All Activity

Back to Whoppner! LOL!!!!!!

What a cult!!! The fact that our current best option is vastly worse than having done nothing and youre tyring to hold it up as a win just shows how deeply the cult runs. We are going to release $bns, set up a $300bn fund for them, agree to get out of dodge, give up and reverse all sanctions and it has cost us $25bn and multiple lives in exchange for absolutely nothing - and youre spinning this as a win. Wow.

I will be engineering an AI version of myself, not so different than Zuckerberg's clone. That way, the site will keep running long after I'm gone. The new AI clone will be able to scrape the site and provide you all the information you need when you do a search. It will be so amazing, that you won't be able to tell the difference between the clone and myself. You may actually be speaking to it right now. My body will become one with the COBF website. Like Fairfax and Berkshire, the site is built to last for 100 years! The new clone will have one differentiating feature that many of you will love...it will never put "Cheers!" on the end of every post!

So evidently your preferred "solution" was that of our friends and neighbors to the North and East - bury your head in the sand and ignore the problem. Thank goodness we have a President and Administration who thinks differently. But keep on exercising your right as an American to keep on criticizing!

My thinking is similar. They are unlikely to make 15% with this investment but if they establish themselves as reliable partners for retiring owners of good assets with steady returns, they might be able to do the kind of deals Buffett wished he could do but which Berkshire had become too big for. Fairfax can stay small for longer as Watsa has got the Singleton buyback religion far earlier than Buffett did, and this could be a competitive advantage for Fairfax.

Imagine how horrible you would feel if you live in Iran where your currency is worthless and you are operating on a barter economy - with no friends to speak of coming to your rescue. Here in the US, nothing has changed, except libtards losing their minds and cheering on Iran.

I dont have a better solution. Im not a middle east expert. But as an American Im very much allowed to opine on how utterly horrible and embarrassing this solution is. And the fact that this might be the best option only reiterates how incompetent the administration who painted us into this corner is.

So, first of all, Holcim had to do it. What I think is incremental is that Holcim is planning to tender for ALL of the shares. Depending on the exchange rate, around $13 per ADR, however I wonder whether the local pension funds may ask for a higher price given the incredible Q1 results, and Holcim's statements at an investor conference (according to a research report that I read) that the synergies will be higher than forecast.

Still waiting for your better idea as to how to solve the Iran problem. Monday morning quarterbacks are worth what they're paid.

We are not "paying" them is a technicality. We are releasing restricted funds back them. From their perspective they are receiving $bns of dollars for just coming to the table. The fact that we are arguing over how terrible this is and whether there are "better ideas" for a situation that we should not even be in is ridiculous. Its mind boggling incompetence.

There is some engineering required because there is Cloudflare in front of CoBF (i.e., your standard python packages will likely fail). If @Parsad permits, I can share the code but here is an example of CPNG thread I just pulled down. I added the screenshot of your chat so you see that I just did it.

I agree and as stated multiple times, would prefer the military approach. But as you know full well, politics is what drives this.

Vance expressly stated that we (the US) are not paying them. Well see. I take it you don't have any better ideas and you're back to your old self. Personally, I'd prefer the military approach and not negotiate with them at all. But if we have to negotiate, this is the way its done.

Disagree - if you are truly in the driving seat with all the leverage and your opponent is on its knees.....you start with bombing (as we did), you proceed to a blockade of the blockade and put your opponent more pressure (as we did).....and all that only ends with the nuclear deal signed with a bow on it. In any negotiation with supposed asymmetry in leverage/power and where you've spent $100bn and not insignificant chaos and disruption to create leverage.....you do not walk away with MOU, you walk away with deal. You walk away with an MOU IMO if all your leverage talk, defeated talk was bullshit and your opponent imposed a form of leverage and power over you that made you tap out with an MOU versus a deal.

We got them to the table????? Thats considered a win now? The US, the world's largest super power, attacks a country and then has to pay them - not to give anything up, just simply to come to the table. Who cares if its a lump sum or over time. We are paying a country we attacked to talk to us. Not to mention what we want to talk about is how much more we will give them to simply go back to where things were 3 months ago! Sooooo embarrassing. This is beyond capitulation. The incompetence of this administration just cant find a bottom.

