LC

Well, for a long time Buffett didn't repurchase shares, idk if I'd call him an empire builder but I imagine he felt he could earn a better return investing rather than repurchasing. Then again I bet that's what every empire builder tells themselves. Of course Buffett happened to be right, at least for a very long time! The other difference IMO is Buffett maybe didn't want to come across as taking advantage of fellow shareholders (also why he publicly released his buyback criteria).

There's one country in history that has used nukes on people. And it ain't Iran or Israel. Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the most barbaric country of them all?

Return on carrying value is useful but it has a limit, no? At some point if we are branded as an investment outfit meant to generate alpha, we really should be relying on market value, not benefiting from low carrying values that is only available due to unique factors that may or may not be repeatable. Really I just take a look at their equity investments and think, all-else-equal and in a vacuum, would I have invested in the same company at the same valuation? I ignore any complimentary debt investments being made, and I ignore most of any proposed 'synergies' or stuff like that. So I know for that reason alone I won't align with a lot of stuff Fairfax invests in. Frankly to me that is a bit of a bonus- I as an individual cannot make control investments, I cannot simultaneously finance an upstream bond offering at 10x the equity value, I do not have an ecosystem of other controlled businesses to cross-sell and such...all these factors that Fairfax and other conglomerates can benefit from...so if 30-40% of my portfolio has that type of exposure, and I self manage the remaining 60%, it seems like a reasonable approach to me.

@SafetyinNumbers I don't have a great way to quantify that but I'd say a lumpy return that matches the index or underperforms by 1-3 percent. Phrased another way: my expectation is that any future outperformance would more likely be driven by underwriting consistency, superior fixed income investment, and perhaps re-rating of the market multiple driven by more consistency in these two areas. Equity returns I expect to have a much wider range of outcomes (investing in mattresses, stretchy clothes from dying brands, gold miners, CRE and rentals, and emerging market banks kind of gravitates towards that conclusion...). I am not banking on HW to knock it out of the park with those equity investments, but I'd love to be proven wrong!

My base case is a step-up in underwriting and middle-of-the-pack equity/investment returns. I don't see whatever it is that Prem et al see in Underarmor, Mattresses, and KW. That said I also would not have jumped into the mining business but Orla has done well. And there is stuff I do align with: Atlas Corp/Poseidon for instance (these guys took me under but hey what are ya gonna do) . And on the bond/fixed side I like what I see. That's essentially my 100ft view of why I am still holding here.

I'm not as bullish on Fairfax's equity picks but over 40 years I agree w Viking the share price is a good indicator of the performance of the underlying earnings streams (investments, insurance). Hard to argue that, IMO.

Sure, when you line up their accomplishments side-by-side of course it's going to look like Obama is 100x the POTUS that Stumpy is...but what you don't realize is that Obama was black and that makes people uNcOmFoRtAbLe!

So long story short is that Iran will continue to promise not to develop nuclear weapons?? The ONE THING that matters, Trump couldn't deliver. God damn it's amazing how this US administration royally fucked this up. What a bunch of losers.

I don't understand the reasoning here. Take this Peller deal, if the deal never materialized, wouldn't the insurance subs now have $4b + $400MM to dividend up to holdco?

Sold some 1 month adobe puts , 181 breakeven. Meh?

With a little bit of retrospect I think around when CM passed we may have known the elephant gun was going to remain loaded...I don't think we can fault the guy for not taking a shot, honestly even having him pull that Apple investment out of his cap at 85 years old, is just the cherry on top of his career. And kind of bad luck that the next big sell-off occurred in the space he consciously avoided (software), so he didn't even get a last bite of the apple. What Greg does now is going to be interesting to watch, already it looks like signs of a different management style.

Exactly - the same opportunity (and conflict) exists: CSU is down ~50% from its highs...should management prioritize share repurchases? M&A? A mix of both? Market declines present management with these opportunities. There are benefits to both approaches: -buying out weak hands builds a more long term shareholder base -expanding at low valuations benefits the whole shareholder base

I agree - I was just theorizing on an "imperfect storm" of what happens if we just consider the downside. In reality there is also opportunity created when markets sell off, which I would hope management would look to take advantage of.

