<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Some Laws Can&#8217;t Be Broken: Supply and Demand</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/</link>
	<description>Value Investing Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 10:55:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Ponzio</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2809</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Ponzio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:37:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2809</guid>
		<description>I hope that today&#039;s three articles shed some light on my thinking. I don&#039;t hope to change anyone&#039;s opinion on the matter. Some people hear about commodities and fall in love. Others will never change their minds on the subject. Worst case scenario, we all have some fun discussing yet another potential avenue for investment.

This whole discussion underscores the importance of staying within one&#039;s circle of confidence and competence. Thanks all for contributing!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope that today&#8217;s three articles shed some light on my thinking. I don&#8217;t hope to change anyone&#8217;s opinion on the matter. Some people hear about commodities and fall in love. Others will never change their minds on the subject. Worst case scenario, we all have some fun discussing yet another potential avenue for investment.</p>
<p>This whole discussion underscores the importance of staying within one&#8217;s circle of confidence and competence. Thanks all for contributing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gopinath</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2805</link>
		<dc:creator>Gopinath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 04:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2805</guid>
		<description>Mark P,

You can&#039;t say &quot;There is no way of knowing what that bag is worth of&quot;. If the commodities investing is out of your circle of competence, you should stay away from that. Some intelligent people thinks that they understood supply &amp; demand and there are mispricing &amp; bet accordingly.

Certain percentage of companies in the world produce those commodities. Their profitability is based on the prices of those commodities. No company is profitable at some dumb commodities prices. So, in your case you wont be able to value those companies as well. But you cant really say those who make investments in these companies are speculative investments.

This article is just to outline the various types of investments &amp; increase the circle of competence of people who are into investing.

Just my thoughts,

Gopinath</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark P,</p>
<p>You can&#8217;t say &#8220;There is no way of knowing what that bag is worth of&#8221;. If the commodities investing is out of your circle of competence, you should stay away from that. Some intelligent people thinks that they understood supply &#038; demand and there are mispricing &#038; bet accordingly.</p>
<p>Certain percentage of companies in the world produce those commodities. Their profitability is based on the prices of those commodities. No company is profitable at some dumb commodities prices. So, in your case you wont be able to value those companies as well. But you cant really say those who make investments in these companies are speculative investments.</p>
<p>This article is just to outline the various types of investments &#038; increase the circle of competence of people who are into investing.</p>
<p>Just my thoughts,</p>
<p>Gopinath</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark P</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2804</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 11:39:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2804</guid>
		<description>It all seems a bit speculative to me. The bigger fool principal, being hopefull that someone will pay more sometime in the future.

With a good investment you should be able to read the future.

There is no way of knowing that this bag of commodities will be worth more in the future.

cheers</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It all seems a bit speculative to me. The bigger fool principal, being hopefull that someone will pay more sometime in the future.</p>
<p>With a good investment you should be able to read the future.</p>
<p>There is no way of knowing that this bag of commodities will be worth more in the future.</p>
<p>cheers</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sivaram Velauthapillai</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2798</link>
		<dc:creator>Sivaram Velauthapillai</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 12:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2798</guid>
		<description>There is an important element that no one talks about--and I suspect this is actually how most people end up losing money on commodities. Contrary to what Jim Rogers says (i.e. commodities safer that commodity stocks) I, similar to some of what BPal is saying, feel that commodities are far more difficult than they seem. Let me point out my view by arguing against a point JC made...

JC: &quot;If the supply of a commodity is falling and demand is rising, the price will rise.&quot;

The important element that is missing from that statement is notion of whether a commodity is overvalued or undervalued. Commodity prices can decline even if demand rises while supply falls. Seems impossible?

Consider oil prices from 1980 to 2000. Except for a brief decline in the early 80&#039;s, world oil demand actually kept going up all throughout the 80&#039;s and 90&#039;s. Yet, oil prices actually declined in that period. I think production did go up here and there but that can&#039;t explain the huge decline in oil prices from the 70&#039;s to the 2000&#039;s.

