All Activity

Fairfax's is a devilishly difficult company to understand. Why? How it invests. But there is an even more important take-away. Fairfax is very good at how it invests - much better than investors generally recognize. As a result, I am adding a new Chapter to my book - Chapter 5 Fairfax's Investment Platform The goal is to pull back the curtain and shed some light on this critically important topic. Today I will post the Chapter Summary and the first three articles. Tomorrow I will post the second three articles (there are a total of 6 in the Chapter). This is my initial draft. I look forward to getting the feedback from board members - that is how we all learn. ------------- Chapter Summary This chapter examines Fairfax's investment business—the second engine that powers the company's long-term growth. It explains how Fairfax invests, why its approach differs from most property and casualty insurers, and why its investment platform has become one of the company's greatest competitive advantages. The chapter is organized into six articles: The Investment Platform introduces Fairfax's investment business, explaining where the capital comes from, how it is financed and why it has become the primary driver of the company's long-term earnings power. Inside Fairfax's Investment Portfolio examines the composition of the approximately US$76 billion investment portfolio, including fixed income, public equities, associates and consolidated holdings, and explains the role each plays in the overall portfolio. Fairfax's Investment Capabilities explores the broad range of ways Fairfax allocates capital—from bonds and public equities to private businesses, distressed investments, infrastructure and venture investing—and explains why this flexibility provides a competitive advantage. Fairfax’s Investment Platform Comes of Age uses Wade Burton's Q1 2026 conference call comments to explain how Fairfax's investment platform has evolved and why it is better positioned than at any point in the company's history. The DNA of Fairfax's Investment Philosophy traces the ideas that shaped Fairfax's investment approach, from Benjamin Graham and Warren Buffett to John Templeton, Henry Singleton and others, showing how these influences continue to guide investment decisions today. Estimating Fairfax's Investment Earnings analyzes Fairfax's long-term investment performance and develops a reasonable estimate of the economic earnings the investment business can generate over a normal investment cycle.

,Canceled $600k Salesforce contract "to replace" it with multi-million dollar spend on Anthropic (51-minute mark). Sure, you can say they used Anthropic for other things too but this is the type of story that I keep hearing about and seeing. Lots of other things here that are inconsistencies that point that AI isn't killing software.

under contract for $30mm less ($250mm vs $280mm) wasn't able to preclear w/ employer on time to buy day after so the big profits for me are merely hypothetical/theoretical...but I know some other folks made some $$$. Elme Communities – Provides Update on Liquidation (BankruptcyData) Publish Date: 2026-07-26 15:27:52 UTC Elme Communities updated shareholders on its ongoing liquidation under the Plan of Sale and Liquidation approved in October 2025, according to a statement. In 2026, the Company completed the sale of six remaining properties, five multifamily communities and the Watergate 600 office property, for approximately $294 million in gross proceeds. After the original buyer withdrew, Elme signed a new agreement to sell Riverside Apartments for $250 million, with closing expected by September 14, 2026, subject to inspection and customary closing conditions. Purchase agreements for Elme Bethesda, The Kenmore, and 3801 Connecticut Avenue, totaling about $168 million in gross proceeds, remain on track. Elme Bethesda is expected to close by August 11, 2026, while the two Washington, D.C., properties are expected to close after completing the required Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) process by year-end. Following the initial $14.67 per-share liquidating distribution paid in January 2026, the Company now expects additional liquidating distributions of $1.74 to $1.94 per share, bringing total estimated distributions to $16.41 to $16.61 per share. To contact B

Nice call. Your timing is spot on.

Do you know what his earnings estimates are for this quarter and year?

The Economist ist even “mainstream media”. Thats already nonsense. 80% of MAGA doesn’t even know that this publication exists. Elon is just making stuff up (like crime rate being high on London) and when a journalist point out that the crime rate is lower than any US city of decent size, she is now and “enemy of western civilization”. Outside ifhis very narrow domain, Elon is just a shill and a Luddite. No different than an actor in Hollywood.

Michael Burry's latest post is on the confluence between PE-owned life insurers, stuffed with crappy PE generated private credit, and the opaque world of US state insurance regulation and offshore insurance regulation in Caymans and Bermuda. There are totally a bunch of rats in this PE generated mess. 777 Partners collapse connected into 777 Re and A-Cap group, owners of a number of small life insurers in Utah, was just the tip of the iceberg. Dodgers owner Mark Walters PE-life insurance mess is getting an expose in the WSJ today. https://michaeljburry.substack.com/p/short-thoughts-june-24-2026-offshore

Wouldn’t it be something if Elon put as much energy into his 5 million kids as he does supporting facists, going on X tirades, and destroying global aid? What a fucking goofball.

Lol, people don’t even know what mainstream media is. I imagine the only thought the average American can squeeze out anymore between their TikToks and Facebook Reels is 'Me hungry.' The Economist remains great and Elon Musk is a mentally ill buffoon.

I loved that he called her out and said "many people hate you the mainstream media", IMO we need more of that. They aren't journalists, it's all fox news now. The are framers/perpetuators of x ideas, it's not like they are truth seeking, although for some that may rank number 4 or 5 on the list, if they have the time and can fit it in. The economist has gone downhill for a decade. The funny thing is that attacking the media is exactly what a free speech absolutist would do, the opposite of hypocritical. Speaking harsh words is the only kind of free speech that matters.

Is there a market for perpetual Fartcoin futures yet?

