All Activity

yes, this is one potential explanation....that most people are exercising their freedoms and choosing to be poor. That would generally reflect better on the US than the other explanation which that the bottom 1/2 or whatever can't accumulate wealth due to lack of opportunity or because we need to build more houses or whatever. definitely think americans consumer-y ways are part of it (my own wealth accumulation is certainly slowed by my lavish expenditures), but not sure if it's the only reason.

Posting here as well for those interested

The starts are aligning...

Sure (it's not intrinsically boring). But when the rules incentivize flopping, flopping is what you get.

No different to hockey, when not playing in the world cup, the players are continually playing against each other in the various premier leagues around the world. When everyone plays at the top of their game, scores are low, and mostly 'cause of some of temporary breakdown. When everyone has incredible ball control, and 'presence' in time/space; the outliers have to be true masters (Messi, Ronaldo, Gretzy, etc, etc) to score at the levels they do. They are; but most teams only have one/two at best, at the same time. These things can be learnt, routinely are, and the 'unknowns' can get to be just as good (Cape Verde, Canada, Morocco, etc). But their best players don't stay at home; they go on to play in the premier leagues, routinely play against the best, and become part of the best. The bigger the global pool that plays, and the more movement between teams, the better the game. SD

Buying anything other than fairfax (both ffh and fih) feels so wrong...way cheaper than anything else...but also a >30% position for me. I worry I might not get another chance to buy csu this cheap. Hopefully I'll have something to trim by the end of the year!

It seems at this point Fairfax and this board are the only buyers. Sadly for the stock price, most people on this board may already have close to full positions.

I think it's largely boring for the same reason a lot of people complained about hockey 20 years ago. The systems have skewed way too much towards defensive styles that abuse the current application of rules. As such, theres very little scoring.

https://nypost.com/2026/07/21/us-news/more-than-6000-non-citizens-registered-to-vote-in-nj-by-software-error-gov-sherrill-admits/ Looks like horseface had an oopsy daisy moment.

Sure, they dont. Is this something new? Theres literally tons of great businesses, like say Apple or Amazon, they feed off the folks whom blow thru or spend 1.2x every dollar they get their hands on. We live in a consumer centric society, as has been mentioned upthread.

Easy to explain - the US cut off some of the spigots and Europe doesn't like it. They'll get over it. Not sure about some here though.

I've not seen data to the contrary that indicates your median or bottom quartile American has much in the way of assets....i think the data is "mostly" correct....whether its $70K or $150K that's still kind of jack shit. i don't see why the nuances of that aren't worth discussing.

