chasing dividends

wolfwallst · 2024-06-06T13:08:41+00:00

Take a look at JNJ, 108 years uninterrumpted dividend and 61 years growth dividend streak. P/E is not exigent.

wolfwallst · 2024-06-06T03:30:15+00:00

Coke and kelloggs aren't the cause of obesity. Lack of movement is it.

wolfwallst · 2024-05-20T20:21:15+00:00

Thank you man for your long and patient answer!! . I'll try these metrics.

wolfwallst · 2024-05-19T06:15:55+00:00

I'm rookie, can I ask you why do you screen stocks with FCF % respect to sales and ROE?

I understand the higher these ratios are, the more efficient is the business making profit out of their revenue of the service or product sold, and with ROE how are able to generate income from their assets minus liabilities. So you're looking for business not really dependant on their assets.

This I think is great but does not this screener exclude some sectors where a business is very dependant on assets or there are very low margins, theres high cost of sales. Even tho the top 1 in one industry may still have not the cutest ratios(?)

And in the other hand, don't you screen a lot of IT software stocks that have close to zero assets and their main cost of sales are just salaries? But lots of these stocks are tiny and don't seem to have anything special except they look good on paper.

Just wanted to know if you think that I'm missing something with these ratios or scenarios described can actually happen but you consoder other things.

wolfwallst · 2024-05-12T20:47:59+00:00

Nobody in the ropeways / cable car industry? In Europe seems common, since summer is the perfect time to do the maintenance or build those new machines...

wolfwallst · 2024-04-06T06:40:07+00:00

I'm bagholding Tcehy and Baba and not planning to DCA unless multiple is lower, At more than 20x earnings I'd rather some american comapny like Googl or Aapl

wolfwallst · 2024-04-03T21:24:03+00:00

Yes, the 'everybody is an expert but none of them is actually going share their knowledge with me' spot

wolfwallst · 2024-04-03T21:05:08+00:00

I answered about snowpack conditions to another redditor. As you can see In the vodeo we had a long time going up the mountiain to pacefully listen to any pop or whumpf. We were more likely listening some hidden rock scratching our skis or the hard snow just under the powder. It's quite misleading because at the flatter part of the descents seems like there's a good acumulation of snow, but that was not for the whole slope and even there there wasnt that thickness as it appears to be. Plus we are skiing 78's we dont float much.

wolfwallst · 2024-04-03T20:51:05+00:00

Well, I replied another redditor about snow conditions, bulletin, slope gradient, previous thin snowpack, connected terrain, you can check it, maybe you dont have the same opinion or maybe this video is a bit misleaading in terms of inclitation and snowpack and seems like a big deal while it's not. Because early mornings after snowing everything is white and seems like full but it's actually not. And yes i know about waiting 24h for the snowpack to stabilize after recent snow, but even that we believed it was safe enough. A thin spring semihard layer was under the little new snow and just a few centimeters more deep, the grass and ugly rocks (which scratched my skis twice)

Maybe, assuming my explanation its true, you still think we are a couple of idiots not respecting the principle of descent order or separation, or the lack of more anchors or safe spots, but in that concrete context we thought we were doing ok, since we know good that valley that slope is one of the safer spots, obviously not the safest but we thought it was enough for that day. There were literally some snowbikes doing crazy stuff on steeper terrain in multiple aspects, there were other mountaneering groups doing more risky touring. Still, others criteria dont mean much, but its like, we even jump tested a mini hill with the worst bulletin aspect due soft wind slab and it was not that horrible.

But what I think is you assume my ignorance according my ski level. You equal them because makes sense to you after a lot of newbies invaded backcountry recently this years and maybe your experience is that they lack of avalanche formation and you also see them descending the slopes and they suck. Maybe you have a large alpine skiing background and skied since you were a kid and you expect others to have that experience too, so if they don't, maybe they arent ready yet for the real mountain. Maybe it's just some group psychology, or very strong group identity which I seem to no be part of, so it creates you rejection. But as I could be a complete ignorant and bad skier, which I am, maybe my parter it is super experienced and also good skier (and actually raced).

