stocks: Oracle vs. SAP

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

A brief report in the Phila Inqr compares ths stock of Oracle vs. SAP; and says SAP is a better investment.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/inq-phillydeals/Buy-SAP-not-Oracle-report.html

[Dan Espen]

Go to finance.yahoo.com and look at the income statement and balance
sheet plus other statistics. Better than the Phila Inqr.

Things that stand out for me:

SAP is trading at a higher PE.
ORCL revenues are stable, SAP declined in 2014.

Not sure I like either of them.

In the tech world I own AAPL and RHAT.
Both have worked out so far.

OTOH I'm definitely not the worlds greatest investor.

--
Dan Espen

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 21-Oct-15 12:37, Dan Espen wrote:
> OTOH I'm definitely not the worlds greatest investor.

Wall St analysts _consistently_ do worse than monkeys throwing darts, so
don't blindly assume that you're less qualified/skilled than they are.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

[Scott Lurndal]

Dan Espen <des...@verizon.net> writes:
>hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
>
>> A brief report in the Phila Inqr compares ths stock of Oracle vs. SAP;
>> and says SAP is a better investment.
>>
>> http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/inq-phillydeals/Buy-SAP-not-Oracle-report.html
>
>Go to finance.yahoo.com and look at the income statement and balance
>sheet plus other statistics. Better than the Phila Inqr.
>
>Things that stand out for me:
>
>SAP is trading at a higher PE.
>ORCL revenues are stable, SAP declined in 2014.
>
>Not sure I like either of them.
>
>In the tech world I own AAPL and RHAT.

For me,

AAPL, RHT (symbol changed a couple years ago), ARMH, VRSN, CAVM, INTC

>Both have worked out so far.

All but INTC have done well. VRSN, RHT (in at $6), AAPL, CAVM have done real well.

[Dan Espen]

Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> writes:

> On 21-Oct-15 12:37, Dan Espen wrote:
>> OTOH I'm definitely not the worlds greatest investor.
>
> Wall St analysts _consistently_ do worse than monkeys throwing darts, so
> don't blindly assume that you're less qualified/skilled than they are.

I don't.
In the past I've used Wall St. downgrades as an opportunity to buy.
That's worked out pretty well for me.

--
Dan Espen

[Stephen Sprunk]

Warren Buffett, who arguably _is_ the world's greatest investor, made
billions by doing the exact opposite of what Wall St says.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 1:53:12 PM UTC-4, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> Wall St analysts _consistently_ do worse than monkeys throwing darts, so
> don't blindly assume that you're less qualified/skilled than they are.

One professional investor told me of various techniques. Generally, stock investors are shooting for an appreciation in the price of the stock they purchased (less so for dividend income). Indeed, there are popular investment tricks, such as stock options (e.g. puts and calls) where serious investors make a higher risk (or very risky) bet on the future price of a stock.

Anyway, some investors are 'technical'. They study the numbers of the company, its R&D, its marketplace, etc, and try to make an anlystical prediction of the future.

But other investtors are 'psychological', trying to guess what other people will do in the future and how the market will react to that. There is obviously some valdity to that, as the price of a share of stock varies greatly, regardless of its underlying numbers (the huge difference in P/E ratios of different companies).

There are other techniques, too, that I'm not familiar with, like day traders.


I've earlier described a stock tip from a friend that was public knowledge, yet the investment community seemed oblivious to it. I bought the stock, albeit a modest amount of it, and it did even better than my friend predicted. I never could understand why the investment community--who is supposed to have specialists who research that very thing--would be so blind.

[hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com]

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 2:54:54 PM UTC-4, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> Warren Buffett, who arguably _is_ the world's greatest investor, made
> billions by doing the exact opposite of what Wall St says.

He has quite an empire. However, he is up in years, and I wonder what will happen to his empire when he passes.