Article #3 in the series on business model. The Organizational Advantage – Decentralized Operations and Centralized Capital Allocation The objective of every well-run company is straightforward: maximize long-term per-share value. Achieving that objective requires more than talented managers, attractive markets or a sound investment strategy. It also requires an organizational structure that consistently produces superior operating performance and superior capital allocation. Over the past sixty years, two companies have demonstrated the power of this approach. Henry Singleton built Teledyne into one of the best-performing companies of its era. Warren Buffett refined many of the same principles at Berkshire Hathaway, producing one of the greatest long-term investment records in history. Fairfax has followed a similar path. Since its founding in 1985, Fairfax has combined decentralized operating businesses with centralized capital allocation. The objective is simple: maximize the cash generated across the organization and then allocate that capital to the opportunities offering the highest long-term returns. The organizational structure itself is straightforward. The challenge—and ultimately the competitive advantage—lies in executing it well. Over the past four decades, Fairfax has systematically strengthened the people, processes and culture operating within this framework. Today, the company appears to be operating the strongest version of this organizational model in its history. The Theory Every diversified company faces two fundamental challenges. First, how do you maximize the cash generated by each operating business? Second, once that cash has been generated, how do you maximize the return earned on it? The most successful organizations recognize that these are different problems requiring different solutions. Decentralized Operations The objective of decentralization is straightforward: maximize the performance of each operating business. Decentralization is built on a simple premise: exceptional businesses require exceptional operating managers. Once the right people are in place, decision-making authority is delegated to those closest to customers, competitors and local markets, while head office remains focused on capital allocation. This creates clear accountability, encourages entrepreneurial thinking and allows decisions to be made where the best information resides. Advantages Optimized operating performance Greater accountability Entrepreneurial culture Faster decision-making Attractive to founder-owners and entrepreneurial managers Higher long-term cash generation Centralized Capital Allocation Generating cash is only half the equation. The next challenge is deciding where that capital should be invested. Rather than allowing excess capital to remain within individual business units, centralized capital allocation allows every dollar generated across the organization to compete for the highest expected long-term return. Operating managers focus on building better businesses. Head office focuses on allocating capital. Each concentrates on what it does best. Advantages Superior capital allocation Capital flows to the best opportunities Internal capital market Greater financial resilience Long-term orientation Tax-efficient capital deployment Importantly, this organizational framework extends across both of Fairfax's business engines: insurance and investments. Decentralized decision-making drives the performance of the insurance businesses, while the same principles govern Fairfax's investment operations, including public equities and wholly owned operating companies. Although the underlying businesses differ, the organizational model remains the same. Both ultimately feed the same centralized capital allocation process. Viewed this way, Fairfax is not simply an insurance company with an investment portfolio. It is an integrated capital allocation organization with two complementary business engines operating within the same organizational framework. Together, decentralized operations and centralized capital allocation create a powerful long-term capital compounding system. Why This Model Is Difficult to Execute If this organizational model is so effective, why don't more companies adopt it? The answer is straightforward: the structure is relatively simple, but executing it well is extraordinarily difficult. Success requires several conditions to exist simultaneously. A lean corporate head office deliberately limits oversight. That only works if operating businesses are led by exceptional management teams capable of making sound long-term decisions with minimal supervision. Capital allocation must also be exceptional. Poor capital allocation eventually produces weaker operating businesses, lower returns and less capital available for future investment. At the same time, operating businesses must continually improve. Decentralization creates autonomy, but autonomy alone does not guarantee progress. Without effective leadership, strong culture and a mechanism for continuously improving operating performance, business quality inevitably diverges over time. Finally, the model requires a long-term mindset. Maintaining a lean head office, preserving entrepreneurial autonomy and continually investing in people and businesses often requires decisions that reduce short-term reported earnings in exchange for greater long-term value creation. Many public companies find that trade-off difficult to sustain. For this organizational model to succeed, all of these elements must function well simultaneously. That is uncommon. It also explains why building this type of organization typically takes decades rather than years. This is what makes Fairfax's evolution so significant. The company's competitive advantage was not created by adopting this organizational structure in 1985. It was created by spending the next four decades learning how to execute it at an increasingly high level. Fairfax's Evolution Fairfax adopted this organizational structure when the company was founded in 1985, and it has changed remarkably little since. Designing the structure was the easy part. Building the people, capabilities and culture required to make it work took decades. The most significant transformation occurred within the insurance operations after Andy Barnard assumed responsibility for Fairfax's global insurance business in 2011. The focus shifted from building scale to improving quality. Underwriting discipline became embedded throughout the organization, accountability increased, existing businesses improved and acquisitions became increasingly selective. The result is a collection of high-quality insurance businesses producing record underwriting profits and unprecedented levels of float. A similar evolution occurred within the investment organization beginning around 2018. While valuation remained central, greater emphasis was placed on management quality, balance sheet strength and sustainable cash generation. At the same time, Fairfax systematically upgraded its existing portfolio, reallocating capital away from weaker legacy investments and toward higher-quality businesses. Investment capabilities expanded, experienced professionals were added and a disciplined investment process became embedded across public equities, private investments and fixed income. Over the past fifteen years, Fairfax has strengthened both engines that generate capital. Insurance operations now produce more underwriting profit and more float, while investment operations generate higher-quality earnings from a significantly stronger portfolio. Together they feed the same centralized capital allocation process. Today, the organizational structure remains largely unchanged, but the businesses are stronger, the management teams are deeper, the investment organization is significantly more capable and the culture has become firmly embedded throughout the company. This version of Fairfax has never existed before. Why It Matters For investors, the implications are significant. Organizational capability compounds just as capital does. Over four decades, Fairfax has become progressively better at generating cash, allocating capital and improving its businesses. That capability has become one of the company's most durable competitive advantages. As a result, Fairfax is applying a proven organizational model to the largest capital base in its history. While the organizational framework has remained remarkably consistent since 1985, the quality of its execution has improved dramatically. That evolution helps explain why today's Fairfax is fundamentally stronger than any previous version of the company. Appendix A — Another Way to Think About Fairfax Fairfax is best understood as a "conglomerate-light" organization. It combines many of the economic advantages of a diversified conglomerate while deliberately avoiding much of the organizational complexity. Core Characteristics Small corporate head office Highly decentralized operating businesses Centralized capital allocation Entrepreneurial operating culture Long-term ownership mindset Advantages Optimized operating performance Superior capital allocation Meaningful diversification Greater financial resilience Long-term orientation Scalable organizational platform Avoided Pitfalls Excessive bureaucracy Organizational bloat Slow decision-making Capital trapped within business units Empire building

