CONTROLLED GREED.com

Looking Forward to Hopelessness

2009-03-02T19:31:47-05:00

“When you stop asking,” was the exasperated reply of the broker to the pestering client who asked the same question over and over during the 1974 stock-market crash: When will it end?

Nobody knew, or could know. The broker, wiser than he realized, chose not to serve up the windy non-answer that fills so much cable TV time today: “Well,” he didn’t speculate, “the bear market will end when the Watergate crisis is resolved and the Federal Reserve gets its arms around the inflation problem and business activity shows convincing signs of a pickup.” Instead, he blurted the truth that bear markets end when investors give up hope.

Read that again -- Grant NAILS the state of journalism on most of cable TV.

Hope sustains life, but misplaced hope prolongs recessions. At the root of this paradox is the notion that booms don’t just precede booms, they cause them. Modern-day booms are the products of low interest rates and easy credit. People overborrow, overpay and overindulge. They love the things that borrowed money buys, but the debts become insupportable. Then the assets, or some of them, must go. A little selling — of houses, cars, companies, stocks — becomes a lot, and the next thing you know we’re talking about nationalizing Citigroup.

Wishing that this weren’t happening to them, hopeful business people and homeowners resist making necessary adjustments. Some refuse to sell the house they can’t afford. Others won’t think of selling the stocks for which they paid what seemed a reasonable price only last year but which are one-half of that reasonable price today.

Today’s low prices, painful though they may be, are the market’s own shovel-ready stimulus. Before you know it, the stock market, and the residential real-estate market, too, will be on their way back up again — just don’t ask when.

Buffett's Letter

2009-03-01T23:18:14-05:00

Plenty of discussion about Warren Buffett's letter to shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway is alive and growing on the Internet. Among the many reports focusing on the company's 2008 results are Carol Loomis' articlein Fortune.

I read the letter yesterday, but I won't analyze it. Let's stipulate Buffett's -- and Charlie Munger's -- and others in Berkshire's leadership -- as real and proven over the long term.

For me, I note that Buffett in his first paragraph puts Berkshire's book value at $70,530. I posted recently that the prospect of Berkshire below book seems like a bargain to me. Let's see if it gets there. Some like Doug Kass have speculated that Buffett is losing his touch and that Berkshire may start trading below book, much like many closed-end funds do. I don't think Buffett has lost his fastball -- my worry would be more that the company is so big its potential investing/purchasing universe is smaller than I'd like.

But in this market, there are very likely herds of "elephants" (Buffett's word for the size of companies Berkshire looks for) roaming the globe. Berkshire has got the cash.

The Lex Column in the Financial Times takes the proper viewof the headlines proclaiming "Buffett's worst year ever":

A little perspective is warranted here. Buffett’s stumble came during the worst year for equities since the 1930s and Berkshire’s book value fell only 9.6 per cent. In other words, it fared 27.4 percentage points better than the S&P500 when dividends are included. An investment with Buffett has returned 84 times that of equities overall since 1965.

And this:

As always, Buffett cares solely about value, not what the market thinks. Such pure objectivity is not only refreshing but also a contrarian buying signal for other brave, long-term investors. Consider what happened the last time he strayed so far from conventional wisdom.

That last time was at the height of the Internet bubble.

Paul Harvey, R.I.P.

2009-02-28T22:33:20-05:00

Paul Harvey, one of the greatest broadcasters in American history and certainly the greatest radio broadcaster, died today in Phoenix at age 90. His delivery, along the way he blended news with commentary, was unlike anything else on the radio dial. And Harvey would personally endorse advertisers on his show, which he reportedly wouldn't do unless he liked the product or service himself. (I still remember his glowing praise of Curtis Mathes TVs years ago.)

A true pioneer is gone. Rest in peace, Mr. Harvey.

