w67thstreet is an incoherent homeless troll

Nobody other than your good friend Ottawa seems to care or agree with you now, hb/gd/rs.

failure of reading comprehension?
blind to the facts?
ignoring your own disagreement with w67 based on your own RE purchase and your lack of equity investment in AAPL and S?

Oxy, another question. You think nobody here is capable of making picks that "truly" beat the market, and hence should follow a diversified investment approach. How about the reverse, do you think anyone here makes wrong picks, or is it all just bad luck?

Oxy>> My standard deviation is much lower than the S&P. In good months, I'm up 3%. In bad months, I'm down 1% but essentially gross out an aveage 1% a month to the positive.

Oxy>> If you somehow think you have the special secret sauce that millions are looking for, I would either start a hedge fund or start licensing your techniques!

You do realize that doing 1% +/- 2% a month over the past 10 years would put you in the top echelon of hedge funds out there? Hedge funds have access to the same class of assets as you do. I'm not sure whether I should congratulate you, doubt you, invest with you, or tell you to refer to your own proclamations that nobody on this board has the ability to beat the thousands of Harvard-educated investment professionals out there.

Really, I don't think anyone on this board has made a claim as bold as this. You are saying that you are able to achieve risk/reward equal to diversification across 25 fully-independent asset classes, each with the risk/reward of stock indices. Poor w67th just publicly punted on a couple of stocks he thought were under-valued, they turned out well through some mix of skill / luck, and he got an earful from you. You on the other hand...

Troll, since my monthly costs for purchasing are about one-third less than renting, I'm getting around a 20% return annually on the down payment . I don't think anyone would say that's a bad return.

You do realize that renting is cheaper than buying. See w67thstreet. See inoitall. They have access to the same real estate and data that you do. I'm not sure whether I should congratulate you, doubt you, buy property with you, or refer you to your own earlier proclamations that buying is more expensive then renting and that you don't have to be one of thousands of Yale-educated owners to figure that out.

Really, I don't think anyone on this board has made a claim as bold as you have made. You are saying that not only is renting not cheaper than buying contrary to the prevailing wisdom across your friends, but that buying is cheaper than renting and not by a few percent or even by a whopping 2x, but rather by 3x. Poor w67th just publicly for the past 5 years told everyone on Streeteasy that buying is for fools, and anyone who disagrees gets an earful from him, and prior to 18 months ago when you bought, would have gotten an earful from you. Today on the other hand...

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

I also have said I got a remarkable deal. Which I did. Live with it, asshole, I'm not lying about my numbers.

>Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

You had a well written post addressed to Oxymoron.

And I thought it was appropriate to apply to aboutready. 20% annual return. 1/3rd the cost of renting. Is it a magic apartment? Do the laws of real estate economics cease to apply to aboutready?

But imitation isn't as powerful as how it was me who made you make a material economic decision (and an underperforming one at that), based solely on what I wrote on streeteasy. That's how you said it happened.

Riccardo65, we still hope you'll visit occasionally. Come see the Macy's parade and stay for the tree lighting.

Did aboutready buy her apartment from the same person who sold Jack his beanstalk beans?

Nada - I do not think your characterizations of oxy's statements are fair, and I am not following your conclusions or analogies, but then again, it may simply be that I am not very bright.

I read his statements as saying that w67th and ino seem like excellent individual stock pickers, but over the long haul, they will likely make as many bad calls as good calls. Sed e.g. Bill Ackman.

See, not sed.

See also chubby wombat.

And I didn't read oxy as saying he had achieved any measure of success over 10 year period.

>but then again, it may simply be that I am not very bright.

You are just an unfrozen cavewoman lawyer. Our real estate world frightens and confuses you.

>And I didn't read oxy as saying he had achieved any measure of success over 10 year period.

But aboutready. Now that woman has magical real estate capabilities according to what she's said about her rent to buy ratio.

