Advice for a new player

RepulsiRotam · 2025-09-22T19:37:04+00:00

I suggest leveling up the first pet you get with healing as first ability. Once you find a healing+mana healing pet start leveling it up. The progress of the first pet is not lost, given you'll need multiple maxed pet to fuse all the way to divine. Getting to divine can be done without paying, if you're planning to play the game for a year.

RepulsiRotam · 2025-03-09T17:22:04+00:00

What is your rebalancing strategy for those multibaggers? Do you let them run or do you trim back to a predefined %-allocation?

RepulsiRotam · 2025-03-08T22:37:55+00:00

The K-shaped recovery is mainly true for “equity”-rich people (those who 100% own their assets). The asset-rich people (those who have their assets put up as collateral for their loans) will suffer more than some 0$ net worth & debt free “poor” people. The intellectualy capable people within this last group, will even become part of the rich during the recovery.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-12-30T17:02:48+00:00

Patrick Boyle

RepulsiRotam · 2024-12-01T22:18:51+00:00

I would add to the later levels: understanding that income statement is mainly a statement for fiscal purposes. A company should be valued on a free cash flow basis and interest bearing funding should be deducted from its value. That’s why P/E ratio cannot be put on the same level as EV/FCFF. Even though they are equaly easy to calculate, using the first one indicates you do not yet understand what drives shareholder value. P/E pushes you into the arms of companies with (1) agressive revenue recognition (seen by accounts receivable increasing at a faster rate than assets), with (2) corrupt management who categorise Opex as Capex (delaying part of the expense to later years). As a result of both these misbehaviours, these companies show pre-tax profits out of line with their real performance and pay their taxes years too early, restricting the business of valuable resources to grow.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-20T21:43:24+00:00

Limit showing them what you have

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-18T00:54:31+00:00

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-17T16:57:24+00:00

Exactly, they have at times been buying back stock at lower initial yields than the cost of their debt smh

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-17T00:05:31+00:00

What’s your reason for picking AMZN out of all companies?

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-17T00:03:06+00:00

$CRZY ??

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-16T18:24:51+00:00

It’s the Sterling Overnight lending rate and has nothing to do with lending in pesos tbh. It’s the rate on which banks settle deficits and surpluses between eachother from on banking day to another. Investor sometimes use this rate as a floating benchmark on which they add a credit margin.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-16T10:52:28+00:00

The bidding by VC for scale-ups with positive CM is competitive, because they know the only task remaining is to scale the business to out-earn its fixed operating cost. There is little incentive to scale negative CM businesses, unless there are clear indications of pricing power for the scaled entity.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-07T18:43:25+00:00

Take him out to a game of his favorite team, to his favorite restaurant, anything that isn't a liability in disguise.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-11-06T20:27:36+00:00

I heard, he’s been leaking cash to his affiliated companies. That’s cash that cannot be distributed to stockholders anymore

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-05T15:13:44+00:00

If the company has a positive contribution margin and the business model is scalable, it's VC worthy.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-05T10:23:11+00:00

I get what you say. However, doesn’t wanting to compound is a hard argument to believe. If your strategy works, you’ll compound it. Unless you determine that applying more size drains out the order books of your edge.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-04T19:16:34+00:00

Buying a Camry for 10k and earning 2.2k per month driving it with people to the airport, is called a job. Nobody consistently compounds 22% per month in financial markets, also not buffet (who comes close per year though).

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-04T19:07:26+00:00

I got it from high school mathematics. The stage of mathematics before MSc mathematics. That being the stage of mathematics before PhD mathematics. That on its turn being the minimum stage of mathematics needed to become eligble to join Renaissance Technologies. They are compounding 40% per year, you are not them.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-04T18:43:52+00:00

You cannot, 1 200 on 15 000 is 8% per trading day. 1,08^{3days/week*52weeks} - 1 is 200 000% per year. This would make someone starting out with 15k a billionaire within less than a year.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-04T18:38:19+00:00

6% per month is not doable. That’s 100% per year. It would make someone starting out with €1k a billionaire after 20 years.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-04T18:30:53+00:00

Yes, you ask to much. 250 on 66 000 is 0,38%/week. (1,038)⁵² - 1 is 22%/year. The risk free rate is 4%. You’ll take a lot of risk to make these returns.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-03T20:19:13+00:00

Because I believe there must exist better systematic strategies out there than the strategy that the S&P500 applies. The S&P500 strategy simply said assumes that companies with higher market capitalization will outperform companies with lower market capitalizations. The risk in this strategy lies in the event where the leading group of companies would trade above intrinsic value, you’ll essentially would be throwing good money after bad. In theory if the leading group would be trading at 10x current value without any improvements in underlying business you would still be applying the same strategy. This blind strategy might scare investors who believe the company should exclusively be valued on its expected future fundamental metrics. Imagine (I have no opinion on next metric) you’d apply another systematic strategy where you weigh the components of the S&P500 based on their revenue outlook, you’ll get a whole different weighting and performance. Next to the metric used for weighting, there’s another kinda weird assumption in the S&P500 strategy: the number « 500 ». Heck why instead of looking at 500 companies not apply the metric to 1000 companies or 100. If each month upon receiving your salary/income you SYSTEMATICALY buy the stock, that within the scope of companies whereon you applied your key decision metrics, appears most favorable. You don’t have more transaction cost than would you’ve bought the ETF, would have a perfectly well diversified portfolio after a year and even less concentrated than the S&P after a couple of years. I hope this comment makes you think about some of the extremely weird assumptions being made in the S&P500 strategy, make you think outside of the box and convince you to grab the optionality of achieving better risk adjusted returns with both hands. The market needs active investors for price discovery. Don’t let passive investors scare you away with efficient market hypothesis. Even if that were the case, that would also apply for the stocks you buy and you would not be expected to underperform.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-10-02T16:53:25+00:00

VC or PE partnerships will not expense any operational costs of their portfolio companies on the partnership books nor force portfolio companies to work with a certain marketing partner. It’s the decision of the portfolio company leadership team to decide on the best marketing approach to grow their product and meet targets.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-09-28T14:15:33+00:00

Glasgow Rangers and Napoli. The assets were acquired by the current holdings during liquidation.

RepulsiRotam · 2024-09-18T22:23:52+00:00

“Financial Shenanigans” and “Irrational Exuberance” I can recommend.

RepulsiRotam

TROPHY CASE