Many years ago he was supportive of Katherine Graham when she inherited the Washington Post. I wonder if he is still an investor in that, or bailed out. I think the Graham family finally had to sell the W/P.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 21-Oct-15 14:45, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> I've earlier described a stock tip from a friend that was public
> knowledge, yet the investment community seemed oblivious to it. I
> bought the stock, albeit a modest amount of it, and it did even
> better than my friend predicted. I never could understand why the
> investment community--who is supposed to have specialists who
> research that very thing--would be so blind.

You seem to assume that analysts' goal is for _you_ to make money.

Numerous studies show that analysts commonly advise selling while their
own firm is buying and vice versa. The firms all claim this is simply
traders taking advantage of their own analysts' incompetence, but it
smells a lot more like deliberate collusion to defraud customers.

[Stephen Sprunk]

On 21-Oct-15 14:48, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> Warren Buffett, who arguably _is_ the world's greatest investor,
>> made billions by doing the exact opposite of what Wall St says.
>
> He has quite an empire. However, he is up in years, and I wonder
> what will happen to his empire when he passes.

Most of his personal wealth will be donated to charity, minus a tiny
fraction (though still in the millions) for his kids.

I haven't seen any plans to break up Berkshire Hathaway, nor would I
expect any major changes. I doubt many, if any, of BH's moves in the
last few decades were his ideas at all; most/all probably originated
with his subordinates after they internalized his system and how to
structure deals so he'd approve. If they're smart--and he doesn't seem
like the type to suffer fools lightly, they'll just keep doing exactly
what they've been doing all along.

In particular, Buffett's strategy has _nothing_ to do with business
fads, market timing, etc.; he's been doing exactly the same things in
the same ways for more than half a century under every type of market
conditions and he's always been successful, so it'll be very difficult
for even stupid successors to justify changing _anything_.

[Peter Flass]

Stephen Sprunk <ste...@sprunk.org> wrote:
> On 21-Oct-15 12:37, Dan Espen wrote:
>> OTOH I'm definitely not the worlds greatest investor.
>
> Wall St analysts _consistently_ do worse than monkeys throwing darts, so
> don't blindly assume that you're less qualified/skilled than they are.
>

You're assuming their goal is to give _you_ good advice. I think they have
their own reasons for their recommendations.

--
Pete

[Peter Flass]

<hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 1:53:12 PM UTC-4, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
>> Wall St analysts _consistently_ do worse than monkeys throwing darts, so
>> don't blindly assume that you're less qualified/skilled than they are.
>
> One professional investor told me of various techniques. Generally,
> stock investors are shooting for an appreciation in the price of the
> stock they purchased (less so for dividend income). Indeed, there are
> popular investment tricks, such as stock options (e.g. puts and calls)
> where serious investors make a higher risk (or very risky) bet on the
> future price of a stock.
>
> Anyway, some investors are 'technical'. They study the numbers of the
> company, its R&D, its marketplace, etc, and try to make an anlystical
> prediction of the future.
>
> But other investtors are 'psychological', trying to guess what other
> people will do in the future and how the market will react to that.
> There is obviously some valdity to that, as the price of a share of stock
> varies greatly, regardless of its underlying numbers (the huge difference
> in P/E ratios of different companies).
>
> There are other techniques, too, that I'm not familiar with, like day traders.

"chartists", who always remind me of tea-leaf readers.

>
>
> I've earlier described a stock tip from a friend that was public
> knowledge, yet the investment community seemed oblivious to it. I bought
> the stock, albeit a modest amount of it, and it did even better than my
> friend predicted. I never could understand why the investment
> community--who is supposed to have specialists who research that very
> thing--would be so blind.
>

--
Pete

[Walter Bushell]

In article <d8q9na...@mid.individual.net>,
Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

> On 2015-10-21, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 2:54:54 PM UTC-4, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> >
> >> Warren Buffett, who arguably _is_ the world's greatest investor, made
> >> billions by doing the exact opposite of what Wall St says.
> >
> > He has quite an empire. However, he is up in years, and I wonder what will
> > happen to his empire when he passes.
>

> He has asked his trustees to put his legacy into index trackers.

Now what does that say about funds that ask for 2% admin fee and
20% of the gain (2 and 20)?

--
Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greed. Me.