Sure, but we dont need to be all that concerned by whats obviously(and already been pointed out as) mangled and misinterpreted data. Whether it's dishonestly/ignorantly presented aside. Its like those oil guys talking about "only 43 days inventory left in the SPR!"....

Great discussion on article 1 above. Here is article 2. Yes, I am generalizing and speculating. But I think it captures Fairfax's 40-year evolution at a very high level. This is important for people who used to follow Fairfax - it provides perspective. Most importantly, it explains what has changed at Fairfax. Over the past 5 years, my mental model for thinking about Fairfax is kind of like a supertanker. It takes a long time to change course. And even longer for changes to show up in financial results. I like the direction the company is travelling in today... How the Business Model Evolved – A Much Better Business Today For most companies, the past provides a useful guide to the future. Business models typically evolve slowly. Companies continue selling similar products, serving similar customers and allocating capital in broadly similar ways. As a result, historical financial performance often provides a good indication of future earnings power. Fairfax is different. Its business model has remained remarkably consistent for more than four decades. Insurance generates float. Float finances investments. Successful insurance and investment operations generate capital, which management allocates to the opportunities offering the highest long-term returns. What changed was execution. Insurance, investments and capital allocation all became significantly better businesses. Those improvements occurred over four distinct phases. Understanding that progression helps explain both Fairfax's historical performance and why today's company is fundamentally stronger than any previous version. Phase 1 (1985–2000): Build Insurance The priority was scale. Through acquisitions, Fairfax assembled a growing property and casualty insurance platform. The objective was to build float while developing insurance expertise and establishing the foundation for long-term growth. Investments The investment portfolio followed a traditional Ben Graham-style value investing approach. Float provided investment leverage, and investment returns were expected to become an increasingly important driver of long-term shareholder value. Summary Fairfax spent its first fifteen years building the platform. Management focused on creating the insurance operations, investment capability and financial scale needed to support long-term compounding. Phase 2 (2001–2010): Learn Insurance Rapid growth exposed weaknesses. Reserve deficiencies forced management to rethink the insurance business. Growth gave way to stronger underwriting discipline, more conservative reserving and better risk management. The experience fundamentally changed how Fairfax approached insurance. Investments While insurance struggled, the investment portfolio excelled. Credit default swaps and equity hedges generated extraordinary gains during the 2008 financial crisis, protecting shareholder capital while much of the global financial system suffered severe losses. Summary This period reshaped Fairfax's thinking. Insurance quality proved far more important than previously appreciated. At the same time, the success of the defensive investment strategy planted the seeds for a later mistake. Phase 3 (2011–2020): Optimize Insurance The most important operational change in Fairfax's history began in 2011, when Andy Barnard assumed responsibility for the insurance operations. Over the following decade, underwriting discipline became the central focus. Existing businesses became more profitable, acquisitions became increasingly selective and capital was allocated more efficiently across the insurance group. Fairfax also expanded its global footprint through acquisitions including Allied World and Brit, while reshaping parts of the portfolio. In India, for example, it monetized its successful investment in ICICI Lombard and helped launch Digit Insurance. Investments The investment business moved in the opposite direction. Large equity hedges and short positions, intended to protect capital, materially reduced returns as global equity markets advanced. At the same time, the equity portfolio accumulated too many businesses with mediocre long-term economics. Management gradually reversed course. The equity hedge was eliminated at the end of 2016, the final short position was closed in 2020 and, beginning around 2018, Fairfax adopted a more selective investment framework emphasizing higher-quality businesses, stronger management teams, healthier balance sheets and superior long-term economics. Summary Insurance became a much stronger business, but weak investment performance largely obscured that progress. Fairfax's underlying economics were improving much faster than its reported results suggested. Phase 4 (2021–Present): Compound Insurance Years of disciplined execution positioned Fairfax to capitalize on a hard insurance market. Growth shifted from primarily acquisitions to strong organic expansion, while underwriting profitability reached record levels. Today, Fairfax's insurance operations are larger, more profitable and higher quality than at any point in the company's history. Investments The investment framework has also matured. Equity investments made since 2018 have generally performed very well, reflecting the emphasis on higher-quality businesses with capable management teams, strong balance sheets and durable competitive positions. Legacy holdings have also been addressed. Chronic underperformers were sold, merged with stronger businesses, taken private or wound down. Many of the remaining legacy investments have performed exceptionally well, with Eurobank standing out as a flagship success. Capital Allocation Capital allocation has become a defining competitive advantage. Management largely avoided the 2022 bond bear market by maintaining a very short-duration fixed-income portfolio, protecting book value while allowing investment income to rise rapidly as interest rates increased. It has also demonstrated considerable flexibility through opportunistic asset sales, unconventional transactions such as the Fairfax total return swap and disciplined share repurchases that have reduced shares outstanding by approximately 27% since 2018. Capital now moves freely across the organization toward the opportunities offering the highest expected long-term returns. Summary For the first time in Fairfax's history, insurance, investments and capital allocation are all operating at a very high level simultaneously. The Bigger Lesson Fairfax's business model has not fundamentally changed. Insurance still generates float. Float still finances investments. Successful insurance and investment operations still generate capital for management to allocate. What changed was execution. The company first built a global insurance platform. It then spent more than a decade improving underwriting quality. The investment framework evolved from traditional value investing, through an extended period of defensive positioning, to one that combines value discipline with ownership of higher-quality businesses. At the same time, capital allocation became increasingly disciplined, flexible and opportunistic. The progression is clear: Build → Learn → Optimize → Compound The sequence matters. Fairfax did not optimize its business while it was still small. It first spent decades building a global insurance platform and accumulating investment capital. Only then did management systematically improve underwriting, refine the investment framework and strengthen capital allocation. Today, those improvements are being applied to the largest capital base in the company's history. Today's Fairfax should not be viewed simply as a larger version of the company that produced much of its historical track record. It is a fundamentally better business. Superior future returns are never guaranteed. However, investors who rely too heavily on Fairfax's historical record risk overlooking an important fact: today's Fairfax has never been better positioned to exploit its powerful business model and compound intrinsic value per share over the long term.

