Luca

Added to EXOR

This is highly interesting: Well, my position in China has been, the Chinese economy has better future prospects for the next 20 years than almost any other big economy. That's number one. Number two, the leading companies of China are stronger and better than practically any other leading companies anywhere. And they're available a much cheaper price. So naturally I'm willing to have some China risk in the Munger portfolio. How much China risk, well that's not a scientific subject, but I don't mind whatever it is, 18% or something, whatever. Whatever's worked out in the Munger family, it's okay with me.

Added to AMR

Nice, i also added recently, really good buy.

Pretty excited!

Fairfax is greatly positioned, Berkshire is a Tank but also slower, Markel tries hard to imitate big brother BRK but cant keep up and Bruce is getting shaky in the current environment. All amazing businesses but BN is definitely on place 3/4

https://www.fairfax.ca/press-releases/fairfax-announces-conference-call-2023-10-27/

Starter in AMR

Highly interesting!

Yeah well said

Even their stock portfolio consists of value and things that are cheap and ownable now...id even sleep well with 100% in FFH but scratching my head if I should go even more overweight.

Tbh, i cant find anything that has as good a setup for the next 2-3 years as FFH. Its not only a hedge but even a compounder id gladly buy, if a recession hits, nice, if it doesnt we are also fine. Really thinking of increasing my ridiculous close to 50% position even more because if i look at everything else i can easily see how things go at least sideways or worse and FFH wont suffer under most circumstances except extreme climate events which can blow it down temporarily.

I think there are good authors on seekingalpha but also utter garbage. Website is useful for quick basic research

Interesting, and still some huge bubbles...

I think this fits well to that whole social clout Ukraine, Isreal, LGBTQ, minority rights activists whatever etc: 21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists’ hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred. 22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss Thats why its often almost impossible to discuss these things with such people because they dont want to truly discuss the topic but rather use it for their own psychological benefit. Its even true for politicians that suffer from this bias and it harms politics and society in general. You will see that people who are balanced and neutral getting immediately attacked for it (like Trump, other right wing politicians or non conforming left wing politicians). Pretty interesting.

Bought more EXOR

Are you sure about 10x earnings for GDP/Inflation growth as a general rule? It depends on interest rates, maybe 10x is fine at 5%+ rates but at 2% rates, a high quality company that is in a saturated market, has a strong moat and pays 80% of cashflows via dividend shouldnt trade at 10x. If you take 10x as your exit multiple you wont find anything that looks good because quality still trades at 20x+ because it almost pays as much as bonds right now and can continue grow those 5% earnings but bonds can not. Id say that moaty high quality businesses with little growth left but that will grow sales with inflation and keeps margin stable should still trade a bit less than risk free rate.

I end up doing relative valuations most often, estimating a conservative growth rate and conservative terminal value with an earnings or FCF multiple. If you purely only discount the cashflows, the assumption is that the business will be sold in the final year. So terminal value becomes the next question, perpetual growth rate formula IMO distorts intrinsic value to much to the upside, punching a 15x-20x multiple on it is fair most often and if you still end up with close to 10% returns with conservative assumptions it looks worth investigating. I remember a friend of mine most often adds a 10-15% margin of safety but you rarely get that nowadays. Already happy enough if the business is high quality and gets you to 10% without tuning the growth rates and exit multiple too much...

I am having a close eye on Carl Zeiss Meditec, 25x earnings still, traded at double that in 2021. Decent company but too expensive.

@Haryana Perhaps you?

Can you link the full article?

China+Financial Institution--> Lufax Holdings (0.2x book). I think thats a neglected in the corner but can be wrong. If id tell this combination to most people theyd probably start laughing

I think i explained some of the motives for the invasion of russia already, not saying it isnt vicious and brutal. I don't think so

Yes, he is making us aware they have these weapons if we provoke them further. He wont nuke us if we leave russia alone.

See, that is the problem. You are already in a world war block mindset, "rivals". Highly dangerous. We "have to have defenses" combined with "rivals" is a big threat to any country and makes putins invasion even more understandable ironically. It became obvious that US foreign policy is quite hostile, china knows it, BRICS knows it.