Five for the Weekend #30

2009-02-27T17:13:10-05:00

Well, the Bear market rumbles on and on, clawing and shredding brokerage statements left and right. While we're tending to our scratches and mauled psyches, we can spend some quality time reading over the weekend. Here a five suggestions.

Good overview articleon value investing entitled, The Graham & Dodders. Besides Graham and Dodd, the piece discusses Warren Buffett, Mohnish Pabrai, Leon Cooperman, the guys at Tweedy Browne, and the Sequoia Fund (co-founded by the legendary, and late, Bill Ruane). Even if you're familiar with value investing, as Controlled Greed readers are, you'll find this worth your time.

If you're a regular here, you know I can't get too much of the late John Templeton. And here we go again. This Forbes pieceprovides a nice overview of Sir John's career, and even tries to pinpoint some stocks he might find attractive today. I'm suspicious of that sort of thing, but confess it gets my interest.

With Warren Buffett's annual letter to shareholders due Saturday, Bloomberg speculatesBerkshire Hathaway's 2008 performance may have been its worst in history -- as measured by the company's book value.

It's been popular since September 11, 2001 -- especially among many of my conservative friends -- to dump on the Saudi Royal Family. Yes, I know the majority of highjackers that day were Saudis. Yet I've always believed that was by design by forces wanting to destroy US-Saudi relations. Karen Elliott House wrote a thoughtful op-edin The Wall Street Journal this week on reforms King Abdullah is implementing. And I wish him and The Kingdom well in what must be among the world's most difficult balancing acts.

Africa-Asia Confidential runs yet another in-depth reporton China's growing investment in the Dark Continent. This story focuses on China creating a mining portfolio in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone.

That's it for now. The big thing this weekend will be Warren Buffett's letter. Remember when Buffett wasn't part of American pop culture? Anyway, see you next week.

Jim Grant Review Teaches the True Gold Standard

2009-02-26T22:13:36-05:00

Jim Grant recently revieweda new book titled, Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World in The Wall Street Journal. Grant writes that the book is a "modernist's" account of the errors helping produce the Great Depression, adding:

It is also, necessarily, a provocation to debate about this, our Great Recession. Liaquat Ahamed is the modernist in question, and he writes with all the world-wise assurance of the professional investor, World Bank alumnus and Brookings Institution trustee that he is.

Apparently, Ahamed believes the main villain was the gold standard. Grant corrects him in the review by pointing out his quarrel is with the "gold exchange standard" -- a "road-show version of the genuine article." More:

The gold standard -- i.e., thegold standard -- was the monetary system more or less continuously in place between Waterloo and World War I. It was simplicity itself. Bank notes were exchangeable into gold, and gold into bank notes, at a fixed, inviolable rate. A central bank's everyday job was to facilitate this exchange. Of what we know today as "monetary policy" -- i.e., manipulating interest rates or the money supply to promote full employment or to pull the economy out of the ditch -- the conscientious central banker would have no part. This gold standard perished in World War I.

Another great part:

But gold backing is not, in fact, the essential feature of a properly functioning gold standard. What made that self-regulating system tick was the simple rule that a dollar or a franc or a pound could not be in two places at the same time. Gold movements between debtors and creditors ensured as much.

You might suppose that so basic a feature of the physical world would naturally rule the financial one. But the post-World War I wrecking crew discovered that a certain privileged kind of money could be made to do double duty. This was the "reserve currency." The pound sterling was the original reserve currency, the top monetary brand of the day. The U.S. dollar is its successor. It was given to Britain, later to the U.S., to have it both ways, to consume much more than it produced but never to have to pay its foreign creditors in anything except the paper that it alone could lawfully print. And as if that were not good enough, the creditors dutifully reinvested the pounds or dollars in the securities of the debtor government. It was heaven on earth, while it lasted.

Of course, it didn't last; it never does. Inflation -- of prices or of credit -- brings down the hammer. The disservice that Mr. Ahamed does to history is to fail to distinguish between the flaws of the classical gold standard, on the one hand, and the far deeper imperfections of the gold-exchange standard (so similar to the evils of today's dollar standard), on the other.

