73 Reds

@Viking Share buybacks reduce or eliminate TRS losses. Funny how that works. BTW, I don't think you're giving BRK enough credit. IMO you're going to start to see a lot more activity in coming months and years. Greg Abel & Co. are not going to rest on their laurels. I've started buying shares again after a long hiatus of sitting on existing holdings. I'll even go out on a limb and suggest that if BRK gets cheap, it will initiate its own TRS.

Agreed. Once benefits vest, those benefits will not be cut. They can play around with the age of eligibility but otherwise it would be political suicide. Prognostications as to when social security would need to be cut are downright silly and based on someone's idea of current numbers that will likely change more than anyone can possibly predict. And the Govt. can get the money from any number of sources, some of which may not even exist now.

Viking convinced me to increase my investment in Fairfax at least ten-fold. Initially it was just a stock that looked too damn cheap. His targeted, yet detailed analysis is second to none. I don't have the patience to pore through years worth of 10Ks (yeah, blasphemy on an investment board) and his analysis cuts to the chase.

As mentioned before, the TRS was what convinced me. And of course, Viking!

Technically you're right but we paid higher tariffs than we received in return and we have been blocked from even competing in many markets. Not to mention other countries stealing us blind. We didn't do anything of consequence about it. Until now.

@dwy000 you and others should really try to frame a proper question. Otherwise, no further reply is even warranted so continue on with your TDS and the rest of us will simply observe and hope you recover.

Why? So you can continue to argue for the sake of argument? Start by removing Trump from your mindset and every discussion.

BS. They made a deal. And the UK is so far down the list of the largest US trading partners, who even cares? There's an old slogan involving forests and trees.

They just made a deal Good thing you weren't involved in negotiating it. China? Oh, that doesn't suit your narrative.

So better we do nothing and let the World keep taking advantage.

You know nothing about me and the 70+ million people who are in the same "cult". But as another poster pointed out, TDS brings out the worst in a lot of folks.

What is a "bestie"; Were you there? Personally I couldn't give a shit. Trump's been accused of raping a woman in a department store dressing room and having golden showers with Russian prostitutes. I voted for him anyway because he was far superior to the other candidate who was truly pathetic.

LOL the Democratic Party doesn't even exist anymore. And all you care about is Epstein because it's the only thing you've got. Good luck with that.

What about 4 years of Biden when nothing was promised, nothing got done but wars, inflation, millions of illegals and a move toward socialism. Or maybe none of that matters.

They'd rather focus on Epstein. Closed border - who cares? Shored up military - why do we need a military? More balanced world-wide trade - we don't believe any deals have been made. Weaken Iran and its proxies - Iran was never a threat and we're starting WWIII. Deport illegals - we need them to vote for us in the next election. Reduce inflation - the price of eggs is still too high Cut fraud and abuse - we spent too much money doing it and we hate Elon. Reduce taxes - yeah only for the wealthy. Men in women's sports - we don't believe in only two genders. Stronger law enforcement and police - we want to defund the police. Make America great - we 'd rather apologize for who we are. It's a bizarre time to be a liberal.

If the counterparty is hedged, someone is taking the opposite side of the hedge. Macro-speaking there is no free lunch.

When I first heard of the TRS it immediately screamed "sucker bet" - for any counterparties. As you suggest, no one knows Fairfax better than Prem, He also knew that he had transitioned away from some of the issues that plagued Fairfax in the 2010s. And the kicker was, if the share price had continued to fall even after the TRS was put in place, he could have openly bought even more shares of his own company until the public finally woke up. This was always a win/win for Prem and Fairfax shareholders. And one way that Fairfax beat Berkshire to the punch.

The genius of the TRS was that Prem & Co. were simply betting on themselves and they completely controlled the outcome. Far different than placing a bet on, or as a third party.

My answer echoes that of Viking. As a private business owner I have no interest in selling any business because they generate good returns and the work is enjoyable.

That's like asking successful private business owners whether they want to sell. I think the price is less important than whether they are ready to retire or move onto something else. I think if Prem and family are happy and productive managing Fairfax there really isn't a price. In any event you know Berkshire is not going to overpay so the issue is moot.

No matter what happens from here on out, the TRS was ingenious. When you consider that it has been far better than simply repurchasing shares, had the company repurchased shares in lieu of the gains thus far achieved through the TRS, any capital used to have repurchased additional shares would also not be available for allocation in the event of an overall market downdraft. As for the issue of concentration, it obviously only makes sense for folks of a similar mindset. One of my heroes, Jack Bogle, would argue for widespread diversification in the form of a broad based, low cost ETF like SPY, which is in fact perfect for those who haven't the time, interest or ability to manage investments. But like anything else, when you, a private investor, have one or more advantages in the form of knowledge, willingness to learn, or innate ability, why not use these advantages to outperform diversification? The "experts" tell you to diversify, rebalance, sell your winners LOL, etc... but for those with an advantage, does this really make sense?

In a practical world where nothing goes up in price a lot and forever, there are indeed businesses that I'd argue should never be sold - unless or until the" buy and own" thesis no longer exists. Most private business owners understand this concept better than passive equity investors.

"Never sell" never went out of vogue as long as there was no reason to sell. Folks who listen to so-called experts are destined for the same results as those experts. Thanks but not thanks.

If you separate personal baggage from policy, arguably Trump was exactly what the Country needed at exactly the right time. We didn't need a "nice guy" or even one of strong moral character - especially to take on a corrupt democratic party. If history is any guide, the "nicest, most moral" President we had in my lifetime (Jimmy Carter) proved to be one of the worst Presidents. The job may not always be suitable for nice guys or even people who don't carry a lot of baggage and have been thoroughly battle-tested - even as the result of their own wrongdoings.

Happy you find that explanation satisfactory. I don't and find it insulting to the conscience.