yes, big fan, have opened them for my kids, 1 of whom got $1,000...put in $5K for each and intend to build them some nice little future IRA's along with the $35K 529 thing...i think it's a small little token and honestly the accounts aren't that great unless you use them as wealthy people will: to create future roth conversion opps w/o earned income also love the program because it creates a very simple and efficient way for wealthy people / corps to just give their money to people w/o any kind of government or non profit program / management....middleman...like childless heirs can just give it to trump accounts and give everyone a cent or a dollar and over time that could be quite powerful...but would need to be big...Mr. Dell and crew can't do it alone.

With the stock continuing to drop, I have a feeling we are going to get a massive quarter in regards to buybacks

Like this? https://investamerica.org/

I think it’s incredibly important. You need a big portion of society to feel invested, to feel like capitalists, to have ownership. Otherwise risk of pitchforks, seizure, and drastic redistribution and capital destruction increases. At a point of inequality/if I saw things going this way, I’d consider fleeing the US (which statistically more people are but for affordability reasons)

Please don't get ridiculous.

Yes it is boring and that is why it is the most popular sport in the world. The above comparison makes no sense... has nothing to do with luck, has everything to do with the higher likelyhood of a draw. Especially in football you have higher chances to draw because only a few goals are scored per game, while in basketball draws are quite uncommon. Chances are just smaller to draw when you score 100 points vs 1 or 2 points per game. This means that small differences in skill level are insufficient to get a win in football... while in tennis (no draws) they are more likely to get you the win.

The melting ice cube is my concern. Also, I think $T and $VZ are trading at single digit earnings/FCF multiples and I own both of them. Thanks for the suggestion, I appreciate it.

I am ridiculously concentrated on Fairfax Financial.

Then whole Europe, - basically - is suffering from TDS, @73 Reds, -what do you think about that?

TDG new position