Like anything of Grant's, read the entire thing.

Lonrho-LonZim Controversy Brewing

2009-02-26T21:04:08-05:00

Regular readers of Controlled Greed know that yours truly has been intrigued by the idea of an African-wide play. The reason is because Africa has been growing nicely over the recent years, and might be a smart play on emerging market growth with Mainland China and India getting all the press. (This was before the global financial crisis.)

Lonrho is a company I've been keeping an eye on -- and money out of.

While Lonrho is a "conglomerate" investing across several countries and industries on the "African Continent," it also qualifies as a micro-cap outfit. As a result, there's very little coverage of the company, both in the press and among analysts.

Then, with the current market meltdown, you don't have to endure the risks of putting your money in Africa when plenty of outstanding companies are available at cheap prices. (At least that's what I hope the case with Microsoft and Cheung Kong Holdings.)

Thursday the news brokein London that Lonrho's investment arm LonZim (which invests in Zimbabwe) had bought Lonrho's stock without telling anyone:

LonZim spent almost £3 million buying nearly 60 million shares in Lonrho, with which it shares most of its directors, over a three-month period, including participating in a private placing in November, but failed to disclose the purchases as a related-party transaction. The company also failed to inform Collins Stewart, its nominated adviser, which is understood to have now moved to sever all ties with both LonZim and Lonrho, after what is believed to have been a rocky relationship.

David Lenigas, who chairs both companies, last night denied any wrongdoing by the AIM-listed groups and said that he was already in discussions with a number of parties interested in becoming LonZim’s new adviser, with a view to relisting as soon as possible. LonZim suspended its shares at 31p while it reviews the transaction.

Lonrho trades in London under symbol LONR. LonZim had been trading under symbol LZM.

Sobering Column by Tom Stevenson

2009-02-25T22:41:18-05:00

Tom Stevenson isn't a technical analyst. And I'm not, either (as a value guy, that's no surprise). Yet his Daily Telegraph columnmakes interesting reading. Even if you, like me, don't quite know what to make of it.

A bit:

It is not inconceivable that another big down-leg is what the markets have in store for us. This is the scale of what happened to investors during the Great Depression. But to believe this outcome you have to also accept some pretty ghoulish forecasts for the global economy. You have to believe, for example, that the entire financial world order which has held for decades has come to an end and that much of the wealth creation of the post-war period has been an illusion.

Same Old, Same Old Left-Right Debates on TV Getting Old

2009-02-25T22:27:39-05:00

President Obama's State of the Union speech was excellent, in terms of delivery and charisma. And the First Lady was simply stunning, even radiant. I don't know if Mr. Obama will ever top his victory speech the night of the Iowa caucus, which was a transcendent moment in American history.

But the analysis on TV here in the US has been uniformly bad or at best very mediocre. Everything is positioned in the false Left-Right light, leaving those of us in the libertarian segment (admittedly feeling very small these days) out in the cold.

Even Charlie Rose was disappointing, having a 5-person roundtable consisting of 4 leftwingers and one supposedly conservative pundit (who, BTW, writes it seems to increasingly impress the Beltway cocktail party set). It's obvious most of these folks on all these shows grew up believing the New Deal hype and accept it as religion.

And it would be so -- well, refreshing -- to have seen Thomas Donlan or even better Jim Grant frequent these roundtables. Perhaps Mr. Donlan will address the State of the Union address in the upcoming Barron's this weekend.

In the meantime, Holman Jenkins writes something in The Wall Street Journal popping out:

His will be a fascinating presidency to watch, not least because of his inexperience, his intellectual agility, and the crisis in which he finds himself. But his presidency will get really interesting in a year or two, or six months -- whenever he finally realizes that everything he thought he wanted to do is irrelevant. He'll then have to adapt an agenda for the world as it is, in which many childish things no longer have a place.

