lot more month-to-month shifting in China when it comes to video subscriptions, they are easy to start and stop and people take advantage of that much more than they do here. Throw in the fact that Chinese regulators recently cracked down on some political humor videos[13] on iQiyi, and that little trade war we keep talking about that seems to be hitting China tech stocks in general, and you can see why this recent IPO has seen its price decline during its first week.

The potential comes from the fact that they have blistering top-line growth and subscriber growth, and a LOT of users already, with a pretty good revenue base to build from. This is a new stock, but not a new service — Baidu is just looking to get a better valuation for it, and I expect, get those big content creation costs off of their balance sheet and raise more capital to compete with Tencent Video and Alibaba’s Youku Tudou.

I don’t know if the sentiment will end up being meaningful, but my perception from reading outside commentary about the Chinese video market (a few sample pieces here[14], here[15] and here[16]), is that iQiyi has a slight edge over Tencent on original content and the youth market, and may also get a boost from licensed access to Netflix’s original content in China, and that all three are pursuing that Netflix-like strategy of building exclusive premium content libraries (but also are primarily “freemium” services, offering a lot of free video but pushing more people to upgrade for “premium” content).

So this is a growth gamble, based largely on the fact that paid video is growing as a business in China and IQ is a strong “pure play” on that growth, with relatively low recent growth in daily active users over the past year but a substantial boost in subscribers (DAUs were flat at about 125 million from 2016 to 2017, but subscriptions jumped from 30 million to 51 million, and the average time spent by users grew by about 15%… and just in the first two months of 2018, paying subscribers jumped by 20% from the December 31 number (50.8 million to 60.1 million)).

Like Netflix a few years ago, they have terrible-looking financials… and won’t soon be making a lot of profit (though NFLX is now profitable), but if they can put their new IPO capital to work taking meaningful share and making good content acquisitions, there’s a chance that they could grow phenomenally.

Assuming, of course, that Chinese stocks don’t all crater.

Right now they trade at about 4X 2017 sales, which looks pretty cheap compared to Netflix (NFLX at 11X sales)… but just about everything looks cheap compared to Netflix, and NFLX also traded at well under 4X sales for much of its life before 2016. That’s a much cheaper valuation than the Chinese internet giants trade at, but that’s because IQ is nowhere near being profitable and Tencent, Baidu, Alibaba and the rest all have strong and growing profits in their core businesses.

I like that the IPO came at an awful time in the markets, and didn’t generate a lot of attention despite the relatively large size (IQ is a $10+ billion company now, and raised more than $2 billion), and I think there’s a decent chance that any return to “normalcy” in Chinese stocks could give IQ a chance to surge above $20 in fairly short order (like, six months or so)… and, more importantly, that their focus now that they have a life separate from Baidu will give them a chance to stand out from the crowded trio that leads the growing Chinese premium video market. They claim to have a strong competitive position with the most popular content — 42 of the top 50 titles, 6 of the top 10 drama series, and 5 of the top ten variety shows — but, of course, there’s a downside to being “hit driven” if you hit a dry spell in your hit-making machinery.

So this is a “story” speculation, but it comes with established revenue growth… it’s just that competition and the fairly young status of this industry in China means we won’t know for a while whether or not one of the three leaders really “wins,” and there’s certainly the possibility that three huge competitors in this space means profitability will be elusive for a long time as they all fight for market share.

Lots of uncertainty, for sure, but I decided it was worthy of a speculative gamble as the share price languishes here in the early days post-IPO. As I’ve done with other small speculations over the past year, this comes in at roughly a 0.5% position and I’ve also juiced it with a little options exposure (September $15 call options, reflective of my guess that the next six months could see some analyst push to generate a small post-IPO tailwind, and some more investor attention if the “trade war” talk fades over the summer).

If you’re interested in researching this one yourself, someone posted the slides from their pre-IPO “road show” presentation here[17], and you can see all of the detailed info in their prospectus (F-1) and other SEC filings here[18]. And on the “cautious” side here’s a piece from Bloomberg about the tough competition[19] and the weak IPO, and a contrary opinion from a Motley Fool writer[20], for a bit of perspective (the Fool is far from a monolith, of course, and a different author also has a bullish note here[21]).