@Txvestor, I get a lot of pushback on my 'New Fairfax' thesis. They went from being a sub par hitter for many years. And then out of nowhere they have become the best hitter for years. Yes, that could be ascribed to luck. But the timeframe is too long and the number of transactions is too large. My view is they became a much better hitter because they changed their approach. Also, when I look at each investment (I like to get into the weeds)... I see a very consistent theme playing out. I think the 'optimize operations' theme is not widely understood or appreciated. This is right out of the Singleton playbook (and Buffett's... he likely lifted it from Singleton). Fairfax's holdings were a mess pre-2018 (in terms of being well run companies). Fast forward to today.. the exact opposite.

We've got them to the table. You're focusing on the wrong thing entirely. Seriously doubt that they get the full proceeds in one lump sum and so what? Do you have any better ideas?

That "little bit of money" is many multiples of the restricted funds Obama released and people freaked out about. For nothing. Literally agreeing to talk. The US is paying $bns to a country we attacked to come to the table and talk. That is just embarrassing for a supposed superpower.

They're getting a little bit of money in exchange for showing a little bit of good faith. Nothing more. Again, we're at Square -0-. In order to get to Square 1, something has to give. If normal shipping resumes through the SOH, oil prices will come down and a lot of pressure on and from other countries will ease. Otherwise an MOU is an agreement to negotiate. Until now Iran has demonstrated -0- good faith. Any MOU is intended to allow them to demonstrate something more than -0- good faith if they want to survive.

They are releasing restricted $ as part of the MOU. So Iran is getting paid to negotiate for 60 days regardless of outcome or if a deal gets reached. Thats a huge amount of leverage being given up. The rest of the terms are basically the US eliminating trade restrictions and setting up a $300bn fund for going back to where things were 3 months ago. There is literally zero that the US gains vs 3 months ago but they give up a ton. Countries and going to line up to go to war with the US if they get to negotiate outcomes like this!!

Chumps like you will always declare victory in spite of the horrific devastation inflicted upon Iran. Ayatollah dead Half the IRGC leaders dead Air defenses destroyed Air Force destroyed Navy destroyed Nuclear facilities destroyed Arms manufacturing destroyed Currency worthless Inflation 100%+ Iran is in fine shape And to think we have not even hit the enforcement phase - something the coward Obama/Biden never dare touch.

While I appreciate the positivity. It's important to ask if something truly changed in their investment approach or it was a certain element called luck. The reason I mention this is, a lot of these industries ie steel, shipping, mining and so on are very cyclical. And until they sell and book those gains nothing is a surety. While the early signals are good, that's a point is worth stating. You are right in that they spent a lot of time and effort selling, fixing, restructuring and correcting prior poor capital allocation decisions. Lastly some of the equity investments they are making recently such as KW, Andrew Peller, Sleep country, Underarmour etc. cannot realistically be described as wide moat businesses. Each of us can decide what we think about them, and the most one can hope for is business synergies and better capital efficiency. Again, I like you don't profess to know exactly what their rationale is on these investments, but I think it maybe too early to say they have had some sort of revelation and have had a definitive change. Only time will tell. They are still cigar butt puffers at heart. They wasted a ton of shareholder capital during the lost decade. As we saw in one of your prior posts the difference could have been between 4% PA and double digit returns based on just their business model. Over 8-10yrs that's a more than 100% delta. Now their insurance subs underwriting, sizable float and higher interest rates are giving them a nice stream of capital, and some of their equity investments have turned out well. I think that's as much as I am prepared to say. I appreciate your optimism but wanted to push back a little on this one.

Change, [if this truly is the text] it is an MOU. We've got to start somewhere. No one is giving up any leverage and as you know, an MOU is subject to cancellation, revocation and/or amendment at any time and for any reason. There is nothing binding here, though the US recognizes that a starting point is necessary in order to get to Step 2. Not sure why anyone is reading more into this. IMO, something is better than nothing but only marginally so given who we are dealing with.

Blake, older people are often "set in their ways" as you put it because they learn from experience. Younger people often don't have the experience to learn from.

Where are the MAGA morons that have been whining for the last decade about Obama releasing 1.7 Billion? Waiting to see them twist themselves into pretzels to explain how this is called "Winning and is the "Art of the Deal". I guess they haven't posted yet because they are waiting for FAUX News to give them the spin.