RBD - Restaurant Brands

[BRICKS]

WILL have 2 pieces of Chicken and a large Mr Chips, Tar.. [8D]

[Halebop]

Macdunk google isn't a dictionary. It's a search engine. If you spell a word incorrectly in the search bar and people out there in web land have used the same spelling, google will return those results. According to Dictionary.com (USA) and Dictionary.co.uk the word has only one "L".

[BRICKS]

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS

WILL have 2 pieces of Chicken and a large Mr Chips, Tar.. [8D]

DONT shove in i was here FIRST.. [8D]

[Halebop]

quote:Originally posted by Tom Hall

I'm using Mozilla Firefox which has an inbuilt spell checker though that may bias me more towards American than English!

If you want to give others the benefit of your knowledge about Google Mr comet man, perhaps you should consider trying to earn a little more about it first.

Thanks Tom, I also use Firefox and the built in spell checker. A great function. However I use the Australian English dictionary instead. You might want to get the upgrade ...and then re-read Macdunks and my posts to get what I was saying to him.

[Halebop]

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

Companies don't compete for capital, except, I suppose, at IPO time, or when raising additional capital. If, by profits, you mean profits on the sale of shares, I would say, yes, they are incidental to the investing process.

Companies do compete for capital all the time. It's a function well beyond the simple IPO. They offer a return to investors by delivering on an "X" discount rate. Holders demand that managers continue to deliver (or better yet improve on) those returns in order that their investment continues to pay its way. Companies that fail to deliver go bust, deliver negative returns or get taken over at prices cheaper than their competitors. Its all a very competitive process because those cmpanies must compete against other companies and investors get to benchmark and choose which ones they invest their funds in.

By profits I mean what investing is all about. You may recall using the word favourably when compared to speculating just a short time ago. Here some definations of Investing...

http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=investing
the act of investing; laying out money or capital in an enterprise with the expectation of profit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investing
Investment is a term with several closely-related meanings in finance and economics. It refers to the accumulation of some kind of asset in hopes of getting a future return from it.

http://selco.org/consumer/glossary_s...+investing.asp
The act of using money to make more money

http://www.mostchoice.com/general/to...investment.cfm
Putting money into securities like stocks, bonds, or mutual funds with the hope that it will grow in value.

Apparently others out there think investing is done to earn a return or profit. You should spread your good word before all this crazy talk gets out of hand and people start expecting to make a profit when they invest.

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

The point I mainly wanted to make though is that investing in shares is not, or should not be, some sort of dog-eat-dog competition. Gordon Gecko is hardly the cinema world's most attractive character.
hiawatha

"Is not" and "should not" aren't the same. "Is not" is simply wrong, the world is competitive. The former Soviet Union made a good show of trying to remove that from the wealth generating process. The Chinese saw the writing on the wall and capitulated. "Should not" is simply a philosphical point of view, perhaps shared by some of those Soviet folks.

Keep it up though, love your work.

[duncan macgregor]

All the companies compete for my investment dollar by showing good profits, which normally leads to a rising share price. I look at a rising sp, add on what dividends if any, then draw a line under the total. I expect the company to compete with other companies to give me a higher total than any of the other companies. I as an investor compete with other investors to buy good trending shares from them, and sell bad trending shares back. If a company is not competing and gets into a downtrend as RBD is then i am not interested in buying, or holding, im off like a robbers dog. I dont care what excuses, or bad luck they might have had, i look on it as their problem to solve, if they want to compete for my investment dollar. Life is one big competition, with winners and losers, you cant have one without the other. RBD have made some real clangers in the last few years with the resulting drop in the sp. You wont find many clued up winning investors on their share register. Macdunk

[BRICKS]

quote:Originally posted by duncan macgregor

All the companies compete for my investment dollar by showing good profits, which normally leads to a rising share price. I look at a rising sp, add on what dividends if any, then draw a line under the total. I expect the company to compete with other companies to give me a higher total than any of the other companies. I as an investor compete with other investors to buy good trending shares from them, and sell bad trending shares back. If a company is not competing and gets into a downtrend as RBD is then i am not interested in buying, or holding, im off like a robbers dog. I dont care what excuses, or bad luck they might have had, i look on it as their problem to solve, if they want to compete for my investment dollar. Life is one big competition, with winners and losers, you cant have one without the other. RBD have made some real clangers in the last few years with the resulting drop in the sp. You wont find many clued up winning investors on their share register. Macdunk

SCOTT so your saying that all the 6,669 RBD shareholders they are all DILLS but doubt they would like THAT.. [8D]

[BRICKS]

quote:Originally posted by hiawatha

quote:"Is not" and "should not" aren't the same. "Is not" is simply wrong, the world is competitive. The former Soviet Union made a good show of trying to remove that from the wealth generating process. The Chinese saw the writing on the wall and capitulated. "Should not" is simply a philosphical point of view, perhaps shared by some of those Soviet folks.

Communism was an attempt to eliminate privately owned capital. Marx thought that "capitalists" would take the lion's share of production, leaving a mere pittance for the workers. By placing the means of production in the hands of the state (which could be deemed to represent the workers), communists hoped to get rid of the conflict of interest between owners and workers. It didn't work, probably because managers were required to produce quotas of goods rather than profits.
However I don't see how this is relevant to the current debate. All it does is show that the centrally planned economy is in some respects inferior to the laissez-faire economy.
hiawatha

WOULD you like some chicken & Mr Chips too at the rate we are going none of us will get served.. [8D]

[duncan macgregor]

quote:Originally posted by BRICKS
SCOTT so your saying that all the 6,669 RBD shareholders they are all DILLS but doubt they would like THAT.. [8D]

BRICKS, you dont want me to get into trouble do you?. Its all in the eye of the beholder Bricks. I am told some people actually will queue up to eat the bloody stuff.Macdunk

[Scuffer]

Reading the last couple of days pages and all whats been said by you guys about RBD and too each other,I have come to the conclusion they are a few wannabe RBD holders and quite a lot of hasbeen holders but who would admit to it.This company maybe a dog but listen to yourselves you are all barking at the moon.