Here’s a little quote from that Bloomberg piece for you, to make sure you don’t get too excited:

“This market is difficult to understand for those outside of Asia. What needs to be recognized, though, is that two battles are going on here: One among recorded streaming services such as iQiyi and Youku Tudou, and another among live-streaming operators such as YY and Momo. Think of the way Netflix not only competes with Inc., but also broadcast and cable TV.

“This means iQiyi investors aren’t just betting on a more rational recorded streaming market, but a truce in the entire content sector.

“That will happen eventually, but shareholders need to decide how long they’re prepared to wait.”

True enough… though it’s not just rationality but also growth they’re betting on. IQ has fewer than 60 million paid subscribers right now, just about as many subscribers as Netflix has in the US… so if they eventually get the kind of penetration that Netflix has in the US, that could be about 250 million paid subscribers. And these businesses use the “freemium” model right now, and IQ also has almost 400 million free viewers to “upsell” … so I acknowledge the fact that brutal competition may mean they don’t ever reach profitable scale, but I’m willing to bet a small position that they could get to that, and if they can then the “story” could well ignite investor interest again. We’ll see how it goes, this definitely ain’t a traditional “value” investment.


But wait, wasn’t I talking about India, not China? Yes, I’d like to see more exposure to Indian media, too, in addition to my investments that are plays on Indian travel and financial services… but there aren’t any “busted IPOs” in that space at the moment.

All of the interesting media in India appears to be pretty tightly controlled, the most appealing video services, since we’re talking video, are Hotstar and… like much of the rest of the world… Netflix and Amazon. Hotstart is owned by 21st Century Fox, so is becoming a Disney (DIS) property and will be a small piece of that conglomerate, and, well Netflix and Amazon will spend a lot of money trying to take share in India, but it won’t drive their results anytime soon. That’s what often stands out in China: The presence of the “great firewall” and regulation means that the big international players can’t come in and take a piece, at least not easily… which doesn’t mean there isn’t competition (Tencent and Alibaba can outspend Netflix and Amazon if they want to), but it gives more of an opportunity to buy localized and “pure play” companies that are levered to one specific growth market instead of to a global fight for market share.


Portfolio sum-up: As noted above, I initiated a position in iQiyi… and as penance for that speculative move, I also added very small bits to three other much higher-conviction investments today, so the Real Money Portfolio now reflects incremental additions to my holdings in Fairfax Financial (FFH.TO, FRFHF), Alphabet (GOOG), and NVIDIA (NVDA). Fairfax Financial and Alphabet are my two largest holdings that are close to compelling purchase prices right now, and NVIDIA is just a little “buy the dip” position increase on a stock that I think continues to have exceptional long-term growth prospects and is being brought down by the trade war sentiment and the fall in cryptocurrencies.

Best of luck to you as you navigate these crazy markets, and please chime in with a comment below if you have thoughts to share on any of the stocks mentioned above, or questions about anything else. Have a great weekend!

Disclosure: Of the stocks mentioned above, I own shares and/or call options on Disney, iQiyi, Fairfax Financial, Fairfax India, Alphabet, NVIDIA, Boston Omaha, Amazon, Berkshire Hatahway, Facebook, Naspers, Alibaba, and Yatra Online. I will not trade in any covered stock for at least three days, per Stock Gumshoe’s trading rules.

  1. great article by Morgan Housel about bad forecasts:
  2. expectations vs. forecasts:
  3. Annual Letter from Boston Omaha (BOMN):
  4. with some recent adjustments:
  5. Sheryl Sandberg hit the media circuit full-speed yesterday:
  6. the backlash is real:
  7. quote from analyst David Wong:
  8. partly because of new mining-only chips:
  9. possibly brand-damaging security issues:
  10. one of the stocks I was watching last year:
  11. thoughts about Fairfax India:
  12. rumors are that Amazon might also bid on Flipkart:
  13. cracked down on some political humor videos:
  14. here:
  15. here:
  16. here:
  17. pre-IPO “road show” presentation here:
  18. prospectus (F-1) and other SEC filings here:
  19. piece from Bloomberg about the tough competition:
  20. contrary opinion from a Motley Fool writer:
  21. different author also has a bullish note here:

Source URL:

What These Icons Mean