UK
-
Posts
1,859 -
Joined
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by UK
-
-
1 hour ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:
Eventually BTC will trade at a significantly higher enough capitalization that forward returns will be pretty minimal as holding a currency should be. That point doesn't occur until mass adoption has happened which we're only seeing the beginning of. Lots and lots of new market participants have come around to accepting BTC since 2018 and I believe more will come around.
Supply and demand.
What is your estimate of "significantly higher"? ~500 K USD if ~on par with gold? It would mean we just went from possible upside 10x to 30x in say 10 years? But even more important question: how low it go down further? Is it possible for BTC to trade below 10.000 USD at some point in the future? 1.000 usd?
-
10 minutes ago, Gregmal said:
I’ve long been of the belief gold is worthless. It’s not a speculation, it’s just useless. Spare the jewelry usage because sea shells and fake diamonds work for that too. But people have and continue to hold it religiously, many bearish value investors actually.
I think even Munger already aknowledged, that BTC is like gold. At the same time they are saying similar things about gold as of Bitcoin. Also on art etc. Since those are not productive assets, Buffett an Munger is probably right in a very long term. Even super art items have lousy long term returns vs productive things. But that does not mean one can not make some money speculating them. But as Dealraker said it is quite difficult to understant difference between 20 or 1 M USD? What is a good price for BTC?
-
-
What obvious implications possible war ending would have in terms of economies and markets? Perhaps it would be somewhat disinflationary at least in short/mid term? Also bullish for Europe?
The imminent onset of winter—coupled with fears of inflation spurred by mounting energy and food prices, the billions of dollars of weaponry already pumped into Ukraine, and the tens of thousands of casualties on both sides—has prompted talk in Washington of a potential inflection point in the war, now in its ninth month. The U.S. and its allies are pledging to continue supporting Ukraine, but top officials in Washington are beginning to wonder aloud how much more territory can be won by either side, and at what cost. Some European officials, meanwhile, are more bullish on Ukraine’s chances. “There has to be a mutual recognition that military victory, in the true sense of the word, is maybe not achievable through military means, so therefore you need to turn to other means,” Army Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the top U.S. military officer, told the Economic Club of New York on Wednesday. “There’s also an opportunity here, a window of opportunity, for negotiation.”
“It remains to be seen whether or not there’ll be a judgment made as to whether or not Ukraine is prepared to compromise with Russia,” Mr. Biden said at the White House. He added: “They’re going to both lick their wounds, decide…what they’re going to do over the winter, and decide whether or not they’re going to compromise.” Washington has signaled to Ukraine that at a minimum Kyiv needs to appear open to a negotiated solution. Mr. Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, conveyed that message to President Volodymyr Zelensky and his lieutenants in Kyiv on Nov. 4, suggesting that Kyiv would gain leverage by showing openness to negotiations, according to people familiar with the discussions. Two European diplomats briefed on the discussions said Mr. Sullivan recommended that Mr. Zelensky’s team start thinking about its realistic demands and priorities for negotiations, including a reconsideration of its stated aim for Ukraine to regain Crimea, which was annexed in 2014.
Officials in some European countries, particularly in the east and north, have said that publicly pressing for talks could hurt Ukraine’s efforts and play to Russia’s aims of dividing the alliance. “We need to talk about the cost of peace,” one northern European official said. If the war ends now, “The message the Ukrainians would get is that their fight was meaningless. The message Russia would get is that this is time to refit and to rebuild economically. No one believes [Russia] will stop until they achieve their strategic objective.”
Mr. Putin has said that Russia is open to peace talks and argued that if Washington ordered Mr. Zelensky to sit down for negotiations, Kyiv would do so. With the latest setbacks in the battlefield, Western officials have said the Kremlin appears to have backed away from its previous preconditions for talks, such as accepting Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian territory.
-
30 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:
Yep Bank of Ireland - European bank….but unlike other European banks its in a banking market that looks more like an oligopoly than the bloodbath on the continent..….where there are way too many credit institutions competing with each other for deposits/loans…..I’ve written about it in a thread that is confusingly titled AIB on here. AIB being the other Irish bank.
Thanks, nice to know. I am quite familiar with this bank and totaly agree with you. Just read another day, how they are now reflecting on how banks are "overearning" and on this oligopoly situation, which was further strenghtened after GFC debacle. I agree that in Ireland and some other countries banks are day and night vs some other EU countries.
