Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
by 20% per year annually since 1957.
David Wilkinson wrote:
> Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
> Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
> only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
> by 20% per year annually since 1957.
And?
"PeterL" <> wrote
> David Wilkinson wrote:
> > Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
> > Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
> > only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
> > by 20% per year annually since 1957.
>
> And?
I thought it was interesting.
I would like to know if Bernanke's sole stock holding is related to
professional conflict of interest concerns, though.
"Elle" <> wrote
Hey, the "e" is back. Oh, you are so full of surprises.
Elle wrote:
> "PeterL" <> wrote
> > David Wilkinson wrote:
> > > Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
> > > Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
> > > only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
> > > by 20% per year annually since 1957.
> >
> > And?
>
> I thought it was interesting.
>
> I would like to know if Bernanke's sole stock holding is related to
> professional conflict of interest concerns, though.
Greenspan don't even own stocks.
"Ed" <> wrote in message
news:
>
> "Elle" <> wrote
>
> Hey, the "e" is back. Oh, you are so full of surprises.
>
>
Yup, like I mentioned to Steven L, it keeps on changing
its' name as to NOT to be "plonked".
I just wish it would drop the "ski" from its' last name.
It hurts me when I see that, but then again ...
David Wilkinson <> wrote:
> Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
> Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
> only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
> by 20% per year annually since 1957.
-Mike
ps, he made some nice moves into Canadian Strips. Perhaps he's a dollar bear?
"Mike S" <> wrote
> David Wilkinson <>
wrote:
> > Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an
article attached to
> > Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben
Bernanke, invests in
> > only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and
apparently it has grown
> > by 20% per year annually since 1957.
>
>
Nice article. From a link to it showing Bernanke's precise
holdings c. 2004, he owns only $15-50k of Phillip Morris in
a portfolio of 1 to 6 million dollars. He owns several stock
mutual funds (most or all of them actively managed), so it's
misleading to say he holds only one stock position.
I think explanation 4 as to why he holds so many active
funds is most likely to be correct. Guy's a bad example.
> ps, he made some nice moves into Canadian Strips. Perhaps
he's a dollar bear?
On 23 Nov 2005 16:34:44 -0800, "PeterL" <> wrote:
>
>Elle wrote:
>> "PeterL" <> wrote
>> > David Wilkinson wrote:
>> > > Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
>> > > Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
>> > > only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
>> > > by 20% per year annually since 1957.
>> >
>> > And?
>>
>> I thought it was interesting.
>>
>> I would like to know if Bernanke's sole stock holding is related to
>> professional conflict of interest concerns, though.
>
>Greenspan don't even own stocks.
I read a year or so back an article on "How Greenspan was worth an
est. 120 million or so.... Would you care to specualte on how a man
with a salary of say 120k per year or so can become so wealthy? :-)
Could it possible be that he is/was so privy to "insider moves"?
David Wilkinson wrote:
> Talking of investing in single stocks I see from an article attached to
> Finance-Yahoo that your new economic leader, Ben Bernanke, invests in
> only one stock. The stock is Philip Morris and apparently it has grown
> by 20% per year annually since 1957.
MO is almost the perfect regulated industry. Government regulation
plus massive market barriers to entry keep out new entrants (this may
be changing in the US).
Consumers are notoriously price insensitive to tobacco. Margins on
tobacco products are c. 40% from memory, v. less than 8% for the
average US consumer product (quoting from memory). Think of MO as the
ultimate speciality pharmaceutical stock (which it is).
Demand for tobacco products grows (albeit slowly), probably less than
inflation, but it is still in its hyper growth phase in emerging
markets (as people get richer, they have more to spend on luxuries like
tobacco). In developed countries, there is a 'hard core' of smokers
(about 30% of the population) which doesn't reduce much (older smokers
die or give up, but new younger smokers are created all the time).
Even in New York, which bans all indoor smoking, it is about 20% of the
population.
Every so often litigation sucks out a wodge of cash, but the overall
picture is a pretty rosy one: a classic Warren Buffett play. Find a
sector for which investors have a non-financial aversion, which is
massively cash generative and management *pays out* that free cash
flow, rather than squandering it.
BAT and Imperial Tobacco and Gallaher are the UK equivalents. BAT has
US litigation risk.
I would say this says that Bernanke believes in teh Value Effect
<> wrote
> I read a year or so back an article on "How Greenspan was worth an
> est. 120 million or so.... Would you care to specualte on how a man
> with a salary of say 120k per year or so can become so wealthy? :-)
People in his position have many opportunities to make money. Clinton makes
more from speaking engagements than he ever did as president. Also, consider
Greenspan's age. The man is no fool and has probably been investing for
decades.