Welcome to the Value Investing Forum
Recent comments
- packers and movers delhi
1 hour 39 min ago - Twitter is a great source
1 hour 53 min ago - Hi,
Jade here from Canada. As
17 hours 35 min ago - Thanks for the post. It will
2 days 4 hours ago - Small business owners use
4 days 1 hour ago - book is now in paperback, hardcover, and large-print edition
4 days 6 hours ago - Intelligent Speculation
1 week 20 hours ago - A book summary is posted on youtube
4 weeks 19 hours ago - link to book site on lulu.com
5 weeks 1 day ago - Well this is a very good
7 weeks 4 days ago
Big echo in here
Hurray! Someone found the Forum. I encourage everyone to use the Forum to ask questions about value investing or make suggestions on how to make Value Investing News even better.
It is still echoing!!
I consider myself an investor but I dont' necessarily call myself a value investor. I consider my strategies and ideologies to be based upon the great investors who influenced me like Ben Graham,Warren Buffett,Peter lynch, Greenblatt among others. But value investing seems redundant. It seems all true investing is value investing. This dawned on me after I read something another "value" investor wrote about this. true investing is using the idea of finding a real value and not speculating just on price. Price is what you pay value is what you get so Buffett says. So an investor in essence basically is a value investor. What's the need for value tagged before it. It seems all true investing is value investing. value investors are just known for being disciplined investors but are investors not looking for the same things value investors are?
Buffett and Munger would agree with you, as would most here. I think the distintion helps the uninitiated - everyone probably thinks they're investing.
Good question. My thoughts, at the risk of "preaching to the choir":
Buffett and Munger would not easily agree with your premise. If there was no difference between the results of Buffett and the results of Joe the investor, then all the Joe's would be as successful as Buffett. So how is value investing different from other investing?
I think the distinction lies in your objective. Where others might select investments to achieve growth, or income, or political correctness, or stability, balance etc, etc, the "value investor" looks for stocks that have a special feature that translates into "objective" (meaning quantitatively measurable & predictable) financial results in Sales, Expenses, Profits, Cash flow, etc.
The value investor does more research into the target company and understands the target in depth. The value investor is a fundamental analyst. He does not base decisions on trends of the past, ie he is not a technical analyst.
The distinction also lies in how you select your investments. Buffet and Graham define the term "intrinsic value" which is the present value of future cash generated by the business. If the investor does the research and the math needed to calculate intrinsic value, then the investment's value is the difference of intrinsic value per share less market price per share and less a safety margin, or moat which means an allowance for error and lack of perfect knowledge about the company.
And the distinction also lies in the time horizon of the investor. Value Investors tend to be holders rather than in and out traders. Value investors tend to take more time in to analyze and selet their investments. They are not in the game for the quick score, but for a long term winning record covering decades or forever.
I leave further discussion to other posters. There is a bunch more that distinguishes between value investors and other investors.
Regards
Steve
I'm sorry this probably wasn't the idea of the original topic thread to include my ideas. My question wasn't really necessary I guess as I know there are many, many different kinds of investors. I'd probably have to call myself a value investor for lack of a better grouping but I think its hard to group. I'm different than everyone else even though im long-term, contrarian, business oriented. I like to buy companies for less than what they are worth with predictable earnings and operations but I think that's just smart investing. Value investing has many connotations to different people some of which I don't even like. I guess if all the great investors called themselves value investors I would to but its sort of broad and vague. For example, I think some people think of value investing as only buying low price to book or pe stocks which isn't what it is to me. I was just saying it seems redundant like saying i got a "free" gift or something like that and can't be summed up with certain criteria. I suppose it can mean whatever one wants it to mean to them and is hard to categorize maybe. Does Buffett really call himself a value investor? I guess I just don't know where the value word came from in history and why its necessary as I pointed out.
I'm shopping for brokers and wondering if you guys had any suggestions. I've got a roth IRA account with about a $28k balance and a traditional IRA with about a $7k balance. I also am thinking about opening a taxable account with about $10k. I tell you this because the balance will affect the commissions. For each account I'm probably going to split the money about 50-50 between common stocks and bond funds.
Tradeking and Zecco seem to be the two cheapest for stock trades, but I'm not sure about what they offer in the way of bonds. If anyone has used either of them I'd like to hear your opinion. And of course if any of you are using or have used someone else who you think might be appropriate for me I'd like to hear about them as well. Thank you
Hi fabiotobasco. Welcome to the Value Investing News forum.
I personally use Firstrade as my broker for my IRA and traditional accounts. They are fairly cheap and offer bonds. I'm not personally familiar with Tradeking or Zecco, but I seem to recall reading about some issues people have had with Zecco.
If you decide to go with Firstrade, please contact me first. I can set you up with some free trades through a referral code.
In this idea buffett uses the pretax earnings per share in his calculations. I was wondering to get this figure, is it simply Net Income Before Taxes divided by the amount of shares? or is there another number I should be using..
Welcome williammunny!
Which Buffett calculation are you referring to? My guess is that he would use owner earnings. That is earnings plus depreciation, depletion, amortization, and certain other non-cash charges...less the average annual amount of capitalized expenditures for plant and equipment, etc. that the business requires to fully maintain its long-term competitive position and its unit volume.