I now see where oxy claimed measure of success over 10 year period, but I also read his comments to mean that he does not expect this to continue indefinitely.

I read oxy's main point to be that everyday Joe has no business trading individual stocks; picking individual stocks is for professional investors, and it is risky even for them. For every homerun, there will also be a strike out. The bulk of market participants are not skilled in this area, and for the average investor, diversification is the sensible strategy.

Which brings us back to question of what w67th, the Michael Jordan of investing if he is to be taken at his word, is doing on this site. I can't imagine Michael Jordan getting into it with high school kids - totally beneath him. W67th's engagement here either detracts from his credibility or suggests a high level of insecurity. If he were real, he'd be picking on people his own size. See e.g. Carl Icahn v Bill Ackman.

>Which brings us back to question of what w67th,

I'm not sure where you get that. w67 picked on stock - Sprint - that had outsized returns. He maintained his position in Sprint - see the link posted by Ottawanyc where this was stated by w67 - which has underperformed Apple since the date that w67 picked and made his announcement. According to inoitall, this is a big mistake, and w67 should have shorted Sprint on that date (4/19) and gone long Apple on that date. Apple of course has underperformed, in some cases quite materially, a number of other stocks in the same field, as I have listed above.

>if he is to be taken at his word

Like when he scolds real estate purchases but bought a portfolio of condos?

Or where he said he went all-in on Apple, but there is evidence that he also stated he held more Sprint in the past 6.5 months and that he sold his Apple in the $480s.

Or his claims of 5,000% returns and nary a mention of a loss?

@fc - I don't think w67th takes himself seriously, which is part of the reason I can't imagine anyone taking him seriously.

I know for a fact that w67thstreet takes himself seriously, which is why all of you will be eating humble pie when he is canonized during his own lifetime.

Fact, Jack.

AH - have you met him?

And how will we ever know when he is canonized or wins Nobel Prize?

And finally, many of us are already humble.

I think you mean by not understanding, and how many times must I make clear that I am beneath the fray, but I am glad you continue to make my point for me.

Yes, when logic fails you can always resort to sexual harassment. That really bolsters your credibility.

@nada, I think NYCNovice made addressed your comment for me. My track record isn't long-term and I don't believe in my own infallibility so will continue to diversify.

I would also say that I was surprised that single stocks don't appear to be way, way, more risky compared to highly leveraged RE. I will eat a small bite of humble pie. However, I remain to be fully convinced. I think the sharp swings that equities can exhibit will actually mean that RE is less risky when volatility is measured through a better statistic.

Not so random aside. I've always found the faithful who rant against atheists to be funny. They take a fact (there is no proof that God does not exist) and proclaim the irrationality of the atheistic (I absolutely believe God does not exist). Meanwhile, they ignore the symmetric irrationality of their own position: "While there is no proof that God does exist, I absolutely believe that God does exist".

I saw inonada in Spain last summer. I have no proof it was him but he told me his name is "inogrenada".

I absolutely believe that inonada exists in the Grenadines. He sailed to Spain with w67th.

Call the weekend emergency hotline for meds adjustment.

w67th left inonada in Granada and sailed to Zanzibar with the fray.

please tell me that she got hacked by the NSA

>please tell me that she got hacked by the NSA

C0C0, was that your attempt at humor or political commentary?
How was your weekend, by the way?

shift key got your tongue?

Uh, no, it didn't, whatever that means.

i would commend you on your new groupie except for the unfortunate fact of how lame she is.

Lame says who?

you don't think she's lame?

Who is she?

well...you gotta take what you can get.

You take the good, you take the bad

what's the good?

Part of it all.

oh, right.

hfscomm1.

Oxy, I likes you, you are a cool cat.