And, by the way, he kids himself if he believes he will be allowed, like FDR, to preside over a depression without being politically blamed for it. The public is different now -- the world is different -- and he will own the "Obama depression" sooner than he thinks.

Wonder column. Read the entire thing. But I wonder if Jenkins is wrong in that last paragraph.

Barron's Bary on Buffett's Berkshire

2009-02-25T06:41:00-05:00

Say that three times really, really fast. :-)

Berkshire Hathaway is the subject of this articleby Andrew Bary in Barron's Online:

While Chief Executive Warren Buffett has made a slew of savvy preferred stock and corporate-bond investments, the company's famed portfolio of stocks has been slammed in the ongoing bear market.

So far this year, Berkshire's class A shares have slumped 20% to $77,500, near the lowest level in five years and just over half the stock's peak reached in late 2007.

The investment company's woes come in spite of recent investments outside the common stock market. For example, the company has bought $2.6 billion of convertible securities from Swiss Re that pay a 12% interest rate. Berkshire also has bought a series of bond issues from the likes of Vulcan Materials, Harley Davidson, Tiffany and Sealed Air that pay 10% or more.

Berkshire's problems these days clearly stem from its equity portfolio, which could be down more than 25% in 2009, based on our calculation of the performance through yesterday of Berkshire's 17 largest investments, which historically have accounted for over 85% of the portfolio.

Bary estimates that the stock trades at 1.2 times book, below the 1.5 times book its traded for over the past decade. He concludes:

Berkshire has taken some lumps this year, but it remains a financial powerhouse at a time when credit is dear and investment opportunities are plentiful. This plays to Buffett's strength, although he probably wishes he had invested less in 2008 and had more cash to invest now.

The annual report, including the most-anticipated and most-read letter to shareholders in the world of business will be out this weekend.

"Dollar is Best Looker in Ugly-Currency Parade"

2009-02-24T21:32:54-05:00

So says the always-interesting Michael Sesit in his latest Bloomberg column. He notes that to end the US dollar's reserve-currency role, you need a replacement. And there isn't one. Some may whisper, "gold bullion," but you get the idea.

A snippet:

Americans are now saving more while spending and importing less. As they do, the current-account deficit will narrow and the U.S. will become less dependent on foreigners to finance the gap. The deficit amounted to 4.8 percent of gross domestic product in the third quarter, having been as large as 6.6 percent of GDP in the last quarter of 2005.

I think the long-term prospects for all the paper currencies is lousy. But two thoughts occur as I type that. How long is long term? And what else is there (as insurance) other than gold bullion (but I'd wait for the correction in the price of gold)?

Jean-Marie Eveillard on Bloomberg

2009-02-24T21:23:49-05:00

Bloomberg interviewedJean-Marie Eveillard on First Eagle today. He gave his thoughts on prospects for nationalization of US banks and some stock ideas. It's good stuff and, like any interview with Eveillard, well worth your time if you're a fan of those great value investors who've proven themselves over the course of time.

On a related note, earlier this month Sivaram of the Can Turtles Fly? blog posted about the recent First Eagle conference call. He includes links to listen to the call or read the transcript.

BTW, it's nice to see these guys at First Eagle are fellow travelers with me in Microsoft (MSFT/NASDAQ). That doesn't guarantee anything, of course. But I'd rather be alongside folks like these than not.

Hope and Waterfalls

2009-02-23T17:04:49-05:00

John Dorfman offers hope for a stock market recovery in his new Bloomberg column. A few bits:

Market action during and after “waterfall declines” -- sudden drops of 20 percent or more in a few days or weeks -- tend to follow a pattern, featuring three phases. First there is the dramatic decline itself, often recession-related. Next there is a basing period of one to three months when the stock market moves sideways. Then there is generally a rally lasting six to 12 months, carrying stocks up 24 percent on average.

