All Activity

By removing a stipulation of a minimum threshold of time, all you're saying is that "anything that can go down can't be a store of value" which would exclude everything....gold, t-bills, USD. Because it IS possible to have an unrealized loss in any of those items after the point the of acquiring. Having a reasonable minimum threshold for a period of time we're measuring the storing of value across allows for that natural variation in each while still holding them accountable to inflation resistance over an intermediate/longer term. Gold is highly volatile. It was up 50+% at points last year and is down 25+% from that peak. Obviously it wasn't a "store of value" for anyone who bought int he last 2-3 months...but its intended to be a "long term" store of value. Not a store of value over 2-3 months. And over rolling 5- or 10-year periods, it tends to do a decent job. Bitcoin isn't any different - but is more volatile at this time given the emerging nature of the technology, the perfect inelasticity of its protocol, and the lack of understanding of it by market participants/speculators. Like Gold - any short-term period can deviate from that "store" narrative. But over rolling 3- or 5-year periods (cuz rolling 10- doesn't provide much observation yet...) it has worked pretty well over the majority of those varying time periods.

Fund is up ~80% as of 2Q26. Going to put out my 2Q26 letter soon.

Bought a few hundred extra shares of JOE. Hoping to do that every week the next few months if price remains here.

I've started to get back to my Swedish Real Estate basket these days. Today I've got filled on a few shares today of WIHL.STO - Wihlborgs Fastigheter AB.

This is the absolute worst. Im already completely tired of having to engage with people whom think like this. If youre using AI to make investments, I dont want to waste my time discussing them with you LOL Like dont get me wrong, it's a helpful tool at times, as a cog, but making your judgment calls based on "what Ai says" is pure stupidity.

Add llm's to the mix and now every investor can spew bolded bullet points about how company xyz's moat is invincible, or condensing 10k's and earnings call transcripts into 5 key takeaways, thus missing any real understanding or nuance. I actually think next few years could be a fruitful experience for the genuinely good investors.

I really have no attachment to LA. Beautiful beach and girls, but that's pretty much it. It seems like the place where young investors go if they want their passion for investing to die. The caliber of talent I've met in the brief two days I was in NYC.. Man, it re-invigorated my passion for investing. I felt boy-ish wonder that left me after I was 14, felt like I was in college again.

Good point. I have noticed on the YouTube type investing shows/podcasts they all mention the same tired points or most obvious moats on stocks and act like it’s a big secret that they constantly explain over and over on all the different shows. Like they are all only learning from each other. I get the sense that there is not much reading or real work going on out there. If my kids (7yo - 13yo) are any indication, deep reading is about to become a very rare super power if it is not already.

You know there was another Chinese place on Frederick Douglas Blvd that had the same kind of set up as the one on 116th street - Thick glass barrier between the customers where you push the money in a slot and the same terrible quality oil for frying (you can tell by the smell), which was exactly the flavor I was looking for. I stopped going to the place on Frederick Douglas because drug dealers would be dealing inside the restaurant in front of me while I waited for my order. The Chinese guys didn't care because there was that thick glass barrier and whatever happens on the other side, well... I always disliked taking the 7 train. What am I gonna do, go watch the Metropolitans play at the Shea? Come on!

What's the litmus test for "being crowded?" Fairfax gets almost no mention outside of this site, but that's rare for an equity. At the same time if you spend time on X.com (I no longer do) it's not hard to find yourself in some reinforcing algo cycle of being pitched value stocks (many of which I see on here) by specific accounts. So it does make me wonder.....is the retail market becoming more.....influencer, algo, efficiently driven "influeicient"? And how is the "algo push" bleeding into other areas (this site etc.) of idea generation?

You live in LA which is like against suburb and not a real city. Sorry.

NY is like 200 countries packed in a few square miles. If you can’t get it in NY it either isn’t worth having or it does not exist.