On zealots vs atheists, it goes both ways. But more often than not, atheists are proclaiming the higher rationality of their viewpoint when none really exists. I don't see it so much the other way, believers often understand there is no rationality behind their belief. Unless of course we're talking about something like Pascal's wager.

oxy is still a moronic neophyte. nobody can beat the market over the long haul, my impeccible minted ivy league friends who work at the top ib's cant make head nor tails, blah, blah, blah, blah.... sophomoric stuff. ur ivy league buddies came out with the same models and slide rules as rhino and even he figured out he was in above his head and tried turning to re. do you really think those tools with their finely minted credentials have any true read to the market?

get some ballz and invest you turd or sit there and pop your ten grand in a vanguard fund....

That was a magnificent rant.

That was a pathetic rant.

Your opinn, which given the quality of your recent posts is fairly meaningless.

Opinion.

Meaningless to you?

Yes.

Well, your opinion, given the quality of your recent posts, is fairly meaningless.

cmon, u really trying to defend his pathetic crap over the last few days. not worthy.

whatever happened to Rhino? There was an angry meathead if I ever saw one.

Oxy, on the issue of your claim of "1% +/- 2% a month", some facts. One of the most revered forms of diversified risk out there today is a fund from top-tier Bridgewater called All Weather. It is likely one of the sources you're parroting your diversification mantra from. In it, they claim a Sharpe ratio of 0.43 (gross of fees) from 1996 through the end of 2009. See:

http://sdcera.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=4&clip_id=75&meta_id=9141

I believe that Sharpe ratio would be about the same if you included 2010 to 2013.

Now these guys are at the top of the game of this approach, and they are collecting $350 million this year to implement it on $70 billion in assets. But all they can achieve with such an approach is ~1.6x the risk/reward of stocks by diversifying into what amounts to 3-ish independent sources of risk/reward. Now, Bridgewater can do better than that by actively managing in their Pure Alpha fund (and charging higher fees), but that's all they can do through diversification.

You claimed a 10-year track record of Sharpe ratios that are ~3x better than All Weather. This is equivalent to ~25 sources of independent risk/reward akin to stock indices. Bridgewater thinks they can take 1 to 3 through diversification, you think you can take it to 25. This means that over the past 10 years, you've been able to find 22 fully-independent-equivalent sources of diversified beta each & every year that Bridgewater could not.

Now poor w67th comes along and says he's got a view on Sprint in 2012, a view on Apple in 2013. These are all he's got. Each of these views is worth, at best, a single stock-equivalent risk/return. I.e., maybe he can get to a risk/reward of 4:1 or 3:1.

A little analyis would tell us that no matter what you think is the chance that w67th can predict things a priori (say 1%), given his track record you should make you think it's 6x better (say 6%) now. You can doubt him, but only 6x less than any random person here. An extremely unlikely thing happened (Sprint hit it huge AND Apple hit it well), and it would have been unlikely even if w67th had a fair amount of ability, but it'd be 6x less unlikely if you assume w67th has some ability. So as long as you don't stick to some absolutist position, you gotta take your hats off to him because he should have shifted your position from "you're a random punter like the rest of them" by a factor of 6.

What I find ironic, however, is the scale of your claims against his. He's identified (according to him) two independent opportunities of risk/reward, and he's put them out here for all to see. Your claim, while wrapped in the seemingly enlightened mantra of diversification, is you have identified 220 such opportunities in the past decade. That supposed track record beyond All Weather should shift a person's belief that you might be onto something by a factor of 3000x or so.

rangersfan>> ur ivy league buddies came out with the same models and slide rules as rhino and even he figured out he was in above his head and tried turning to re. do you really think those tools with their finely minted credentials have any true read to the market?

In Oxy's defense, Rhino has not one but two finely-minted ivy league credentials. Harvard and Wharton.

Fascinating how some people give such deference to a degree over data and evidence. While the school you were able to get admitted to as a teenager is a fine indicator of skill, success, etc., it is far from a perfect indicator. There are literally about a million ivy league graduates out there.

