I thought I would start the week off with a topic that all monkeys can relate to: making a ballsy move. We've all done it before and sometimes you go big and sometimes you go home. But this Monday, I want to take a moment to recognize those in the news who made ballsy moves, and we'll see if it pays off for them.
Buffet Makes a bet on IBM
Arguably the best investor of all time making just another investment doesn't sound too ballsy, but this bet was a little uncharacteristic for the Oracle of Omaha. Buffet has stayed away from technology stocks for years citing the fact that he is basically technologically illiterate. This time Warren said screw it and purchased around 5.4% of IBMs outstanding stock (up around 20 points already), without having spoken a word to management.
Moody's Rating Agency's move for a potential downgrade of Penn St. Debt
Yes, you heard it right. Moody's rating agency released a statement saying that they will be keeping an eye on Penn St. I imagine they want to see if Penn St. reputation suffers enough from the molestation scandal for Moody's to get into the news for another downgrade.
Silvio Berlusconi going Terminator
The former Italian Prime Minister was not too happy when he left office and the entire Italian peninsula rejoiced that he was gone. He simply couldn't understand why his constituents would be mad at him for running up Italy's sovereign debt while hanging out with underage "dancers". His response to the new prime minister, have fun trying to pass anything in parliament since Berlusconi evidently still has a following there. What else did he say? "I'll be back!"
Jamie Dimon making it rain
What was Jamie Dimon doing lending money to MF Global when they had declared bankruptcy? Turns out he knew what he was doing and some MF Global clients are pissed. JP Morgan chase had lent money to MF Global but there were strings attached, strings that are allowing JP Morgan to have first dibs on some of MF Global's assets that others want in bankruptcy court. MF's clients are preparing for court while Dimon and the gang are laughing all the way to the bank.
Rhino Tipping
The last ballsy move has nothing to do with finance. It goes to some workers at the World Wildlife Fund that airlifted 19 rhinos to protect them from poachers. Nothing says environmentalist like drugging a rhino and stringing it upside down from a helicopter for a joyride. Suck it peta.
Flying Rhinos from Green Renaissance on Vimeo.
umm buffet didnt just reveal the plan, he revealed that he already purchased it and is up 20 points already
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-14/berkshire-takes-10-7b-ibm-stak…
Has it gotten to the point yet where we can say that Buffet can't be wrong? I mean he takes a position and that fact, in and of itself, moves the market in his favor.
Perhaps in the past it was that way. Buffett hasn't been spectacular for the last 5 or 10 years.
Is IBM really a tech firm anymore?
http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/International_Business_Machines_(IBM)
More than half of its revenue comes from consulting and outsourcing services in the IT sector. 23% comes from the sale of data servers and other hardware, yet half of that is through partners and affiliates. The rest of its revenue comes from software and financing.
I'm not saying its not a technology company. However, the bulk of its business is consulting.
OP, nice post, keep these coming please
EDIT:
heheheheTCU going for two against Boise St.
The Atlanta Falcons going for 'it' on fourth and inches...in overtime...while inside of their 30 yard line...instead of kicking a field goal.
Oh, wait. Where's the 'Stupid Move of the Week' thread??
Regards
Can't really kick a field goal from inside your 30 yard line? Unless you've got a kicker capable of unleashing 81 yard bombs (I know you meant punt but I couldn't resist).
Hahaha, I can almost do it, lol.
No, I meant field goal...but I actually meant inside their opponent's 30 yard line, lol. So we are taking about a 45 yard field goal...that they decided not to take, which resulted in their loss.
Regards
They were inside of their OWN 30. The field goal would have been 88 yards (nice math rufio), so I think it's safe to say that the field goal was out of the question.
I know I sound real dumb in hindsight, but I kind of this going for it is the right play. With their O-line and Michael Turner vs. the saint d-line I think they'd be successful over 70% of the time.
Twice
why did someone neg the op?
buffett is the king of the crony capitalists
you think he really bought that hunk of BAC without some under the table downside protection from The Jeethner?
Being from Atlanta I can tell you that I watched every second of the game. The Falcons were definitely NOT in Saint's territory, come on CPH. The Saint's have one of the best offenses in the NFL. If you're going to beat them in OT you have be extremely aggressive otherwise they'll march down the field sooner or later.
I would have gone for it on 4th and inches, but I would have called a different play. The Saint's jammed the line thinking that Ryan was going to sneak it. The Saint's D-Line had broken through the line of scrimmage even before Turner had the ball in his hands. I would have called 1) QB sneak or 2) Wildcat direct snap to Rogers or Snelling. Oh well.
Yeah, Atl was inside their own 30, kicking a FG wasn't an option. I would have flipped it to the outside though with the surpriseness.
Wow! Awesome story about the rhinos. Who knew that the World Wrestling Federation could be so compassionate; it's beautiful.