The real reason, of course, was that oil was overvalued back in the late 70&#039;s/early 80&#039;s. Supply and demand fundamentals could be bullish but if the commodity is overvalued, it will fall; and vice versa.

I&#039;m not a value investor but one of the reasons many value investors avoid commodities is because it&#039;s difficult to price it. How do you figure out what the price of a commodity should be? Should oil be $30? $50? $70? $100? $200? $500? How about copper? Is $2 too high? Is $1 too low? Is $0.50 right? Even if demand is greater than supply, how would one know whether the price should go up 25% rather than 5% or 50%?

I&#039;m (mildly) bearish on commodities but there is nothing wrong with investing in them but they are a totally different game.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is an important element that no one talks about&#8211;and I suspect this is actually how most people end up losing money on commodities. Contrary to what Jim Rogers says (i.e. commodities safer that commodity stocks) I, similar to some of what BPal is saying, feel that commodities are far more difficult than they seem. Let me point out my view by arguing against a point JC made&#8230;</p>
<p>JC: &#8220;If the supply of a commodity is falling and demand is rising, the price will rise.&#8221;</p>
<p>The important element that is missing from that statement is notion of whether a commodity is overvalued or undervalued. Commodity prices can decline even if demand rises while supply falls. Seems impossible?</p>
<p>Consider oil prices from 1980 to 2000. Except for a brief decline in the early 80&#8242;s, world oil demand actually kept going up all throughout the 80&#8242;s and 90&#8242;s. Yet, oil prices actually declined in that period. I think production did go up here and there but that can&#8217;t explain the huge decline in oil prices from the 70&#8242;s to the 2000&#8242;s.</p>
<p>The real reason, of course, was that oil was overvalued back in the late 70&#8242;s/early 80&#8242;s. Supply and demand fundamentals could be bullish but if the commodity is overvalued, it will fall; and vice versa.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not a value investor but one of the reasons many value investors avoid commodities is because it&#8217;s difficult to price it. How do you figure out what the price of a commodity should be? Should oil be $30? $50? $70? $100? $200? $500? How about copper? Is $2 too high? Is $1 too low? Is $0.50 right? Even if demand is greater than supply, how would one know whether the price should go up 25% rather than 5% or 50%?</p>
<p>I&#8217;m (mildly) bearish on commodities but there is nothing wrong with investing in them but they are a totally different game.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BPal</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2795</link>
		<dc:creator>BPal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2795</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t assume volatility and risk are one in the same, but they are correlated.  A high beta offers the chance for higher returns but at greater risk.  I was simply offering a reason why someone may want to invest in the stock instead of the underlying commodity.  The stock tends to be less volatile.

Also, I do understand the economics of supply and demand.  But I also understand options and futures and that they are a risk transference tool.  It&#039;s a zero sum game, one person&#039;s gain equally offsets the other&#039;s loss.  Unlike owning a piece of a business which produces value-added outputs, owning a commodity is a speculative bet on price movements.  I&#039;m not saying you can&#039;t make an informed bet by doing your homework first, but it&#039;s still a bet.  Just like a professional poker player may have better knowledge than an amateur, he&#039;s still placing a bet.  

At least when buying a stock, you can build in a margin of safety.  That option&#039;s not there when purchasing a commodity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t assume volatility and risk are one in the same, but they are correlated.  A high beta offers the chance for higher returns but at greater risk.  I was simply offering a reason why someone may want to invest in the stock instead of the underlying commodity.  The stock tends to be less volatile.</p>
<p>Also, I do understand the economics of supply and demand.  But I also understand options and futures and that they are a risk transference tool.  It&#8217;s a zero sum game, one person&#8217;s gain equally offsets the other&#8217;s loss.  Unlike owning a piece of a business which produces value-added outputs, owning a commodity is a speculative bet on price movements.  I&#8217;m not saying you can&#8217;t make an informed bet by doing your homework first, but it&#8217;s still a bet.  Just like a professional poker player may have better knowledge than an amateur, he&#8217;s still placing a bet.  </p>
<p>At least when buying a stock, you can build in a margin of safety.  That option&#8217;s not there when purchasing a commodity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amit</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2794</link>
		<dc:creator>Amit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:32:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2794</guid>
		<description>To avoid the risk of being &quot;Joe&#039;s Disciple&quot; , I will respectfully agree with JC lol =)

