Dear @realwillmeade you do know that when you get quoted and you don't correct the public record, people will think you are lying, because you are not expected to let actual untruths stand.
This article here may simply be sloppy reporting of a tweet but it's out there.
There are others out there too.
This one is also from a tweet. And it misreads your bio.
But you don't really make your bio clear do you. There are people who would read that bio and say at the very least... "gee, he was a former PM at a hedge fund"
.@realwillmeade would you consider changing your bio so people don't always get confused?
Hope I got that right. The bio you used in your 2015 "ebook" suggests the RIA was a hedge fund, but people who worked there both before and after Gary's passing say it was no such thing.
By the way... I love the bit about turning $20k into $26 million in 12 years or into $1.2bn in 30yrs in that e-book. I walked away from that e-book with the knowledge that you didn't understand statistics, but that you did know (or your partner knew) how to data-mine.
I see Hertz was a fave then. And as you noted, downside was limited to 100%.
Of the 4 stocks you chose in the e-book, 3 have underperformed the S&P in those 5yrs (HTZ went BK), but AAPL has done OK, which makes up for HTZ and more, but the kicker is the new WFH fave, isn't it.
That basically did little for 4yrs, then popped, got nailed in March, then rallied hard.
If you'd bought that 4-stock portfolio on 31Mar2015 and held it til you sent out that "Sell Everything!!!" tweet, you would have underperformed S&P500 by 24% in 5yrs.
If you'd bought that portfolio 30 Jun 2015, you would have underperformed by 28%. Best case? You were late and bought that portfolio 30Jun2016 and you only underperformed 5%.
I know. I checked. I even checked other possibilities, and a dollar-cost averaging in-price too.
Of course... since your "sell everything" tweet, which doesn't seem to subscribe to your service, all your baskets have done well. The worst performing in-price has outperformed S&P500 by 22.5% in 3mos. S&P itself is +17% since SELL EVERYTHING, so the average is up 45% since then
I could go on but this all started with your bio....
You know all those "experts" like this guy who rely on LLMs to tell you what things cost in the future by using past costs?
Yeah. Didn't think so. I don't know that many either. Just this guy. I don't know any expert in the field who would make a real decision by asking an LLM.
The supposition he made a couple of days ago was that it would cost 23x as much as natgas.
Given subsidies at their highest were never 95%+, utilities who have solar as by far the highest portion of incremental generation capacity - both last year and
for years to come, must have figured out something that he didn't figure out using grok or the other LLMs.
What most adults who advocate/expect more solar+batteries know is that you don't have to scrap existing natgas+coal+nuclear capacity as you build more solar+BESS.
@abcampbell Well done. The two things I would note are: 1) conversion of PV panel mfg to copper, at that payoff profile, might not take as long as that. The supply chain is very concentrated. The top 10 mfrs in polysilicon, wafers, cells, and modules are 80-90% share. Know-how needs are not
@abcampbell super diversified, and it can be done in steps. Low temp curing of silver-coated copper paste formulations are already out there. Given a lot of new PV panel mfg capacity is still to come on line in the years ahead, given expected growth rates, if new mfg capacity were switched
@abcampbell to copper, in 5yrs more than half the then-existing capacity would be switched organically.
2) I expect companies like Trina to implement perovskite-TOPCon tandem panels which would increase output per square meter installed vs current levels by 30+%. In combination with lower
For people looking at the Trump trade "deal" with Japan and saying "Trump removed all barriers to US cars and trucks selling in Japan", the correct response to that is... "Uh.... no."
Japan has a zero-tariff policy on automobile imports. The US has been able to export. It hasn't
in part because they don't sell well. The majority of US auto exports to Japan are made by Japanese companies in the US.
The USTR every year puts out a report called the National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. It's long (397p this year). The section on Japan
starts on p229 and starts out with heavy-hitting topics like leather/footwear, and fish/seafood. It gets to cars in "Other Barriers" on p237.
The number one complaint is that Japan does not accept US Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards certification. This is probably because
broken EVERY SINGLE trade agreement which was in place between the US and other countries, before him or which he, himself, signed, including USMCA which was "maybe the greatest deal ever done."
Donald Trump has, for decades, been a fan of tariffs. He ran on it. He put tariffs
on allies. He put tariffs on Australia, which has zero tariffs on the US and with which the US runs a trade surplus. He demands tariff cuts from Japan which runs lower average tariffs on US goods than the US used to run on its imports. He put tariffs on penguins.
Just getting around to the USTR Section 301 hearings on the Proposed Action in Section 301 Investigation of China's Targeting of the Maritime, Logistics, and Shipbuilding Sectors for Dominance.
Like the USTR report released in Jan, it is something of a disaster. 500+ pgs of it.
There are people who support (politicians, labour unions, ports, dockworkers, steel companies, etc).
They almost all use the same talking points from the USTR report which were... wrong. They were factually incorrect in the USTR report and they were the same, or worse in the
hearings. The common trope is that shipbuilding 50 years ago was such that the US was the dominant global shipbuilder, and shipbuilders once employed X number of people. This was destroyed by CCP policies to achieve dominance in shipbuilding, and those policies started in 2006.