If that happened this year, the Dow Jones Industrial Average would recover to 9,133 and the S&P 500 would bounce back to 955.

Dorfman uses Ned Davis Research to find that we've seen 11 "waterfall" declines since 1929. He believes we're now in the next phase -- finding a base. And he believes this provides a guide for 2009:

Traders say that the stock market likes to go up with as few people onboard as possible. Today, many people have retreated to cash, or to a mixture of cash and bonds. Many of these investors will miss the next rally.

Using data from Ned Davis and Bloomberg, I examined what happened in the market three months, six months and 12 months after the market low in the 10 descents cited earlier.

In seven cases out of 10, it took several days or weeks for the market to hit a final low after the waterfall decline. That bottoming process took 2 1/2 months after the crash of 1987, for example. The same interval applied with the post-Internet bubble bear market of 2000 to 2002. So far, the current basing period -- assuming that I’m right, and we’re in one -- has lasted three months.

Three months after the post-waterfall low, the market was higher in all 10 cases. The average gain was 15 percent.

Six months after the low, the market was higher in nine of the 10 cases (flat in 1937). The average gain was 17 percent.

Twelve months after the low, the market was higher in nine cases out of 10 (flat in 1929-1930). The average gain in 12 months was 24 percent.

You'll want to read the entire piece. While I don't know if Dorfman's hunch will prove true, I do believe this is not to time to dump stocks and move to cash or bonds. It is a good time to make strategic lateral moves, such as my recent move into Microsoft and, before that, Cheung Kong Holdings. (Whether those two specific plays work out only time will tell.)

I'm trying to position the portfolio for the eventual recovery. Whether it comes later this year or the one after that. Or the one after that. Or the one...well, you get the idea.

Reader Emails on Exchanging Links

2009-02-23T12:44:00-05:00

Lately, I've gotten several emails from readers along this line:

"Hey, John -- great blog and I've enjoyed reading you for a long time. I've started my own blog and was wondering if we can exchange links?"

I no longer respond to these emails, so if you've sent me one of these and haven't heard back, please don't feel offended. It's just that I'm like most people in the Internet age, and find that coping with emails is a huge task. And a BIG impediment to managing my time effectively if I'm not careful.

I used to get loads of these types of emails right after launching Controlled Greed in 2005. Since then they come in cycles -- get them for a while, then none come for a few months at a time.

My advice to anyone starting a blog is this:

Just blog as much as you can, as best as you can.

Keep at it and discover if you like it -- especially after you've been blogging six months or more. There are who-knows-how-many blogs out there "orphaned" because the newness of blogging wears off after a while.

If you do both of those, you'll almost certainly be very pleasantly surprised how many blogs link to you and even refer their readers to specific posts you've put up.

And with that, best wishes to anyone starting a blog. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have over the past few years.

Gary Shilling on Financial Sense Newshour

2009-02-22T23:36:47-05:00

Jim Puplava interviewedGary Shilling in the first hour of his weekly Financial Sense Newshour program. It was Shilling's first time on the show -- and what a treat it is hearing him allowed to finish his thoughts and sentences. Much different from when he's appeared on CNBC roundtable discussions with 4 or 5 others, all talking at the same time. Some of whom aren't qualified to tie Shilling's shoelaces.

Shilling correctly forecast much of this current financial mess several years ago -- and he tells Puplava housing has further to fall. In fact, he thinks we might not see a bottom in housing until sometime in 2010.

I like listening (and seeing and reading) Shilling when the occasion arises in the same way I enjoy guys like Jim Rogers and Marc Faber on "big picture" type stuff. He's been writing columns for Forbes for what seems like forever. He strikes me a man who's been around a while and who takes a long-term view of things. Let's hope this is the first of many appearances with Puplava.

Donlan on GM

2009-02-22T23:26:17-05:00

I haven't posted anything on General Motors for a while. Mainly because my exposure is now in the debt (symbol GBM), and is so low I've almost written it off mentally. But not quite. My hunch is that the White House and Congressional leadership will move heaven and earth to save the United Auto Workers (who have given the party in power countless millions in the past). So we'll just have to wait and see what develops.