And that block chain can effect faster/cheaper transactions without the need for banking intermediaries that take a cut as a result? I thought this was already well accepted.... I mean V has an annual data processing expense of $890 million to move $14.2 trillion in annual payments (both credit and debit) or 1 bp ($0.0001 per payment dollar moved). So, if we're just comparing electronic bits moving through a network, I'm fairly certain Visa's marginal cost to move bits is also pretty much close to zero. So there's no technological innovation here in cost per transaction vs current payment rails. But I get it, there are financial institutions making these debit payments and they take a cut. And to emphasize the point - we are talking about debit transactions not credit card transactions. The average US debit transaction of $40 at a large bank costs 23-cents in interchange (0.00575 per payment dollar) so this should be the proper comp in that up-thread article. I would argue that the real comp for blockchain then should also include the on- and off-ramps to/from bank deposit accounts. What is the all-in cost then to compare against a Visa debit card payment? I bet its not less than .00575 per payment dollar. I include the on-off ramps, because we are never going to live in a world where Bitcoin is an actual currency that anyone spends. Even if we look at US-regulated stablecoins as a payment medium, they are not gaining any traction from what I can see. Paypal's stablecoin is dead in the water, and Circle's USDCs in circulation is down 7.1% so far in 2026 (CRCL promised 40% CAGRs, lolz). Meanwhile, bank deposits are up 4% in 2026, and currency in circulation is up 2%. Go fiat! Look - I'm not anti Bitcoin, I'm just a neutral to slightly skeptical agnostic. Bill (full disclosue I have been short CRCL since after it went public).

Do agentic AIs not have the same problem that they may distrust one another on payment? And do block chain rails where they can identify the wallet balance beforehand, and smart contracts that escrow the funds until actions are taken, not relieve that burden of fraud/nonpayment? And that block chain can effect faster/cheaper transactions without the need for banking intermediaries that take a cut as a result? I thought this was already well accepted....

Elon Musk whining about a journalist asking some real question. And pushing back on some of his nonsense . Traitor of the West. LOL

The National Bank analyst raised their target from $3300 to $3450. There is quite the disparity now between different analyst targets.

Still not addressing the issue. If you want to discuss another issue that is fine. "Losing the Iran war" is like calling a baseball game in the top of the 2nd inning for a team down 10-0 with a depleted lineup. Narratives don't win baseball games or wars.

Can you elaborate on why this statement loses the author credibility? Because the author is comparing a credit transaction (funds are being borrowed with the associated compensation built into the transaction cost for credit risk being assumed by the lender and not the payment network) with a debit transaction (funds are in place ahead of the transaction and being withdrawn from a deposit account). That means the author is either unaware of the difference (hence my ignorant sports fan analogy) -- or, worse, is aware and deliberately misleading the audience for obvious promotional reasons. Bill

So now you're doing the Greg approach (the one thing about Greg that is intolerable to read and I wish he'd stop), rant and whine about other's opinions. A slight change of spirit so to say with a question: Can we say to the degree we bomb Iran equals the degree to which we are losing the Iran war? And what's the read delay in their nuke program? Trump says 50 years; I read 9 months to a year.

Spreadsheet are useful but fail to capture a ton of business qualities such as scarcity value like sports teams or hard to permit mines. They can also mislead in the case of companies which are current cash cows but at high risk of being obsoleted (Adobe) or are too aggressive in price taking (discretionary spending like Disney or luxury goods). As Druk says, the market is right 80% of the time. I don't discount the collective intelligence on the other side of the trade. In the case of Nintendo, I'll be stubborn. Btw, I think the companies which Acquired covers are a reasonable proxy list of great companies.

@Dealraker, why do you continue to avoid the issue? The issue is voting and policies/issues. Nothing more. John is able to understand that. Why can't you? I'm not asking you or anyone to like Trump but that is not the issue. Perhaps when you finally figure out that there were and usually are only 2 candidates running for President, you'll begin to understand why Trump retains support rather than rant and whine about mostly nonsense.

I don't find any attempt to justify your words any better. Startling as to lack of sensitivity for folks who lost entire families and pedigrees to the likes of Hitler. "Nationalism" did not lead to Hitler and is not, in and of itself a problem. It is but one of many variables that all came together to contribute to 1930s Germany.

Shorted SKHY Hoo boy I hope it doesn't squeeze too bad

I'd say that having a maniacal focus on cash generation and per-share growth in the relevant metrics (EPS, FCF, BV depending on the company) is the key part. You don't need to own something that is considered great, when companies generating heaps of cash and returning more and more of it every year will do just fine in terms of generating wealth. Another approach would be to ask what a great company that fails to create shareholder value even is. You could pretty reasonably argue that there aren't any, but that clearly isn't the consensus view of the markets. From what I've gathered, the label "great" usually gets stuck onto exciting, high-margin businesses with fast growth in typical investing discourse. That already offers a bunch of pitfalls to fall into: increasing competition leading to losing margins, diworsification while growing, brand dilution, overpromises broken and so on. A lot of these traits seem to go for consumer brand companies in businesses where there isn't some special barrier to entry to market. Maybe you could say that if a company cannot primarily focus on their shareholders when deciding over business matters, then it might not be such a great business after all. Another issue is if a company seems to be run for someone else than all their shareholders. These kinds of firms are relatively easy to avoid by looking at stock ownership among the board and the directors, cash compensation, SBC and stuff like that, fortunately. Also, failing to create shareholder value needs to be clearly separated from failing to create shareholder returns. Overpaying for a truly great shareholder value creator hurts in the short term, but if the business case remains intact, the returns will follow sooner or later (although if you pay 50x for damn near anything, you'll likely do a lot of waiting).