-
-
1 hour ago, Dinar said:
c) People everywhere usually act in their own self interest. When individuals act in a righteous manner, that's a cause for celebration, when nations act this way, it is incredible. Nobody owns Ukraine anything, and it is NOT in the interest of the US or Europe to support Ukraine. This support will go away at some point, the question is how quickly? It is in the interest of Ukraine to settle things with Russia before the West pulls support.
I wish that the war would end as soon as possible. I think that it is in the interest of both Ukraine and Russia, as well as US and Europe that it ends asap. The only ones who gain are the Chinese, the Indians, and the Iranian regime.
Why do you think it is not in the interest of US or west to support Ukraine? Given ukrainian will and at this time proven ability to fight isnnt it a very good opportunity (not with you own soldiers) to push back, weaken and contain if not change Russia even more? Also, I am not sure about any obligations to Ukraine, but I thought there were some security guarantees for them after they agreed to give uo nuclear weapons? Also, if this pushback will succed (sofar it seems it could?), donnt you think it would show something to China too? I actually believe that US and west almost cannot aford not to support Ukraine and it would be a huge failure not to do this, unlees you want allow Russian regime to do as they want in Europe and China in Taiwan/south asia. I am not debating who is right or wrong, moral or not, but just from this longer term or great power strugle perspective, why would US not see this as an very good opportunity? And I agree that ending all this asap would be great, but how do can you end a war, when part of your territories are still occupied by an enemy? Maybe sollution at this stage, if you want everything to end asap, is more support (more Himars, tanks etc to Ukraine), not less? What good it will do if you stop everything for a one ore two years and provide opportunity for russian forces to regain strenght?
-
-
2 hours ago, changegonnacome said:
Your 100% right........macro forecasting 99% of the time is a waste of brain power.........but sometimes the macro environment is just kind of so crazy that the direction of travel is somewhat obvious & the warning signs so clear that I would argue you should pay attention this time..........and then put away your macro books for another 40 years............I can list them.....the COVID fiscal largess in the trillions (not billions), monetizing government debt, inflation where it is, speed & scale of rate hikes......advertising canary in the coal mine stopping chirping....etc etc.
(Also self-aware enough to realize that this is what macro guys always say, thats its blindingly obvious.....but I've some form to contrary......I ignored the marco guys in the 2010's....their arguments didn't stack up...I was long, very long). So I'm not a perma bear macro lunatic, though I sound like one
.
I also just dont like fighting the Fed.
But also not freezing here - I own what I like long term I'm fundamentally long......just bought more MSGE/HSW Thursday.........have bearish hedges sitting around a core long portfolio..........I guess if I was to sum up what I'm doing is that I'm both an owner and a seller of vol right now & cycling through each what I consider to be a bear market rally.......for example......Friday I sold SPY OTM June 2023 Calls......cash covered, not a big chunk of NAV......will materialize into cash at some point with the volatility & I'll turn around and buy more BOI. Kind of recycling short type hedges into core longs but at the margins of the portfolio....nothing of any existential size that would endanger more than a coupe of hundred bps.
By BOI you mean Bank of Ireland or is it something else?
-
43 minutes ago, Parsad said:
For the most part...no.
Not that it couldn't happen. It's just that crypto and these trading platforms in many cases avoided registration, so they never became qualified investments for most institutions, funds and accounts.
If major developed nations were stupid enough like Venezuela, then yes, this would have been more like the Financial Crisis rather than Enron. I'm also not sure the tide is now out far enough to expose everyone who has been swimming naked. There is probably still a little more fallout coming. Maybe a bunch of smaller fish than FTX...but still more to come!
It is actually a good opportunity to add blockchain companies and businesses to your portfolio if you want that exposure. The reason being is that this is probably going to force developed nations to bring all crypto and blockchain companies into full compliance and regulatory oversight over the next couple of years.
Cheers!
Thanks! Do you own or know more ideas of blockchain companies in addition to OSTK?
-
11 hours ago, Viking said:
Fairfax has certainly hit the ball out of the park with its commodity holdings. They currently total around $1.9 billion = 12.5% of total equity holdings of about $15 billion. The holdings are very diversified and certainly look well positioned to deliver significant value to Fairfax in the coming years (they stand a good chance of hitting Fairfax’s 15% return hurdle rate).