If you're looking for a needle in a haystack, it's probably the best haystack to search. But it doesn't mean the haystack's all needles and no hay.

just found it somewhat curious and amusing that oxy's arguement in part was that if my finely trained hommies can't predict the market, then no doubt nobody can....i find most sell side analysts to be nothing more than banker's bobbleheads.

@nada. I likes you too.

No sacrcasm intended, I'd love to understand how I can calculate the Sharpe for my portfolio and compare it to other strategies. I'm not sure you have the data to do any calculations. I don't believe I ever stated that I never exceed +3/-1% in any month so that may help eradicate some of my risk-adjusted "outperformance". If I did, I apologize. Unfortunately, I was only up 2.77% in January (when global large caps were up 7.83%) and down in August by 2.82% (when global large caps were down 3.79%). I have been up every other month (by <3%) except June (down <1%).

@carlosdangersfan. Point taken about IB Analysts. I do remember Jack Grubman. However, what about my point about regular portfolio managers at Asset Managers. They have perfect alignment of self-interest to outperform. Why is it so, so rare for any of them to do so past 10 years?

Genuine question for Nada - are you self-taught? I believe someone who is self taught can achieve or exceed performance of those who are formally trained, and I really have no idea whether you are or not. Just curious.

omoronic, i find it interesting that you are able to achieve your 10% per annum return in the range of investment vehicles you listed. moreover, if you are truly an investor in absolute hedge funds and the like, you either are a trust fund baby or completely full of it. some of these vehicles that you listed have very high minimum investment entry points and given your "logic" about the folly of anyone to truly beat the market, why would you be paying 2 and 20? again, going to call shenanigans.

inonada, like so many people on this discussion board, was schooled by w67thstreet.

AH - That is apparent about many on this discussion board. Inonada, however, has credibility with me because in speaking with him in person the few times I have, he struck me as highly intelligent. Now highly intelligent individuals frequently skip steps when explaining their thought processes, which can make their thought processes less accessible to other people of above average intelligence who are generally used to being able to follow a debate. Oxymoronic has the better of this one so far, though I will be curious to read Ino's response to Oxy's most recent post.

http://allthingsd.com/20131104/stanford-human-computer-interaction-expert-cliff-nass-dies-at-55/
Dr. Cliff Nass, a highly regarded professor at Stanford University who was known for his research on human-computer interaction and the impact of multitasking on cognitive performance, died from a heart attack this weekend. He was 55.

Nobody speaks to inonada in person.

Kobayashi can eat way more frankfurter sandwiches than Kawauchi can. WAY more.

about 3 days ago on this discussion thread, the lawyer claims:
"...with that said, I reiterate that I always enjoy Nada's view b/c I have met him..."

about 2 hours ago: the lawyer states here:
"Inonada, however has credibility because in speaking with him in person..."

Yet, she never asked him that "Genuine question...""?!

I have no problem with inonada.
If I had met him, I would have asked him (if I cared) in person.

Truth - How could you have asked him a question you didn't have at the time? It was only through his comments in this discussion that the question was raised in my mind. I have little doubt that nada is highly skilled in financial analysis and frequently makes excellent stock picks. Moreover, I would not be surprised if he were among the top tier performance-wise in managing money. His training formal or not has nothing to do with ability or performance but it might help me understand the disconnect between him and Oxy. He is an interesting poster whom I have had the good fortune to speak with on two occasions, but it's not like we are in regular contact. He can choose not to answer, and I would absolutely respect that choice.

O.K., NYCNovice.
However, that "Genuine question" would have been on my mind "at that time", when I met him.
I would want to know, before granting him the position of "credibility" b/c: "I have met him."
and "in speaking with him in person."
Just to ask him a "Genuine question", whether or not you "respect" his choice to answer.

inonada: Your genuine response?

inonada could take a while to respond:
w67th left inonada in Granada and then sailed to ZZZanzzzzzabar with the fray.
inonada may need you to help him with I.P. claim: inonada wrote the song: "inohowtosavealife".

