All Activity

Probably doing things differently, but I have a barbell approach, no ETFs. All long term holds. 70% Dividend payers - Cdn Banks. 30% Tech. - Apple, Google. Cash flow is protection for me as it gives me optionality for deployment into attractive companies. Dividends and earned income provide cash flow for investment - about 50%:30% these days. Doing this approach, you need to focus on quality and valuation at entry. If you want Tier 2 names, ETFs or keep to < 1% of the portfolio.

Yeah, Obama's looking pretty amazing right now--got a much better deal and didn't waste hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives to do it.

What price do we see next $60 oil or $100 oil?

Here is the link to a good overview of Peller Estates. https://s201.q4cdn.com/211846765/files/doc_presentations/2026/APL-Investor-Presentation-Q3-26-FINAL.pdf The reported purchase price can be misleading... Part of the purchase price will likely be funded with an increase in debt at Peller Estates. The key is how much $ is Fairfax contributing. And what will that investment earn over time? The big question for me is: How good is the management team at Peller Estates? There are lots of interesting angles to this deal: Real estate portfolio and inventory = C$500M Recipe/Keg - this will work both ways... restaurant competitors might not like it. This is a long term business - much better fit as a private company. The sector (alcohol) is pretty out of favour. From an income stream perspective, another addition to the consolidated bucket for Fairfax.

I think it depends on sizing. If your "largest" position is less than 10% it really doesnt even matter. Generally I think on one's best ideas you should be OK putting 5-7% of the portfolio "at risk". Meaning if you think theres potentially 50% downside a low teens allocation is reasonable.

Andrew Peller owns a good property that they have been wanting to develop to sell.

Alternative view I saw recently, referring to Goldblatt I think, was saying that your largest position should be the one you think you are least likely to lose money on.

Interesting we can pay reparations to Iran

As mentioned before, its really no different than a business owner maintaining most or all of his/her wealth in the business. The advantage is the business owner has complete control, but otherwise the issues are the same and it would be silly to advise a business owner to sell or take on partners unless necessary or desired.

Yes looks like you're right here. The Andrew Peller release is more clear on this. And I agree it's a good thing as the managers have skin in the game. "Andrew Peller Limited (“Andrew Peller” or the “Company”) (ADW.A / ADW.B) announced today that it has entered into a definitive arrangement agreement (the “Arrangement Agreement”) with a newly-formed and wholly-owned subsidiary (the “Purchaser”) of Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited (“Fairfax”), and Fairfax, as guarantor, in respect of a transaction (the “Transaction”) whereby the Purchaser will acquire all of the issued and outstanding Class A Non-Voting shares (the “Class A Shares”) and Class B Voting shares (the “Class B Shares”) of the Company (other than the Rollover Shares (as defined below))"

Also gives Fairfax partners who know the company best that have skin in the game.

Yes thats what I read it to be. And how I arrived at ~$65M. Ie 5.2M x $8 and 2M x $12. Everyone else gets cash.

With all due respect, those are really miniscule numbers given their market cap in the range of $15B. €6.5M is less than 0.05% over 3mths.

I feel sorry for the suckers.

No, the purchaser is a new subsidiary that has been created to acquire the company.

God i love how you can simplify thoughts into such a blunt object. #gregisrighttoday

maybe I am not reading it correctly but it sounds like John Peller is exchanging his shares for the “purchaser’s” shares. Wouldn’t that be Fairfax shares? https://ir.andrewpeller.com/news/news-details/2026/Andrew-Peller-Enters-into-Definitive-Agreement-to-be-Acquired-by-Fairfax/default.aspx In connection with the Transaction, John Peller and certain affiliates (collectively, the “Rollover Shareholders”) have entered into an equity rollover agreement with the Purchaser, pursuant to which they have agreed to exchange all 5,246,517 Class A Shares and 1,994,212 Class B Shares beneficially owned and controlled by the Rollover Shareholders (the "Rollover Shares") for shares in the capital of the Purchaser or an affiliate thereof. The Rollover Shares represent approximately 15% of the issued and outstanding Class A Shares and approximately 25% of the issued and outstanding Class B Shares

There is just a certain type of people in this world. War with Iran was every permabulls wet dream, as was closure of the strait. Kinda funny, even I’m surprised it didn’t spike higher. Part of it was Trump’s shit talking, he talked prices down.

End of the day it's as simple as making the position as big as you're personally comfortable with and holding it until you dont want to hold it anymore. Beyond that it's kind of a waste of time having hard rules and all that because the whole point of being in the market is to capitalize on opportunity.

I don’t think so. The dividend capacity is based on what regulators will allow them to dividend out without seeking additional approvals based on excess capital. Selling one equity investment like Poseidon to buy ADW doesn’t change that.

I see a lot of value investors say this, but if you're an affluent individual living off of your taxable portfolio, and you can match the S&P performance with 2% positions, this gives a lot of wiggle room for tax efficiency. The big IF is whether you could match the S&P performance, but there have been great investors that had lots of stocks. If you have all your money tied up in 3 stocks that are all sitting on gains, and you're holding them for decades, you have no choice but to sell stock, take margin on a super concentrated portfolio, or hope they pay dividends. If you pick the right 3 stocks, great. If you're taking a buy and hold approach, or buy/hold/tax loss sell the losers, you're more likely to hit some huge long term winners if you get 50 chances. Retirement accounts I think would be a much higher hurdle, since I suspect the highly concentrated portfolio with event driven type ideas probably shows the highest return if well executed.

Concentration is how you make/lose money. Diversification is how you protect it. Over time, investment management is an exercise in both. I found early on that it was often my smallest positions that outperformed the most and my largest positions that would lag. Had I just equal weighted the portfolio, I'd have done much better. I made adjustments to my approach as a result. I never equal weighted, but set a limit on my largest positions as a % of my net worth to force more money to funnel down into the smaller ideas. The hope was I'd prevent some damage if I continued to be wrong, but still give myself grace in getting better/more right over time. As such, I typically start positions at ~1% of my net worth, a full allocation would be ~3-7%, and I only have two investments at the ~10% limit which have largely grown there and weren't allocated there.

Don't own anything in a concentrated portfolio you wouldn't be comfortable owning if the market is closed for a decade. 2% position is pointless for individual positions, at that point just buy index funds.

What's the company? Something like Berkshire, Fairfax, or even CSU is easier to concentrate in due to the diversified nature of the companies. Something like Warrior Met Coal is tougher to concentrate in for obvious reasons. You need to get a few drawdowns of 50% under your belt before you really can feel comfortable concentrating. Otherwise it's gonna be tough for you. The fact you're questioning "how to do it" tells me you're going to have a hard time next market crash holding/not diversifying, etc