cheap nfl jerseys

Ingredients1 (about 2.5 kg) goose, legs and breasts removed (see note)1 kg coarse sea salt1 orange, zested rind only8 sprigs of thyme6 cloves of garlic, bruised600 gm skinless pork belly, bones removed, coarsely chopped1 kg goose or duck fat3 tsp quatre (see note)40 ml (2 tbsp) Cognac60 gm unsalted butter, coarsely choppedTo serve: toasted baguetteTo garnish: thyme sprigsPears in grape must6 paradise pears, peeled and halved150 ml saba (see note)MethodServes 6

Prep time 45 mins, cook 2 hours 10 mins (plus salting, setting)

Indulge in this luxury pat with a good bottle of red wine. You need to start this recipe a day ahead.

Combine goose legs and breasts, salt and half each of the orange rind, thyme and garlic in a non reactive baking dish. Make sure goose is covered with salt. Cover with plastic wrap and refrigerate overnight.

Preheat oven to 130C. Remove goose from dish and rinse off excess salt. Pat dry with absorbent paper. Combine with pork belly, goose fat, cup water and remaining orange rind, thyme and garlic in a casserole. cheap nfl jerseys Cover and roast until meat is falling from the bone (about 2 hours), then cool.

Using a slotted spoon, transfer meat to a tray. Remove skin and bones and discard. Reserve fat. Using 2 forks, shred meat as finely as possible. Transfer to a bowl, add quatre Cognac and 1/3 cup of the reserved goose fat (remaining fat can be refrigerated for up to 1 month and used for confit or as oil or butter substitutes in cooking). Mix thoroughly to combine, then pack firmly into a 1 litre capacity terrine. Place butter in a heatproof bowl placed over a saucepan of simmering water and, when just melted, pour over rillettes to cover. Refrigerate until firm (about 2 hours). The rillettes will keep in the refrigerator for up to 2 weeks.

For pears in grape must, combine pears and saba in a saucepan and bring to the boil. Reduce heat to medium. Simmer until pears are glazed and syrup is thick (5 7 minutes).

Goose with fruit and nut seasoning recipe

Goose with fruit and nut seasoningBy

Cooking timemore than 1 hourServesserves 6Ingredients20g butter, melted1 tablespoon honey1 teaspoon light soy sauce3.5kg gooseplain flourFruit and nut seasoning2 tablespoons oil200g chicken giblets, finely chopped1 onion, finely chopped1 stick celery, chopped1 apple, peeled, chopped cup chopped Brazil nuts cup slivered almonds cup thinly sliced dried apricots cup finely chopped raisins1 tablespoon chopped fresh mint1 cups (100g) stale breadcrumbsMethod

Combine butter, honey and sauce in bowl, brush mixture over inside and outside of goose. Fill goose with fruit and nut seasoning, secure opening with skewers. Tie legs together, tuck wings under. Prick skin to release fat in cooking, but not through to the flesh.

Lightly flour a large oven bag, place goose in bag, secure with tie provided. Make holes in bag as advised on package. Place goose breast side up in baking dish, bake in moderately hot over for about 2 hours or until tender.

Fruit and nut seasoning:

Heat half the oil in pan, add giblets, cook, stirring, until browned, remove from pan; drain. Add remaining oil to pan, add onion and celery, cook, stirring, until onion is soft. Add apple and nuts, cook, stirring, until nuts are lightly browned. Remove from heat, stir in giblets, apricots and raisins, mint and breadcrumbs; cool.

Roasted chilli lemon chickenLucio’s chocolate cannoli of blood orange cream with blood orange chocolate sauce.

Goose Your Total Portfolio Alpha Using Addition

SummaryA couple of large index funds is the starting place for investors, but it is important to recognize their limitations and pitfalls both in playing defense and in seeking alpha.

What you don own may be more important than what you do own, and may provide more alpha.

A comparison of two fairly similar Vanguard funds, one a mid cap index, the other “selected” from that universe, shows the added value that may come from subtraction (of 88 holdings).

The same principle works with individual stocks, which add to emphasis in a portfolio but also dilute and decrease the weight of other holdings.

Investors might refer to the 2000 2003 smash up when the best help for survival was in in not owning techs and dot coms and other growth stocks the bubble dragged up.