This place is terrible. Cheap Chinese food for Gwai- Lo’s. Check out Flushing

Well we took you guys out in 2014, lets see if you can get your revenge. Though the friendly in March was 5-2 in our favor...

I'm not going to state much about the broker business as I'm not in any way up to date and feel that all I can offer is bias which isn't helpful. I do spend a lot of time with probably my best friend who is still in the business, he has a lake house that he lives in half the year that's a quarter mile from my home, so summer we are together often. His firm now is 45 people. Anyway we do generally talk the business at least some when we get together. What's interesting is the two things we most have watched affect the broker prices, that's soft markets and AI, are things he simply doesn't even mention. I do bring them up of course and he sort of comes back with what I'd call a "normal stuff" position. His most worrisome issue is that he doesn't want to sell the business, but he now doesn't want to be on task but 4 hours or so a day- he and his wife travel, and his two sons are not particularly motivated and honestly not very capable. He does have a middle age woman who he says can and for the most part - and actually does - run the business. This woman has a daughter who just graduated and joined the firm who my friend says, "She will be both my son's boss within a couple of years." He is delighted with the overall conditions of the insurance business, says opportunities are endless and competitors aren't a problem. This is a guy who never went to college, he joined his father's one man operation when he was 18, he's now 67. He's also an aggregator major owner, that is a 6 part ownership thing and he has personal and via his business ownership of 5/6th's, and there's one other 1/6th owner.

It doesen't matter here that you've lived in USSR, what matters here is you don't by now live here in Europe, with that said, to the contrary of @Loss Horizon [, also from USSR], if you have read all @Loss Horizons posts [, which I have].

Got some on Tuesday. Thanks.

Typically promises of gifts are not construed as contracts and are not legally enforceable. The difference is, Buffett's letter goes through great lengths to ensure that the Foundation should rely on his annual gifts for all but the three exceptions listed. To your point, there would still probably need to be some form of written, formal acceptance by the Foundation to even begin to construe the letter as a binding contract. On a related subject I picked up a book while traveling last year entitled "Warren and Bill - Gates, Buffett and the Friendship that Changed the World" (Anthony McCarten). Rehashes how the relationship evolved and of course much is already known to most of us here. The most interesting aspect of the book is that it did not paint Gates in a particularly kind light in a variety of ways, while also briefly touching on his relationship with Epstein.

What a friggin' issue to have at the age of 95, and as likely one of the most intelligent and smartest 'money' persons ever on this planet. Go figure. [If it actually is so, We - by now - don't know for sure.]

AI narrative on these was absurd. Plus the soft market and it was a real low hurdle opportunity.

While we only have that public letter to go off of (which really only gives Buffett 3 specific "outs"), there is probably a more formal legal document that is in place. Or Bill may just let Warren out of an irrevocable pledge because it's the right thing to do. OR.. the independent law firm's investigation / report compels Sussman to remove Gates from "active engagement in policy setting and administration" of the foundation, which is one of Warren's explicit "outs" since Melinda already departed and its a "one or both" deal.

I lived in the USSR, so don't give that bullshit. There is a difference between rules on conduct which every society has and rules on speech, which not every society has.

Typically gold, held in a mix of physical and paper gold (futures, ETF, etc.), dependant upon need. The hype thing applies equally to bullion prices as well. The often quoted usage case for gold is also very biased - as the BTC alternative is still a recent development (18 yrs from inception, vs 100's of years for gold).... one either accepts BTC as a viable alternative, or one doesn't. The trading thing, is BTC as just another trading sardine; same as any other sardine, the expectation is that the opportunity is worth it, and tax man is watching, If you are willing to hold throughout the cycle (as you would if you hold BTC for 'insurance' purposes), you can do very well. Every asset has to earn its keep ..... SD

Thank you very much here, @73 Reds, It's really hard to be or get enthusiastic here about anything related to it. *ugh*

Makes sense, seeing the same thing with my new ADBE position. If only my alt asset managers would get out of the penalty box.