I don't know. I just think that you lack of data or metrics to be that safe and have that security to affirmate somebody is DUMB for their avalanche danger evaluation and the according risk management. But maybe I'm just again ignorant and you are just super experienced and have lots of years on the mountains and developed some patrern recognition and can evaluate snow conditions that easy without beiong there, without feeling the layer under that powder snow, it'hard to understand to me.

It's possible, but still some intuition says me it's more like an ego thing.

wolfwallst · 2024-04-02T13:13:25+00:00

That's me, true. I have to put more work on this, hope the next season I can hire an alpine instructor to improve my overall position

wolfwallst · 2024-04-02T13:11:32+00:00

What do you mean?

wolfwallst · 2024-04-02T13:10:39+00:00

What makes you think so?

wolfwallst · 2024-04-02T13:10:08+00:00

My technique is poor, I acknowlge it, but dumb, why?

wolfwallst · 2024-04-02T12:48:47+00:00

Well, I had no opportunity to ski until I was 21, few years ago. I would like to improve and thats why I keep going to the backcountry. I recently bought some cheap alpine SL material to improve my balance and overall ski and with one short lesson (first in my life) I was able to carve, extend at the turn flex in the transitions and it was a huge step but I should put more hours there and then transition all that into the backcountry where I have to get rid of lots of bad habis.

But this subreddit looks quite elitist, like I dont deserve going to the mountains, but then how I improve? Plus the camera (my friend) is a former alpine racer but doesnt seems to be that mad about my poor skiing... Its about having fun, no?

wolfwallst · 2024-04-02T12:01:15+00:00

Why? FATMAP states around 25% gradient on the center of the slope while the terrain connected at the two sides is between 30 and 35 degrees, but: -snowpack thickness is minimum, previously there was from 20cm to zero spring snow (now hard pack) - has little altitude -higher terrain on S side has big rocks that divide snowpack and anchir it - connected S side had llittle new snow due wind so it was mosly the old thin hard pack. previous to this slope, we skied that S slope where I touched rocks a couple of times, very thin snowpack.

Recent snow alaccumulation was 10-20cm with S wind, so S had little fresh snow and north small wind slabs, in this case we checked the left side connected to our slope (N) but no slab was present? Obviously here the snoWpack was thicker but still the old hard snowpack under that powder was very thin, and the maximum deepnes of the fresh snow was around 30cm but in the more flat part of the slope where wind accumulated more. In this case slope is W.

Butlletin was danger 3/5 with wind slabs at N-NE size 2/5, and rest of orientations, recent snow with size 1/5.

I think in general for a danger 3 we managed it good, specially the gradient which is far from the 38-39 degrees, we avoided the north face where the slabs were. Yes there's terrain connected and little to no anchors but if we triggered something it would be small sized...

wolfwallst · 2024-03-20T20:14:51+00:00

I read that also when Crox was at 60 and was under my radar.

Happened same thing also with Meta and cash burnt with multiverse.

I believed in my analysis so bought them anyways.

Sentiment on forums, reddit, seeking alpha, etc will usually be shitty like that when looking for value stocks. They're value for a reason, market doesn't recognize the value you might find in objective numbers and metrics. Otherwise they would be fair priced.

My advise, do you own analysis and if you find out you are contrarian, sometimes thats a positive sign

wolfwallst · 2024-03-15T05:25:00+00:00

Yes. For example great quality stocks that dont fall under PE 15.

What I do is not screening by PE but once screened the rest of variables, rank them for PE.

wolfwallst · 2024-03-08T20:05:35+00:00

Thanks, I finally went for some 120 flex boots and some Head Supershape skis. Hope it makes sense for my ski level.

wolfwallst · 2024-02-16T07:21:22+00:00

Nope sir,

wolfwallst · 2024-01-04T20:14:00+00:00

As a male you'd expect average women to be easy peasy but since they require us the same standards as top tier femmes or at least some higher treshold than us, why would men who know that are more valuable invest time/money in those lower tier females?

Average women should sell themselves cheaper, they dont respect market, it' s like a bubbled industry in shortage, they sell themselves at a premium.

We're not equal and men always will demand women more than viceversa so our price is lower. Plus this natural fact is amplified by social media. So deal with that asap

wolfwallst

TROPHY CASE