In the meantime, as an investor in GM and admirer of folks like Bob Lutz, it pains me to read Thomas Donlan's editorial in Barron's. Pains me because it makes so much commonsense.

Nibbling at Cheung Kong Holdings

2009-02-22T23:04:56-05:00

Friday I added a few more ADRs to my holding in Cheung Kong Holdings -- and I do mean just a few. I had a bit of cash in that particular account, nothing much, and decided to add it to this position since I could get in at a price lower than my original entry price.

I boosted my ADR count by 9%, buying on Friday at $8.10. I originally established the holding at $8.60, and my average cost is now $8.56.

Five for the Weekend #29

2009-02-20T19:50:37-05:00

Very, very busy week for me personally -- which is good in this economy. Next week promises to be as well. And I'm looking forward to some quality down time this weekend. But who cares about my non-blogging life when the market continues in Bear territory? Not many, to be sure. Hopefully a few more will find this week's installment of Five for the Weekend more interesting. ;-)

I speculated earlier this week that CBS may be reducing its dividend. I was right the very next day. But not because I'm smart. More like because of dumb luck. I respect Les Moonves and I don't believe he'd do this unless it was necessary. The credit agencies are applauding the action. I liked the idea of an "old media" company not being appreciated by the market, with Moonves and me and other shareholders getting the last laugh. That may yet prove true for Moonves and shareholders in the future. But not for me as I've taken a bath on CBS.

Fairfax Financial (FFH/NYSE) continues being among the precious few bright spots in my portfolio. 2008 is reportedly the best year in the company's history. To help mark the occasion, Chairman and CEO Prem Watsa gave a must-read interview(and a fairly short one as well) to the National Post.

A new Barron's goes online tomorrow, but I don't want to let Tom Donlan's excellent editorialin this week's issue go unmentioned. Donlan argues that economics isn't "hard science" but an ongoing philosophical debate. And points out the wide range of economists winning the Nobel Prize. Spot on editorial. Regular readers of Controlled Greed know I believe Donlan is the finest editorial writer in America. Even if someone doesn't agree with him often, I hope we can all agree that he's a unique voice -- especially with the over-used and very-tired Left/Right arguments consuming most media.

James Altucher's latest columnin the Financial Times deals with networking. Not the social media type of stuff you hear so much about these days. But old-fashioned face-to-face contact. Jim writes that he normally isn't very social or enjoys meeting new people. Same here -- I like people generally but am on the quiet side and have the bad habit of listening too much when meeting someone because I don't know them and want to hear what they have to say. The result is I can often wind up saying very little. Oh well. Back to Jim, he follows Howard Lindzon around one day and attended eight meetings.

The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange is re-opening after three months with its listings denominated in US dollars instead of its own virtually worthless currency. Here's a Bloomberg report. And for more of the latest goings-on in the former Rhodesia, Africa Confidential uncoversthe fragile state of the country's so-called coalition government.

Have a great couple of days. See you next week if not before.

Portfolio Adjustment: Selling CBS and Comcast; Buying Microsoft

2009-02-18T00:44:11-05:00

I took the opportunity to upgrade the portfolio Wednesday (love that word, "upgrade"). I sold CBS (CBS/NYSE) at $5.51 and Comcast (CMCSK/NASDAQ) at $12.27 and put the proceeds into Microsoft (MSFT/NASDAQ) at $18.39.

I'll post more about these as time permits -- it's after midnight in my neck of the woods and I'm swamped with non-blogging duties. I've taken a big loss with CBS, and would've held on if the current market wasn't giving us opportunities to get great companies at cheap prices. I liked Les Moonves and his returning cash to shareholders, but CBS may have to reduce its dividend and even limit share repurchases. Which would tank the stock even more.

