Very sad and disappointing news for sure – and deep condolences to his family.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/michael-f-price-a-pugnacious-value-investor-has-died-at-age-70-11647621811
I first learned about the Price funds in the mid-80’s, started investing in them, and spoke to him a few times. He and Max Heine, who later died while crossing an intersection in Phoenix, managed MUTHX and Mutual Beacon Z class. Later Price started MDISX (Mutual European, now Global Discovery)), all of which my spouse and I owned in various accounts plus custodial accounts for my two children.
His returns helped us pay for part of our two kids’ college education.
At times, some of his funds were closed because of AUM capacity.
I was disappointed when Price sold the firm Heine Securities in 1996 to Franklin Templeton. He told me that he had to sell for reasons, sadly, that I no longer recall. I only remember his saying that “It was time.”
I immediately sold all of his funds because I suspected that the sale to Franklin would grow assets at Franklin. I've researched the performance of how the funds that FT bought have done since Price sold them.
I remember when I first received his shareholder report for one of the funds, and when I looked at the holdings, I said, “What?” Who in hell are these companies? I recognized a number of names, but for the most part, they were unknown and obscure. Special situations for sure.
I loved it when he talked about how he broke down the value in certain stocks that he owned. Just fun to listen to.
What I enjoyed most was seeing how many times his funds made money on days that the market was down. (For a long time, I kept track of these changes weekly.) This was when, as far as I know, MF prices were only made available in newspapers.
RIP.

@davfor : I'm wondering if I'm reading you right. Seems as market drops you add to your account to keep 64% in stocks. Or energy & utilities caused your portfolio to stay in the 64% range with one (1) drop to 63%. Now thinking the later guess & hats off to you !
I was down 8 +% in one account & guessing 2% in other account.
Have a good weekend, Derf

March 18th Episode:

I've been in the habit of rebalancing once a year, when things were allegedly more predictable. Current circumstances equate to a flying circus. I still have not put money into any commodities funds or single stocks. I figure that train has already pulled out of the station. ..... I'd been aiming for a "safer," less volatile portfolio, given that I'm in retirement and am not getting younger. But Mr. Market has other ideas at the moment. I don't want to be the last one caught tilting at windmills. So, very quickly, in just the last couple of days, my bonds have dropped to 44 from 60 percent and stocks are back up to 48 percent of portfolio. The cash portion is mostly all in the sweep account now: standing at 13% of total portfolio.
Domestic equities: 34%
Foreign: 14%
This past week has halved my unrealized losses for 2022, so far. Much easier to swallow, now. There might even be some GROWTH, this year. But don't quote me. That will jinx the whole thing. ;)

Barron's is reporting:
Value investor Michael F PRICE (Mutual Shares/MUTHX, 01/1975-11/1998) passed away at 70. A short obituary was by Barron’s Roundtable member Meryl WHITMER.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/michael-price-value-investing-51647646915?mod=past_editions
M* MUTHX http://financials.morningstar.com/fund/management.html?t=MUTHX&region=usa&culture=en-US

Never, at least not on purpose. I would prefer not to hold any income producing investments but lenders, rental companies, utility companies, etc., like to see income.
Nearly all of my equity positions pay dividends and/or produce income distributions (e.g. equity CEF's). My fixed income portion, roughly 20-25% at the moment, consists of primarily PIMCO bond CEF's, CHS preferred shares plus some cash. That percentage has been as low as 5-10%. One could say that I just prefer to hold stocks.

Sold out of MGGIX the other day as part of early tax loss harvesting for 2022. It was acting too much like a concentrated tech fund and that's not what I wanted when I bought into it.
Their 2021 Annual Report came today. Call me spoiled or misguided after years of the informative, descriptive, reflective personal multi-page discussions in the annual letters from Giroux, Capital, Vanguard, and other funds, but when fund management's commentary for an annual report is only one page, unsigned, and doesn't even say 'thank you for investing in our fund' (*) it just suggests to me they don't really care about building a relationship with shareholders.
(*) I refer to the manager of the fund itself, not the Chairman's introduction note on behalf of the fund manager's firm.
I noticed a similarly annoying thing an a recent report from Blackrock. They (Blackrock) were the investment advisor, yet they kept saying "the Investment Advisor...." as if to rhetorically distance themselves for some reason. And it was only 1 or 2 of their funds doing that, the rest were more first-person in tone. Weird, but noticeable.
Edit: Interesting too that the majority of MGGIX directors come from Perkins-Cole. One would think there would be greater diversification there.

I posted a pissed off thread about MGGPX recently, but held on. Good thing I did. Guess, you gotta trust a good manager. Doesn't have the jitters during rough times. He killed it during covid. Let's hope he pulls through on all this.