- Resolute ($600 million): Selling Resolute for +$600 million (plus $180 million CVA) in a bear market was brilliant. It will be interesting to see where they redeploy the funds when the deal closes in 1H 2023.- Stelco ($384 million): this has also turned into a home run investment. Given all the share buybacks, Fairfax has increased its ownership the past 18 months from 14% to almost 24%. And Kestenbaum is still sitting on some crazy amount of cash ($800 or $900 million?). Another great asset to own. I expect steel to do well as we get to the other side of the economy in another year or so. Like Exco, with Fairfax now owning >20%, this is now an Equity Accounted holding.
- Foran Mining ($140 million): Fairfax owns 23% of Foran, which is developing a copper mine in Canada that should begin production in a couple of years right when sales of EV’s should be taking off… and a shortage of copper develops. Most analysts are forecasting much higher prices for copper looking out a couple of years. This investment will be one to watch moving forward as it has the potential to be a another big winner for Fairfax.- Altius Minerals ($106 million): Fairfax owns 14% of this diversified royalty company with exposure to potash, iron, copper etc. Quality company… chug, chug, chug.
Fairfax also has a pretty sizeable exposure to energy:
- Exco ($195 million carrying value Dec 31). @nwoodman yes, it will be very interesting to see what EXCO resources can deliver as they work off their nat gas hedges. Fairfax’s share of profits for Exco was $44 million in Q3. Great asset to own in the current environment.
- Limited partnerships/private equity funds - investment funds managed by third party fund managers:($252.1 - oil and gas extraction- at Dec 31, 2021). @glider3834 mentioned this investment in the past.
- Ensign Energy Services ($59 million): Fairfax owns 13% of this oil and gas services company. Certainly looks well positioned.- Big Oil: OXY ($62 million) and CVX ($57 million): Fairfax was a big buyer in Q2. Will be interesting to see if they added more in Q3.
Viking, thank you for all you work and info on FFH!
-
Does any major spillover from all this (or what has to come yet) could happen in fiat world/traditional financial system? What to avoid?
-
“A lot of people have compared this to Lehman. I would compare it to Enron,” former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers said Friday in a Bloomberg TV interview. “The smartest guys in the room. Not just financial error but -- certainly from the reports -- whiffs of fraud.”
-
"According to the available information, the Russian side addressed neither the leadership of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, nor the leadership of the General Staff, nor the command of the army groups with a request to create so-called ‘green corridor’," Brigadier General Oleksiy Hromov, Deputy Chief of the Main Operational Department of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, said at a briefing, answering Ukrinform's question about the request for a "green corridor" for the invaders. Earlier today, Serhiy Khlan, a member of the Kherson Regional Council, said that the Russians were moving their equipment to the left bank of the Dnipro River, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine were destroying it.
-
-
-
“You're going to get a judicial outcry now to regulate the system and bring these guys to justice,” Chanos, the founder of hedge fund firm Chanos & Co. said. The warning comes on the day that Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder and CEO of major crypto exchange FTX.com, suggested the company could be heading for bankruptcy barring an injection of fresh capital.
Chanos has criticized a slow-moving regulatory response to crypto before, noting that it’s ultimately market cycles that dictate how authorities respond. “Asset prices are both the defense attorneys and the prosecutors” when it comes to financial frauds, he said.
While crypto itself is often characterized as an anti-government asset with some ‘defensive’ or ‘uncorrelated’ characteristics, Chanos noted that there’s a long history of alternative currency projects popping up during bull markets, or “when people’s sense of disbelief is suspended.” He said that people often focus on the downsides of fiat currency, rather than its strengths — which include a central bank backstop in times of crisis.
-
11 hours ago, Viking said:
i wonder how much windfall gains in crypto was fuelling economic growth in 2021. How does this now work in reverse? Is the crypto crash now bigger than the .com crash?
I think crypto is still substantially smaller than dotcom was, so hopefully fallout will be manageable for economies, but for sure it will cost some, just think about all this mining equipment or even advertising market. It would be very interesting to know how much of online advertising was/is crypto related.
-
4 hours ago, no_free_lunch said:
I don't want to get ahead of myself on this but very good to see. As I understand it, part of the success in Kharkov was the result of Russia fortifying Kherson region. For them to lose both is quite an embarrassment. I can see why Russia keeps talking tac nukes, it's defensive as they are revealing that they have no functioning military.
I donnt want to get ahead also, but recently they also toned down nukes speech a lot. Much more now they are talking about "national unity" etc and about "openess to negotiation". Just look: https://tass.com/politics/1534305. It it almost impossible to believe (so I still dont), or maybe China or/and India did something, after recent dirty bomb information campaign by Shoigu:)
-
47 minutes ago, Xerxes said:
There is no relation between the explosion Kerch bridge and Russian withdrawal from Kherson. Perhaps you meant the bridges on the Dnipro river being taken out via HIMARS, cutting off supply lines.
