73 Reds

I was not aware of this and am glad you brought it up here. If the ask price dropped down to somewhere near where it traded in 2022 it would be of interest. Otherwise, the yield is not particularly attractive [to me] at this time.

@Marco Van Basten the easiest way to reduce or defer taxes is to not incur tax consequences. With investments focus on long term capital gains and avoid short term trading. But taxes are just one example of a consistent, drip-like impediment to increasing net worth. Equal or worse is insurance - of all kinds. Be it property insurance, auto insurance or even medical insurance, I long since concluded that insuring only against major catastrophic events makes a lot of sense. Some of the rental properties I own sit on land that is as valuable, if not more valuable without the house and thus I save a lot of money by not insuring them at all. As an (until now) relatively healthy adult, I've long since only carried major medical insurance with very high deductibles. Same with auto insurance. Of course you have to be willing and able to pay for minor or routine incidents, but insurance costs have in many cases become so high that it is worth considering the extent to which you are willing to self insure.

Yeah, for me the short term bucket isn't really short term but more a "taxable" bucket, mostly private investments that generate taxable income. When it comes to other investments, paying taxes is as bad as when you discover a leak in your water pipes behind the kitchen sink or dishwasher that requires mold remediation and replacement of your entire kitchen - i.e., money lost.

All depends, mostly on your approach. Again, with very rare exceptions the only stocks (i.e., public companies) I buy are those I intend to hold forever without regard to immediate catalysts or positive stories resulting in quick gains. I think JOE best exemplifies how land holding companies are typically viewed; show us results and then we'll pay up. Much different than investing in hype, which is just not in my wheelhouse.

I see and read their plans but it looks like 100% potential at this point in time. Won't miss much by watching until the potential becomes real. Still screams "value trap" to me. In that sense, very much like JOE until recently.

I dunno, BTI and other big tobacco have been written off for decades yet they continue to pump out huge sums of profits for shareholders and they're not going away anytime soon. Cash substitute? maybe not; better than cash. - I think so.

ALCO? Reminds me of JOE from decades ago. I've been watching this company (with amusement) since living nearby way back when. Little has changed and management still sucks. Like JOE there is plenty of time to avoid this until something actually happens beyond orange groves.

I echo what John wrote. Different styles, approaches, backgrounds and skills are what make this Board unique. But don't forget about pure passive investing. Anyone who had simply dollar cost averaged into an S&P 500 Fund or the equivalent for the last 10, 20, 30 or more years would be doing quite well with little in the way of taxes and costs to interfere with investment results. Indeed, many ways to skin a cat. With apologies to anyone in the money management profession, for most folks the best approach is to stay out of your own way and ignore everything and everyone offering investment advice.

Show of hands: Who here would not accept 17% annualized growth for the next 40 years? Anyone?

@gfp Borrowers frequently do that to me. But as a lender I don't care because they've signed paperwork reflecting that the property is an investment property and as owner-occupiers they'll tend to take care of the property better than if it was simply an investment. The advantage to the borrower is not in the interest rates they will pay but being able to homestead the property.

Both she and Adam Schiff will get slaps on the wrist. But there is no double standard.

Yep. That case was a crock of sh-t from the get go. Technical liability - sure. Damages - none. Classic case of lawfare against a political opponent using forum shopping in the worst way. Hopefully those responsible for imposing the ridiculous fine get what they deserve but I won't hold my breath. This crop of democrats cannot stop embarrassing themselves.

BB was not the only poor investment decision from that time period. Yet it is hard to argue with 18%+annual BV growth over their entire history, even with those bad investments. And it is also hard to come up with another insurance company where <CR 100 is naturally "assumed" because of underwriting discipline.

And I agree with most of that. The difference is, I neither liked the prior administration's man or his policies but did not feel the need to vent about it.

<<I walk out of the house today daily to 80% Trumpers where we pretty much see eye-to-eye on things...'cept Trump!>> So should we take that to mean that you agree with most of Trump's policies but don't like the man? If so, welcome to the club.

One of the appeals of Fairfax to me is that the company still remains largely under the radar. Despite the last 5 years of performance relatively few people have even heard of them. This enables them to operate like a privately-owned family business without the outside pressures of "analysts' expectations". People who focus on all the usual valuation metrics and estimates will continue to ignore Fairfax, while those of us who want to own a piece of a business that continues to execute and grow value at nothing short of an astonishing rate will be very happy in the years (and hopefully decades) to come.

Viking, that chart fits into the category of "a picture is worth 1000 words". Truly remarkable performance of Fairfax's largest public companies. The only reason to be skeptical is if you believe the performance was due to luck rather than skill. Or if you think great management provides no moat like a certain stock analyst.

See, this is the problem. What is "Maga"? Who does it apply to? What is a "bad ally" and who made such an accusation and under what pretext? The "Greenland thing" is really a mystery. Non-supporters clearly don't understand that those who voted for Trump wanted someone who thinks - and acts- outside the box. Who cares if a few feathers are ruffled or someone's feeling are temporarily hurt? Not me. The policies I voted for are largely being addressed in ways I had hoped for. Non-supporters will get their chance next year and in 2028. Good luck with that.

Respectfully you are the one who brought up the issue and your yardstick is broken. Israel is the size of the State of New Jersey and historically has been fighting enemies on all sides. That is the correct yardstick. But when Trump dominates one's mindset yardsticks become tapeworms.

Yet Israel gets routinely bashed by Europe at the UN. Midtown Manhattan real estate is far too valuable to house a corrupt organization like the UN.

Because every citizen born and raised in Israel serves in some capacity in the Israeli military and they are all needed to protect the Mother country at all times. There is a religious exception to military service but those people are not fighting anywhere.

Traveling. But you present some good data points.

Not even close. But with a true sense of curiosity (and no direct interest in NYC) I hope he wins the mayorship. It will be truly interesting to watch what happens to the City during his tenure as mayor.

Estimate at your own peril but your words require no estimation.

Not arguing that point - which makes Sanjeev's post all the more amusing.