Here's the page from which @bee's except was taken:
https://www.deepcapture.com/the-story-of-deep-capture-by-mark-mitchell/
naked shorters ... (it's flatly illegal goes the argument
Is naked shorting flatly illegal, or is that just one side's argument?
Naked shorting is not unconditionally illegal, just as going long without having the money to cover it on the trade date is not unconditionally illegal.
Is it illegal to buy a security and then talk it up? It depends.
"[A]busive 'naked' short selling as part of a manipulative scheme is always illegal under the general antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws, including Rule 10b-5".
SEC Rule 10b-21 https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2008/34-58774.pdf
Absent fraud, naked shorts can be legal, so long as they comply with other SEC regs. "'Naked' short selling is not necessarily a violation of the federal securities laws or the [Security and Exchange] Commission’s rules. Indeed, in certain circumstances, 'naked' short selling contributes to market liquidity."
https://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/regsho.htm
Apparently naked shorting is not flatly illegal, goes the official argument. The DTCC agrees, saying that "there is some legal naked short selling.
With respect to Overstock, "In 2004, Cohodes, a partner at a hedge fund called Rocker Partners, and David Rocker, the fund’s founder, shorted Overstock after concluding that Byrne was making untenable promises about its financial performance. "
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/12/14/a-tycoons-deep-state-conspiracy-dive
That's 18, not 15 years ago. This matters because Regulation SHO became effective January 2005, and Rule 10b-21 became effective Oct 2008.
For a very different, expansive perspective of the alleged conspiracies, here's Joe Nocera's business column from Feb 2006:
https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/25/business/overstocks-campaign-of-menace.html
To bring this back to the Reuters piece - put options were purchased. That's a way to gain the same exposure as with a short, but there's no failure to deliver; no security lending is involved. As the CEO of Farmland stated, ""This is not about shorting. This is about securities fraud."

2Y-10Y spread was only 17 bps. Yield-curve also has a tiny hump at 7-yr.
EOD chart should update soon, https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$UST10Y-$UST2Y&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p13919226325
Treasury Rates https://home.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/interest-rates/TextView?type=daily_treasury_yield_curve&field_tdr_date_value_month=202203

Blanchard asks about projections, plus rate of IR increases
https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/1504797235745370113

PByrne was treated outrageously way back when (15y ago) by naked shorters, whose actions eventually resulted in increased crackdown and the rare prosecution attempt (it's flatly illegal, goes the argument). Herb Greenberg (MarketWatch and elsewhere) et alia were the evildoers at the time. I made a lot and then lost it all and a bit more when Novastar got naked-shorted. Byrne was a hero to many w Overstock.
Now of course he himself has become this total bad actor, destructive on so many fronts. Some of us chagrinned are reevaluating our sentiments and thinking from the housing bubble crash.

+1 @Junkster - Thanks for posting. Readers can surely benefit from your experience.
I think it’s OK (or helpful ) for an investor to hold a broad macro view. That view may help shape investment direction. Yet, IMHO one shouldn’t let that macro view totally dictate allocation. A subtle difference - but the only way I can rationalize having some growth investments while maintaining an overall bearish view.
Recognize that a “macro view” is much more complex than simply being “bear” or “bull”. I also think there may be pockets of value here and there (funds / individual stocks) if individuals do their homework first and than make measured bets.

+1 @msf
It’s all a game.
I guess “distort” is open to interpretation. And if done well would be hard to detect or prove.
But “markets move” and “market movers” exist - and profit from said moves.
Just MHO of course.
One prominent short seller (to whom I subscribe) sometimes uses the short seller’s slogan: “Shoot ‘em in the back.” This means, wait until an asset price begins to tumble before jumping on and further pushing the price lower by shorting it on the way down.
Gosh - I don’t think I could live with myself … :)

Deep Capture is an interesting read:

The crimes are the work of Wall Street hedge fund managers and brokers who engage in a common trading strategy known as short-selling. A short sale is a way of making money when the price of a stock goes down. You borrow shares from someone else and immediately sell them off. If the price drops, you buy the shares back and return them to the original owner, pocketing the difference. If a company goes out of business, short-sellers hit the jackpot.
This is perfectly legal and unobjectionable. But some short-sellers do not play by the rules. A small group of powerful hedge fund managers stop at nothing to annihilate the companies they sell short. Their tactics include: blackmail, smear campaigns, espionage, fraud, harassment, extortion, bribery, rumor-mongering, sabotage, off-shore money laundering, political cronyism, frivolous lawsuits, witness tampering, biased financial research, false identities, bogus credit ratings, bribery, libelous blogs, bad science, forgery, wiretapping, counterfeiting, collusion, lying, cheating, threats and theft.
Their most egregious trick is to sell “phantom stock.” By exploiting a glitch in Wall Street’s computerized trading system, and a loophole in federal regulations, some hedge funds sell virtually unlimited amounts of stock that they have not yet borrowed or purchased. This is often referred to as “naked short selling.” Hedge funds use this tactic to flood the market with supply and drive down prices – which is blatantly illegal.