Nice post Joe, awesome discussion too btw</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To avoid the risk of being &#8220;Joe&#8217;s Disciple&#8221; , I will respectfully agree with JC lol =)</p>
<p>Nice post Joe, awesome discussion too btw</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jc</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2793</link>
		<dc:creator>jc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 13:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2793</guid>
		<description>BPal,

I recommend you read Jim Rogers. Your statement comes from a very uninformed place. You clearly do not understand how commodities work and assume that volatility and risk are one in the same.

If the supply of a commodity is falling and demand is rising, the price will rise. As Joe elegantly said...its simple economics and NOT &quot;pure speculation.&quot; It is only &quot;pure speculation&quot; if you buy or sell commodities without knowing what you are doing. I wouldn&#039;t recommend it for you until you learn more about them.

Buffett has also invested in commodities in the past. Look up his various silver investments and currency plays. These weren&#039;t &quot;pure speculation&quot; but based on supply and demand and/or government actions or omissions that would cause one to rise or fall.

&quot;...just realize what you&#039;re getting into.&quot; Commodities, like stocks, are only speculative if you are uninformed or if you are trying to trade in the short-term.

Please don&#039;t take this as criticism. I&#039;m just respectfully disagreeing with you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BPal,</p>
<p>I recommend you read Jim Rogers. Your statement comes from a very uninformed place. You clearly do not understand how commodities work and assume that volatility and risk are one in the same.</p>
<p>If the supply of a commodity is falling and demand is rising, the price will rise. As Joe elegantly said&#8230;its simple economics and NOT &#8220;pure speculation.&#8221; It is only &#8220;pure speculation&#8221; if you buy or sell commodities without knowing what you are doing. I wouldn&#8217;t recommend it for you until you learn more about them.</p>
<p>Buffett has also invested in commodities in the past. Look up his various silver investments and currency plays. These weren&#8217;t &#8220;pure speculation&#8221; but based on supply and demand and/or government actions or omissions that would cause one to rise or fall.</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;just realize what you&#8217;re getting into.&#8221; Commodities, like stocks, are only speculative if you are uninformed or if you are trying to trade in the short-term.</p>
<p>Please don&#8217;t take this as criticism. I&#8217;m just respectfully disagreeing with you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BPal</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2792</link>
		<dc:creator>BPal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2009 07:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2792</guid>
		<description>Why invest in a commodities business instead of the commodity?  Less volatility for one.  Just as a commodity can go up 50% while the company only gains 20%, the commodity can just as easily drop 50% while the company only drops 20%.  Also, if commodity prices stay within a narrow trading band, you make minimal to no return on your commodity ETF but you can still earn dividends from the company that continues to spit out cash for selling those commodities.  

Also, plain and simple a retail investor that purchases a commodity ETF is speculating.  Someone who values a commodity-based business and determines it is trading a discount is buying a piece of a business at a fair price.  A lot of commodity ETFs purchase futures or option contracts.  In these deals one party is hedging risk (the business that wants to lock in prices to reduce earnings volatility) and the counterparty is accepting that risk as a speculative bet on which way commodity prices are headed.  As I assume most retail investors aren&#039;t actually in the business of buying/selling commodities to produce value-added product, they&#039;re speculators.  