Fred Hickey recommended Microsoft at $20 in the Barron's Roundtable. Geoff Gannon said buy at $17.50 or less. I'm in-between so I don't feel too bad. I linked to Geoff's thoughts on Microsoft previously. Here's what Hickey said in Barron's:

But some names you could hold through the end of the year. Microsoft is one. At 20, it is lower than 10 years ago, when the company did $12 billion in revenue. Now it does $60 billion.

Meryl Witmer asked here about if it had the same market cap as then. Hickey again:

The market cap is similar because they have been buying back shares to offset the dilution due to stock options. The dividend yield is 2.7%. The trailing P/E is 10, something you've never seen for Microsoft. Operating cash flow is $19 billion a year. Gross margins are 81%, which gives them a lot of flexibility to offset any weakness in the top line. As the economy weakens, Microsoft is able to cut costs.

The market misperceives Microsoft. Its most visible part -- PC [personal computer] operating systems -- is shrinking. Windows is just 28% of sales. Less visible, and growing rapidly, is the server and tools business, at 23% of its revenue, up 17% in the latest quarter. The SQL server database business is gaining market share, and a new virtualization product, Hyper-V, is one of the hottest technologies in the market. The real jewel is the business division, which now contributes a third of revenue. It grew 20% in the quarter. This is Office and SharePoint, a content-management product, and Unified Communications. Information Week called SharePoint a juggernaut. Companies like Pfizer use it to develop wikis and blogs. Microsoft is making a lot of money as a pick and shovel provider to the industry.

Asked about the attempted Yahoo purchase:

They want to be in the search business. Luckily they didn't get it at the price they first offered, but [CEO Steve] Ballmer is on record saying he'd like to buy Yahoo!'s search-advertising business.

When I sold Mueller Water and Office Depot to switch into Cheung Kong Holdings ADRs (CHEUY/OTC), I believe I moved to a much better company available at a cheap price. I believe that's the case here as well. But only time will tell and I could always be wrong.

Financial Times: Liberty Media Close to Deal for Sirius XM

2009-02-16T18:27:20-05:00

If you subscribe to FT.com, you can read the report here.

Regular readers know I've owned Liberty Media, and now hold its three tracking stocks, for a while. The investment was performing nicely, until the financial meltdown (what else is new?).

Yet I'm a fan of John Malone, though many have lost patience with him over the years. I think he's a shrewd operator and I'm sure he thinks he can do well with Sirius XM satellite radio. At the right price, of course.

I'll take this opportunity to remind that between my holding in DirecTV Group (DTV/NYSE) and Liberty Media (which controls DTV), DirecTV is my single largest holding.

Lucy Kellaway Reminds Us to Know How to Dress Like Adults

2009-02-16T11:31:00-05:00

This columnby Lucy Kellaway in the Financial Times is spot on (HT: Maoxian). It doesn't apply to many of us in the US today, because today's a holiday for many. But it applies to your job, any job searches, and your career. A bit:

The casual look, which we used to celebrate as a sign of egalitarianism and unstuffiness, now looks sloppy. When Stephen Hester, head of Royal Bank of Scotland, was photographed on a recent Sunday leaving the Treasury in jeans and an extraordinary beige gilet with suede patches on the shoulders, the punters did not like it. One wrote to the Financial Times claiming that Mr Hester appeared to be wearing the very same M&S slippers that this reader got for Christmas. The fashion scales have fallen from our eyes. We now see that men in casual clothes look simply awful; and we also are starting to suspect that a man who is casual with his clothes may be casual with our money.

Actually, Kellaway's column doesn't just apply because of this economy. It really has made sense since the tech boom ended.

Look, I where dress-casual attire plenty of time. Most of the time. But part of being a grown up is knowing how to function as one when needed. And that includes dressing like an adult when the occasion arises. It's simple to do. And can be done without spending a fortune. If you're interested, you can read a post about this from 2007.