Sometimes the best addition to alpha is in what you don’t own. The present is a particularly good moment to consider this point. Most of us would like to own (or have owned) the FANG stocks if we could choose the moment in the past to have bought them. Right now, however, might appear to be not the best moment for piling into them. I’m not sure, however, just how many people understand that to buy a large cap portfolio right now, whether it’s actively managed or an index, is often to accept large exposure to the FANGs and similar very high priced new techs.

Ground zero for total portfolio construction is to own a couple of inexpensive index funds. It was what I suggested for my clients when I retired from the RIA business, and I was reminded of it recently when a good friend and tennis client who had just come into a meaningful lump sum asked for my advice. The easy, obvious solution is to buy a Total US Stock Market Fund, a Total International Stock Fund (in much smaller size), and a Total Bond Index Fund (in correct proportion based on age and risk tolerance).

It’s pretty simple. Vanguard will provide all you need at a very low cost, and if you meet one of their modest hurdles for total assets they will even choose the allocation for you. They will also rebalance regularly. Nothing to it, right? You’re all set.

The best thing and the worst thing you can say about indexing is that it’s the great second best. It will save you from making idiotic mistakes in serious size. On the other hand, it is something of a blunt instrument. You can probably improve on it with a little knowledge of the markets and some application of common sense. It also helps to know yourself and have reasonable goals.

People have very different ideas of what they don’t want to own. I had a girlfriend once (in the years between marriages) who wanted me to advise her but insisted on socially vetted investments to the extent that she wouldn’t accept index funds. She was a very smart woman (3d in her class at Wellesley) but by her own admission a hardcore “bleeding heart.”

I reasoned with her about this. Money is fungible, I told her, has no conscience or view of the world whatever, and if your money avoids something, someone else’s money will replace it immediately to keep the value in accord with the prevailing market opinion. She didn’t want to hear it. She didn’t want me to confuse her with facts.

Not only did I fail to convince her, but a few years later I took a look at the socially conscious funds I had finally gotten for her. They had actually done pretty well. They had ducked a couple of scandals and some negative legislation, and they had also gotten her heavily into quite a few of the old tech funds where good governance and no harm products provided the “social” fit. It didn’t convert me to her view, but it did serve as one of the first moments where I considered the possibility that avoiding certain investment categories might actually help returns.

What I myself actually try to avoid is yesterday’s winners, high PE stocks trading on a story or future hopes, or industries which I fear are teetering on a slippery slope. Current examples of the former might be consumer staples companies, telecoms, and utilities. They have been rocking for several years, largely because of the Fed suppression of rates causing poor returns on everything else. As a result, these companies many of them fine businesses are way, way too expensive compared to the rest of the market and their own histories, and vulnerable to a painful adjustment (or at least major underperformance for a long time) if the world ever rights itself. To buy them here is to predict continuation of dismal times to a very distant horizon. I call these companies the “semi frothies.”

The wildly overpriced frothies are, of course, the FANG stocks and a few of their cousins, including the biotechs. To own one of them is to assume that their business will compound wildly but steadily for a very long time before they settle in to merely outstanding growth at a reasonable growth stock PE. Since I try to be a long term investor, I prefer to decline that bet. I just can’t know enough. [Admission: I did a one month break even round trip in Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOG) (NASDAQ:GOOGL) from December to early January. It was the most reasonable of the FANGs. When the market started to crumble in earnest, the market god who looks after idiots whispered in my ear to get out.]

The trouble with the large cap indexes is the importance of the frothies and semi frothies. You can check it yourself by checking position weights in the Vanguard 500 index fund, among others. If you buy a large cap index tomorrow morning, you are going to own a large and very disproportionate amount of these recent winners, even after the recent decline. The decline of Friday February 5, by the way, hinted that the market in aggregate may be beginning to notice. See this by Bespoke.

Stocks that seem to me at different stages of the slippery slope include the oil and gas industry and asset manager/brokerage industry. I dumped my two oil majors Exxon (NYSE:XOM) and Chevron (NYSE:CVX) on the first bounce after they began a real decline, and my oil service company National Oilwell Varco (NYSE:NOV) a little earlier. The trouble with the industry is that it has real short and intermediate term problems and some hard to calculate long term risks. I’ll wait and see.

As for asset manager/brokers, don’t get me started. Tobacco stocks provide a product which is better for you. I managed money professionally, so I really know, but take my view for what it is worth. It is probably a mistake to bet against the dunderheadedness of the general population, but I suspect that over a reasonable period, and perhaps with unexpected suddenness, the investor universe may wise up to the fact that these products and services are largely bogus.

And, oh, hell, I don’t buy tobacco companies. Jean, I have to admit that you got me on that one.

How To Add By Subtracting: A Comparison Of Two Funds

There’s more than one point of view about the great large cap and mega cap companies. Fayez Saroflim, the great Houston asset manager, always argued that the giant brand name companies had demonstrated that they knew how to do things and had gotten large on merit, so you should stick with them. It’s a point of view. Buffett seems to agree with it, saying publicly that the money he has set aside for his wife, if she survives him, would be 90% in an S index fund, probably Vanguard, and 10% in cash for walking around money some walking around money, eh!

My thinking is that Buffett mainly wanted to leave investment instructions that were unambiguous, good enough, and idiot proof rather than optimal. Nevertheless, a large index fund is the starting place, never mind the little distortions mentioned above. It’s not quite good enough for me at this point, however.

Let me make a statistical case using two Vanguard mid cap funds. I like mid caps because they meet the Fayez Sarofim criterion to some degree to become a mid cap (2 to 10 billionish in market cap), you have to become successful and demonstrate some staying power. On the other hand, a 10 billion company is not likely a fad or a super frothy. The new tech companies IPO at large cap valuations, and even their private valuations before there is much in the way of sales or cash flow now almost always put them well up on the scale of the S 500. When you buy a mid cap you are generally buying a real company priced as a real company.

So let’s look at two mid cap funds with a minor difference the Vanguard Mid Cap Value Index Fund (MUTF:VMVAX) and the Vanguard Mid Cap Selected Value Fund (MUTF:VASVX). Here are a few stats out of the Vanguard site:

To start with, the Mid Cap Value Index Fund contains 210 stocks. The Selected Value Fund contains 122 stocks. Think what this implies. The investment universe of Mid Cap Value is the 210 stocks in the index funds. What the Selected Value Fund does, primarily, is to delete. It deletes 88 stocks in all. It is thus actively managed, and charges .44% for it versus the .09 for the passively managed Mid Cap Value Index Admiral Shares. Now I don’t much like paying for active management of any sort, but in this case it’s a Vanguardian incremental cost of .35%, which doesn’t bother me too much. Let’s see what you get for it:

Let’s be statistical. That’s what you do when dealing with a collection of 100 or more stocks. To start with, Selected Mid Cap Value did beat the index fund over all time frames, with the most significant difference at one year and ten years. But what do you own? The Selected fund averages slightly lower average PB (1.7 to 1.8) but also slightly lower average ROE (12.9 to 13.5). Where it excels, however, is PE (17.5 to 22) and much higher earnings growth (11.2 versus 7.1). Thus you get more growth at a cheaper price.

After looking at these statistics I like to do two more things. First I look at the percentage of each fund in various large categories of business. In this case Selected Value has about 7% less in consumer stocks, of which I consider staples overpriced and cyclicals in earnings trouble (it’s hard to break down relative amount in cyclicals and staples because the two funds classify “consumer” elements differently). Selected also has less in telecom and utilities, less in technology, less in materials, and less in energy. I consider the former three areas overpriced (thanks to the Fed) and the latter two cheap but in real business trouble.

On the other hand, Selected is relatively overweight health care by a bit, overweight financials by quite a bit (6%), and overweight industrials by a ton (over 9%). http://www.cheapjerseys6vm5.topI basically agree with these overweights. Mid Cap health doesn’t include frothy biotech and pharma, Mid Cap financials exclude the big banks and insurance companies and are generally conservative plodders, and industrials are an area long into their recession with prices across the board reasonably well reflecting it. And industrials are pretty much here to stay.

Just to be sure, though, I give the holdings of each fund a quick up and down the list eyeball pass over. I know that I won’t be familiar with many of the companies. I just get an overall feeling, the way I do when I read through something like the Magic Formula list.

In sum I think that both funds are okay. The Value Index fund, after all, has already added by deletion (to my mind) the much more expensive (32 PE) growth part of the somewhat more expensive total Mid Cap (26 PE) index.


Fa un review scurt sau un schimb de link