>Are you on crack?

AR, you really shouldn't go there. Not someone of your caliber. Remember the old days.

take it away, feildschester!
(The bored, frustrated, unemployable housewife is still obsessed with my life. She can't go to Italy or France without her husband, he doesn't allow her to travel alone. Especially to "vineyards".)

Wow, I know I'll have badly sinned if I die and come back as your toilet seat.

"fieldschester", take her downtown! She's not allowed to go there by herself, either.

I think the odds are pretty high, actually.

I gotta turn things around. C0C0, I'm sorry, forgive me for revealing all of your confessions.

8:48pm on Monday night, 11/4/13.
The bored, frustrated, unemployable alkie housewife is home alone; angry as usual.

8:48; Monday night, 11/4/13.
The has-been groupie is home alone, brored and bitter as usual.

Go to sleep, aboutready. It's 10:00pm. Do you know where you are?

Have you sued anyone for not allowing food to be delivered to your floor recently?

Go to sleep, aboutready. You're in full drunk-as-a-skunk mode at 10:13pm.

Nice try, "truth." I guess you can't, for whatever reason, answer the questions.

Go to sleep, aboutready. Try to go to sleep.
Maybe if you have another drink, you can take your drunken "questions" to bed. It's 10:26pm.
Your husband would like to come home, if only you'd pass-out.

My husband is home. Where is yours?

Go snuggle up to your husband, if he is home. Your drunken aroma will turn him on. Go to sleep, aboutready.

And where is Spinny? What became of him? Boiled alive in a cauldron?

@carlosdangersfan

Being I'm not a trust funder nor full of it, perhaps there's a third option. The truth...

My access to absolute hedge funds are through two vehicles.

1. I have an overseas "wrapper" fund overseen by Skandia managed in the Isle Of Man dating back to a time when I was cap gains exempt living overseas. This gives me direct access to funds with high mininmum investor thresholds and charges are typically levied at the institutional rate rather than the class A or B rate. This also gives me access to overseas fund managers like Marlborough or First State which have exceptional records but aren't directly available to U.S. investors.

2. I also gain access via Chase Private Client to some J.P.Morgan/Highbridge funds but these are part of bleneded portfolios rather than direct access.

Do hope this clairifies.

Bernie fund was very hard to get into...

Being ugly and european doesn't make you "sexy" for w67.. .it makes you ugly and even worse, w67 can't understand you thru that thick accent.

Ppl leave america all the time.. usually bc they can't get a job that pays enough here. Saw a bunch of misfits ship off to Japan in the 80's. Ugly and unwanted then... still ugly and unwanted now...most parlayed their "exoticness" to marry an unsuspecting japanese chick.

Yes, Oxy has the better of this one. Now, one thing I did ask Inonada in person (because the question had occurred to me many times while reading this board prior to meeting him) is whether Inonada and w67th are one and the same. He stated that they are not. However, I remain skeptical.

Nada appears to have a brain. He can at least construct logical defences of his arguments and reasonably focused probes into the potential flaws of others. If he is W67th, he plays the slightly unhinged troll very convincingly.

I think w67th plays the slightly unhinged troll very convincingly. There's brilliance in his feigned madness.

not everyone here needs to hide behind multiple identities created for the purpose of goading others.

NYCNovice: If Nada stated he's not also posting as w67th, I would believe him. lol.

The purpose of goading others. That's an interesting one.
C0C0, how many of your 12,529 posts have been about real estate?

fieldschester
6 days ago
Posts: 1331
Member since: Jul 2013
ignore this person
report abuse
>The truism of life is even porn stars like sex better when they aren't being paid for it.

Yes, that is the truism of life.

Might also explain why "thousands of people touched your wife."

C0C0, how many of your 12,530 posts have been about real estate?

fieldschester
7 days ago
Posts: 1332
Member since: Jul 2013
ignore this person
report abuse
I sense some goading going on.