Actually the Atlanta call wasn't that bad...read what is written below:
This space is normally reserved for terrible coaching decisions. Let's have a real good time this week and focus on some of the week's braver and more appealing decisions. Obviously, we'll start with Falcons head coach Michael Smith, who made the curious decision to attempt a fourth-and-several-inches conversion from his own 29-yard line with almost 11 minutes left in overtime.
When Michael Turner was stuffed and the Saints promptly kicked a game-winning field goal, it created the perfect culture for reactionary criticism. It hit almost every checkbox. It was an uncommon decision! The Falcons didn't need to go for it! It put them in a spot where they would probably lose if they failed! It's not what coaches are supposed to do!
Was it the right decision? It's up for debate. Certainly, going for it on fourth-and-very-short from your own 29-yard line in overtime isn't something that should happen very frequently, if ever. But if there were ever going to be a situation that called for such a move, this would be it. The Saints, as we've mentioned during the past couple of weeks, have the worst run defense in football, allowing in excess of five yards per carry. They have allowed teams to succeed 80 percent of the time in power situations,1 the third-worst rate in football. And while the Falcons have been just 26th in the league when running in those situations, they'd attempted to run for a first down on four different occasions during the game, including a fourth-and-1 situation in the third quarter. They had successfully converted each of them for first downs, even picking up another conversion on a fourth-and-3 during their final drive in regulation with a throw to Roddy White. When they had needed a yard during the game, the Falcons had been able to get it without much difficulty. Four plays isn't a large sample size by any means, but combine that with the Saints' struggles in these situations and it's possible to see why the Falcons would be confident enough to go for it in that spot.
Keeping the ball away from Brees was also a pretty fair motivator. Although the Saints punted during their first drive in overtime, Brees had led four drives of 50 yards or more among his 10 regulation possessions, and the only reason that figure wasn't higher came to a case of the dropsies from Jimmy Graham during the first half. The Falcons held the Saints to a three-and-out just twice during regulation. There was no guarantee whatsoever that the Falcons were getting the ball back, and if you're the kind that says, "Well, they stopped them on the first drive in overtime," you can't then throw away the fact that the Falcons hadn't been stopped with a yard to go.
Should the Falcons have run a quarterback sneak? Probably. The first four runs had been from their halfback, but they only needed a fraction of a yard; once you get the slightest push forward and move into the great mass of humanity, you're probably going to get marked ahead with forward progress and pick up the first down. Refs are far more likely to give a first down in that situation than they are to decide a game with a bad spot, which is why quarterback sneaks succeeded 83 percent of the time last year. Carries by running backs in those same spots only converted 66 percent of the time. It would have even been a good time to run the not-yet-seen double-fake-snap play, where you go up to the line and shout out the hard count to make the opposing team think that you're just trying to draw them offsides, only to then actually run the play with a couple of seconds left on the clock. That is a money play waiting to happen.
In fact, when you run the numbers with a Win Probability analysis that doesn't adjust for the specific teams involved, as Brian Burke did on advancednflstats.com, the move rates out as a slight positive. The Falcons have a 47 percent chance of winning the game by going for it and a 42 percent chance of winning by punting. Part of that calculus is that the Falcons would still have an 18 percent chance of winning even after a failed conversion, mainly because teams often run the ball into the line for no gain and attempt a long field goal when they get just inside the 30-yard line during overtime.2 When you simultaneously consider just how bad the New Orleans run defense has been this year, it's really not a bizarre decision from Smith. Just an unconventional one.
Ohhhh, I was way off, lol. Sorry about that guys. I didn't watch the game and have only overheard people bitching about this horrible call, so I concluded...without knowing the facts...that they attempted to gain the first down instead of kicking the field goal. Since that wasn't the case, I am confused why seemingly everyone in Atlanta thinks that was a bad call? That's what I would have done. There is no reason to think they couldn't have got that first down, so it was the smart decision. As it was pointed out above, if they couldn't score on that drive, they would very likely to lose to the Saints anyways, so at least going for the first down could potentially diminish that chance.
Again, sorry for my confusion.
Regards
Nostrum eligendi corporis aspernatur et rerum tenetur et iusto. Est nihil nobis aperiam qui soluta. Omnis quis dolorum ullam voluptas aut omnis.
Totam cum aperiam voluptatibus ab illum quae occaecati. Possimus soluta ratione nobis. Aliquid aut est necessitatibus voluptates est ducimus. Illo aliquam dolor consequatur eum magnam. Sed ea eum nostrum officiis autem amet modi. Possimus et ipsa et ducimus delectus.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Dolorem voluptas dolores fugiat voluptate amet commodi nostrum. Tenetur doloremque et temporibus doloremque reiciendis quibusdam sit. Impedit sequi labore cum officia rerum. Rem molestiae omnis ut qui et magni doloremque.
Omnis aliquam quasi unde eos harum explicabo sequi dicta. Hic beatae maiores facilis minus. Rem maxime voluptatem dolorem illum. Est dicta at et. Voluptatum molestiae accusantium reiciendis consequuntur.
Rerum cum error pariatur sed non dolores. Accusantium molestias repellat ullam modi molestias quibusdam. Nihil id et quisquam.