I also feel that this site is losing its way and slowly becoming another blog chasing high returns rather then investing in sound businesses trading at discounts to fair value, suitable for long-term holdings.  A lot of people here are clearly Joe disciples and I just caution you to realize that placing 10% of your portfolio in commodities is pure speculation and while there is nothing wrong with doing that, just realize what you&#039;re getting into.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why invest in a commodities business instead of the commodity?  Less volatility for one.  Just as a commodity can go up 50% while the company only gains 20%, the commodity can just as easily drop 50% while the company only drops 20%.  Also, if commodity prices stay within a narrow trading band, you make minimal to no return on your commodity ETF but you can still earn dividends from the company that continues to spit out cash for selling those commodities.  </p>
<p>Also, plain and simple a retail investor that purchases a commodity ETF is speculating.  Someone who values a commodity-based business and determines it is trading a discount is buying a piece of a business at a fair price.  A lot of commodity ETFs purchase futures or option contracts.  In these deals one party is hedging risk (the business that wants to lock in prices to reduce earnings volatility) and the counterparty is accepting that risk as a speculative bet on which way commodity prices are headed.  As I assume most retail investors aren&#8217;t actually in the business of buying/selling commodities to produce value-added product, they&#8217;re speculators.  </p>
<p>I also feel that this site is losing its way and slowly becoming another blog chasing high returns rather then investing in sound businesses trading at discounts to fair value, suitable for long-term holdings.  A lot of people here are clearly Joe disciples and I just caution you to realize that placing 10% of your portfolio in commodities is pure speculation and while there is nothing wrong with doing that, just realize what you&#8217;re getting into.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rene</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2790</link>
		<dc:creator>Rene</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 10:47:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2790</guid>
		<description>I think there is a danger in taking things too literally.  I don&#039;t think there is any question that Buffett pays attention  to the macro.  Paying attention to the macro, is not the same as paying attention to Mr. Market.  The macro has to do with the real economy, Mr. Market with the mood swings of &quot;investors&quot;.  I would have bought shares on the Titanic at any point up to and maybe even including the moment it hit the iceberg, but not once I saw how much water it was taking on as a result of the damage.  As it is, value investors are notorious for getting in &quot;too early&quot; in bear markets, which is fine, but it would be foolish not to take notice when really huge events occur, like the banking crisis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think there is a danger in taking things too literally.  I don&#8217;t think there is any question that Buffett pays attention  to the macro.  Paying attention to the macro, is not the same as paying attention to Mr. Market.  The macro has to do with the real economy, Mr. Market with the mood swings of &#8220;investors&#8221;.  I would have bought shares on the Titanic at any point up to and maybe even including the moment it hit the iceberg, but not once I saw how much water it was taking on as a result of the damage.  As it is, value investors are notorious for getting in &#8220;too early&#8221; in bear markets, which is fine, but it would be foolish not to take notice when really huge events occur, like the banking crisis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand/#comment-2789</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:28:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fwallstreet.com/article/180-some-laws-cant-be-broken-supply-and-demand#comment-2789</guid>
		<description>Joe:

I think Buffett was mostly doing NCAV and risk arbitrage with his partnerships. When those opportunities dried up, he closed up shop. It may look like he&#039;s making macro calls, but i think that&#039;s just a testament to how the availability of NCAV stocks are a good proxy for how under/overvalued the market is overall. (There are currently tons of NCAV stocks).

More recently, I agree that he has a more complex, multifactor approach to investing, perhaps best described in Charlie Mungers &quot;The Art of Stock Picking.&quot; This article is a great read, but I think there is great danger in underestimating the amount of work, insight and persistance that this more vague and intuitive approach would require.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe:</p>
<p>I think Buffett was mostly doing NCAV and risk arbitrage with his partnerships. When those opportunities dried up, he closed up shop. It may look like he&#8217;s making macro calls, but i think that&#8217;s just a testament to how the availability of NCAV stocks are a good proxy for how under/overvalued the market is overall. (There are currently tons of NCAV stocks).</p>
<p>More recently, I agree that he has a more complex, multifactor approach to investing, perhaps best described in Charlie Mungers &#8220;The Art of Stock Picking.&#8221; This article is a great read, but I think there is great danger in underestimating the amount of work, insight and persistance that this more vague and intuitive approach would require.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