an-overview-of-deep-capture

As of today’s close my largest position will be Schwab’s muni money market fund SWOXX. At TD Ameritrade I am limited to only Schwab money market funds. Money market funds are beginning to rise reflecting the Fed’s action Wednesday. Also took out small positions Wednesday in a bank loan fund and even smaller one in a junk corporate. Very tight lease there, especially the junk fund, as I am barely ahead YTD and don’t want that to go poof. If I lose there hopefully the loss will be made up by money market fund, Thinking about TRMCX. Excited money market rates may eventually rise to 2% to 3%. Also excited the 10 year could go higher as that will positively impact annuity rates. Don’t need an annuity but sadly can’t think of where else to spend some of my nest egg. An annuity would bring peace of mind should I be cursed with a long life.
Still very bearish and think we could be in for a 73/74 style bear. But also realize markets often begin to rebound when the headline news looks the worst. Was impressed with how the market reacted to the hawkish Fed news Wednesday. Would prefer to see a powerful upside/downside day or two to get aggressive which in the past has ended most bear /major corrections.

I greatly appreciate preannouncements because they facilitate YE tax planning - how much gain to take this year (or whether to recognize losses), how much of an IRA to convert.
But in terms of managing large distributions, the preannouncements are a double edged sword. I admit to playing the game (as described below) to the disadvantage of other shareholders when it benefits me to do so. (That happens very infrequently.) It's legal, but it isn't especially fair to other investors.
Total distributions of the retail target date funds were estimated to be around 14%, depending on the fund.
https://advisors.vanguard.com//iwe/pdf/taxcenter/FAFYEEST_122021.pdf
If I had owned shares of a fund that had appreciated less than 14%, I would have sold the shares by the record date (so that I would not receive the distributions). Immediately after that (on the ex-date) I would have reestablished my position. Even if I recognized 12% in gain, I'd come out better than being handed a tax bill for a 14% distribution.
This would hurt remaining investors (in taxable accounts). The same cap gains and income would still have to be distributed, but now divided into fewer shares (because I'd redeemed mine). That would increase the taxable distributions to others.
If I'd had, say, a 16% unrealized gain, I wouldn't make this move. Otherwise I'd recognize a 16% gain when I could have recognized "just" 14% by staying put and taking the distributions.
The fact that this maneuver was available to everyone may be another argument that Vanguard could make to limit damages, assuming it is found to have breached its fiduciary duty.

Mortgage credit in the port now at zero; it was by far my largest allocation in recent years. Last to go was EIXIX. AlphaCentric and Regan's entries in the category have been ~ 75% ROC recently, thus with a pitiful income yield. The category was flat early in the big 2022 selloff, weakening lately, and just not a whole lot of upside left in the tank. This is my obituary for the great debt trade of the last decade-plus. (I might buy in again on a true selloff and signs of recovery.)
I'm probably more cautious than a lot of posters, given no pension and adequate but not massive savings/investment $. #1 position now is cash, #2 is PQTAX, with some ETFs mainly in trading mode. Capital preservation is the main objective at this point.

“What % does a bond heavy fund have to be in bonds before you would consider to "lighten" up on ? Was this in a tax advantage account ?”
@Derf - Thanks for the question. No set percent. Easiest to explain if I post my allocation model.
- 25% is assigned to fixed income. No changes were made in the composition. The weighting, however was reduced from 30% to 25%.
- 25% is allocated to growth. I retained the holdings already in place, including DODBX (30% fixed income). But sold half of RPGAX (30% fixed) and substituted FLJP - a Japanese ETF.
- A 10% allocation to the defensive position does contain 3 funds with substantial bond holdings. Those, however, tend to be short term or laddered, serving primarily as “ballast” while the funds invest the remaining amount in puts, calls and other derivatives.
- That leaves the 40% alternative sleeve where most changes occurred. I axed 3 funds: AOK (70% fixed income), PRSIX (60% fixed income) and PSMM. The latter’s bond exposure is variable - but roughly in the 35-55% area. These were replaced by a market neutral fund, a long-short fund and one individual stock.
(* I had to correct the stated percentages from initially. )
Re question 2. The changes were all in Roth & Traditional IRAs. An investment in munis, which is part of the fixed income sleeve, remained the same.

Rather than talking up a stock and then selling it at an inflated price, hedge funds and others may be buying puts, talking down a stock, and then exercising the put at a deflated price. That is, selling a stock at a locked-in (option) price and covering at a manipulated low price.

Activist short sellers like Muddy Waters' Carson Block bet against public companies they deem over-valued and then publish their investment thesis. They say their work aids market efficiency and dispute Mitts' analysis as flawed. ...
[Regarding Farmland Partners, Inc. FPLN] he ... published his analysis of 1,720 pseudonymous posts attacking publicly listed stocks on financial website Seeking Alpha between 2010 and 2017. His study found such posts were preceded by unusual and suspicious trading through stock options, in a process he called "short and distort".

https://www.reuters.com/business/how-columbia-professor-became-scourge-activist-short-sellers-2022-03-18/

The real question is why did the heart beat trade not work This time around.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-vanguard-mutual-fund-tax-dodge/