That said, I had found the news flow very confusing around the region of Kherson. Talks of mined dam upstream, potential Russian trap as it was reported by Kiev, definitely Ukrainian did not have the field day they day around the Kharkiv region back in August.
Russian workers have made progress repairing a key bridge to Crimea that was severely damaged in a blast that Moscow blamed on Ukraine, officials said, but the span is not expected to be fully operational before next year. The structure — the 12-mile Kerch Strait Bridge that connects Crimea to Russia — holds symbolic and strategic value for Moscow, serving as a key logistics link that has been vital for the Kremlin’s war effort in Ukraine. Marat Khusnullin, a Russian deputy prime minister in charge of the country’s infrastructure, said on Tuesday that the first of four replacement spans of the bridge had been installed. The full restoration will not be completed before next September, Mr. Khusnillin told President Vladimir V. Putin last week. The bridge was damaged by a vast explosion in October that sent two spans of the bridge tumbling into the water. Several other spans, including railway tracks, were severely damaged by a resulting fire. The incident dealt an embarrassing blow to the Kremlin, not just because the bridge had served as the primary supply route for Moscow’s forces fighting in southern Ukraine amid a Ukrainian counteroffensive, but also because the bridge holds deep symbolism for Mr. Putin as a pillar of his disputed claim to the Crimean Peninsula since the structure’s completion in 2018. Although one railway track and one roadway were still operational after the blast, the explosion reduced Moscow’s ability to move equipment and troops to Crimea and Ukraine’s south.
-
Now that would be quite a succesor...
-
https://www.barrons.com/articles/warren-buffett-bets-big-on-energy-51667929870
Buffett was asked at the Berkshire shareholder meeting last year about the Chevron investment and whether he was comfortable owning an oil stock given the role of fossil fuels in warming the planet. “If you expect perfection in your spouse or your friends or in company, you’re not going to find it,” Buffett responded. “Chevron is not an evil company in the least. And I have no compunction in the least about owning Chevron. And if we own the entire business, I would not feel uncomfortable about being in that business.” Buffett then asked Berkshire Vice Chairman Charlie Munger for his view, and Munger said: “Well, I agree. You can imagine two things. A young man marries into your family. He’s an English professor at, say, Swarthmore, or he works for Chevron. Which would you pick? I’d take the guy from Chevron.”
-
Billionaire Changpeng “CZ” Zhao consolidated his position atop the crypto world on Tuesday with a stunning move to take over FTX.com, the suddenly troubled firm led by his chief rival and one-time disciple, Sam Bankman-Fried. The letter of acquisition intent by Zhao’s Binance Holdings came after a bitter feud between the two men spilled into the open, with Zhao actively undermining confidence in FTX’s finances and helping spark an exodus of users from the three-year-old FTX.com exchange. A day before reaching a deal, Bankman-Fried said on Twitter that assets on FTX were “fine.” Such moves would be prohibited on Wall Street but aren’t uncommon in this rough-and-tumble corner of finance, which remains largely devoid of regulation about a decade year after its founding. Ironically, it was Bankman-Fried who was pushing for greater regulation, something that Zhao has largely opposed.
Some of FTX’s investors found out about the deal on Twitter, according to people familiar with the matter. These investors are uncertain whether they will receive any money if the agreement with Binance goes through. The list of losers in the collapse includes investors in Bankman-Fried’s exchange, valued at nearly $32 billion in a January financing. Those include blue-chip names like the SoftBank Group Corp.’s Vision Fund, the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, the Singapore wealth fund Temasek Holdings Pte., hedge fund Tiger Global Management and Lightspeed Venture Partners. Following the January fund-raising, Bankman-Fried told Bloomberg the funds would likely go toward mergers and acquisitions, with possible targets including payments businesses, NFT-centric firms and the metaverse.
-
19 minutes ago, Luca said:
Why is Fairfax so much preferred over Markel here?
Feel like Markel offers similiar attributes with even Buffett buying the stock lately...
I own Markel too and wondered why i should buy Fairfax if i can buy BRK or Markel as a smaller top notch insurer.
And, give or take, but they are still some 30 per cent cheaper.
Buffett/Berkshire - general news
in Berkshire Hathaway
Posted
Re 2. Or is still not to large to be for T or T? Interesting pick nevertheless. Some really deep tech:)?
At what time or where do you see information on Charlies interview?