@SafetyinNumbersI think your question is essentially, how does BV (ie earnings) not grow? What would we see? An "imperfect storm" of: 1) CRs approaching 100 depending on the extent of a softening market, i.e. if the global insurance market across lines softens holistically, plus if Fairfax gets hit with cats which they are not able to reprice. 2) Equity investments: if we see the large investment gains retreat (eg losses at Eurobank, for instance) and/or write offs on some of their recent investments (sleep country) 3) Poorly times fixed income: essentially if Brian Bradstreet is shown to be human after all, i.e. locks in duration today and we see some spike in rates ; or if rates drop and the FI portfolio nor the equity portfolio respond as expected. IMO these are the 3 big buckets of potential earnings - so in order to have lean years we would need to see weakness across all these.

IMO pushback is very important. So we should all be very grateful to @bearprowler6 as he may be the most important poster in this thread. My opinion: There could very well be 5-7 lean years ahead of us. The future is uncertain and we cannot control the share price, outside of buybacks which are a competing use of capital. More important is how will the various businesses perform over the next 5-7 years. This is a bit more visible. I think there is some more stability in the fixed income portfolio and in the insurance businesses, versus the equity portfolio. The equity portfolio I think is where Prem et al are the most volatile. I don't agree with all their investments, but I think they have learned some lessons over the past 10 years and I am more comfortable there than during the years of index shorting.

The TRS does provide some incentive to repurchase, in an attempt to buoy the share price so TRS losses don’t flow thru earnings. Practically I think it gives mgmt a hurdle rate, to compare other competing investment ideas.

At least he's skipping the torture part and going straight to getting your kids killed: Trump Signed An Executive Order Directing The CDC To Cut Recommended Childhood Vaccines From 17 To 11. Moving Flu, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Rotavirus, RSV, And Some Meningitis Shots To 'High-Risk Only,' After A Previous Attempt Was Blocked In Court

Obama didn't shower Iran with money - he released Iran's sanctioned funds in exchange for nuclear limitations - funds the US military used for 37 years. And that's exactly what Trump is doing...oh and Obama got a good deal - a 30 year t-bill in 1979 yielded ~10%, he paid 4% to Iran. Nice! I wish we could securitize the benny hill music royalty payments whenever Trump and his MAGA cronies convince you guys of his shtick....that might shore up those SOH toll payments! Maybe even that rumored 300B Iran fund? Oh and btw, Iran only has ~120B in sanctioned funds globally, where is the rest coming from? Wait, is that Baron and Jared I see walking in? Quick- lock the petty cash drawer!

You're right - he's a cockroach, just the way his parents hatched him

Today and with a 10 year timeframe? Berkshire but I would rebalance on some correction event. Long term S&P will eat even Buffett's masterpiece.

Man it must suck for MAGA, having to constantly defend a rapist and keep telling themselves it never happened. Remember: it's your eyes that are lying to you all, not the dear leader! MAGA is gonna need some collective therapy after getting out of this abusive relationship. Too bad daddy trump gutted medicare/medicaid and they don't have enough money to pay for it out of pocket anyways. Might be a good time to buy booze stocks.

Yeah I think this is the reason for share price action. They are monetizing other assets (Poseidon recently), and it will be curious to see how they continue to allocate capital in this environment. This will be a good test period for management.

This makes me laugh… Trump is the least trustworthy counterparty I can think of. Hell, I’d rather do deals with crackheads and zealots.

I remember one time before a party I was procuring a little charlie at parc lafonatine in maybe...2005?...even the junkies queued up nice and orderly, no different than waiting on line at the grocery store!

Law enforcement told them to back up, stand down. They didn't listen. What happened to the MAGA anti-george floyd shitck of obeying LEOs at all times? Benny Hill is back on the radio, boys! The disrespect starts and ends right at the top: