LC
-
Posts
6,545 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by LC
-
-
He puts the block in blockheaded.
-
8 hours ago, scorpioncapital said:
Another way is populism. Restrict economic activity or who is forced to hold government debt.
Another way is debt forgiveness- forced or voluntary.
-
I take a more sobering view.
I would argue 1-3 are closer to cash return businesses and only 4 can arguably be a reinvestment/growth story.
I own tobacco and O&G - the thesis for both is similar: the market is pricing in a faster terminal decline than I am. But there is not really growth, and I would be a seller when they are valued closer to a market multiple.
Gambling, I haven't done much research there so I'll reserve comment
China - You have compelling valuations and potential for growth with China. I am dipping my toes here (partly based on your posts!). In a future where the current political risks are overblown, it looks like a good bet. I am betting a political status quo is more preferable to open, direct hostilities.
But still, difficult to argue against other faster growing areas of the global economy that will probably continue to grow: Technology and healthcare are two that come to mind.
-
1
-
-
And Capone went to jail for tax evasion. None of this is new.
-
We need a "Trump financial news" thread. My two cents - after seeing this guy skirt the law and fleece anyone he could simply because he had power over them, for DECADES in NY...I do think it's hilarious that he is on the receiving end.
Do I with the law was transparent and principled and we all played by the same set of rules and the various systems of justice enforced it all equally? Of course. But sadly it isn't...as Trump himself fully knows. To me it looks like he played his hand too strong and it's biting him in the ass.
But don't fret - I'm sure daddy Putin or whomever will come to his aid and let the courts play out this charade another few years
-
Dipped a toe into five-cent (tencent) and couche-tard.
-
11 minutes ago, Sweet said:
It also seems odd that the FTC are going after some of the most important US companies which ironically often compete with one another in products and software.
That's fair but the counterpoint (not that I really agree) is that - if Apple, Google, Meta, Amazon, etc. are all out there competing with each other and presumably driving down profits in the name of adding consumer value, why are those stocks essentially the high flyers of the US economy?
Is it competition or simply an oligopoly?
-
-
36 minutes ago, Spooky said:
Thanks for sharing. I find it interesting that Buffett is buying back stock so heavily given his pessimistic statements about Berkshire's future prospects. Maybe one of the few companies capable of moving the needle is Berkshire itself.
10+ years ago the line was, "watch what WB does, not necessarily what he says"
-
2 hours ago, StubbleJumper said:
Wouldn't be the first time that I did something dumb in pursuit of money that I didn't really need!
I chuckled
What % are you in FFH? Purchases due to muddy waters took me over 45% I view it as having good known baseline performance over the next few years (due to the bond positioning), some potential for further outperformance (depending on the insurance market, investment performance). But I am looking to pare it down as I find investments with more upside torque.
-
2 hours ago, gfp said:
You didn't ask me, but here's a hint - just think of all those building code books around the world that require the purchase and use of hundreds of little pieces of bent metal - it's better than auto insurance!
Hah! I’ve owned Simpson on and off. Do you think it qualifies as having a long runway based on new housing stock needs?
-
The railroads are a good asset but you know, when your “moat” is the political and regulatory minefield that makes it impossible to create competitors, it makes it hard to complain about those same politicians and regulators taking their pound of flesh. You make the bed, you need to sleep in it…
-
I think it’s a lot easier to stop writing insurance policies when regulations become too onerous, versus energy where the upfront capital is much more expensive.
-
3 hours ago, dpetrescu said:
My approach is to find a couple companies that have a strong long lasting competitive advantage in a niche market - that can increase revenues and earnings at near double digit rates every year for decades and decades and is at low risk of tech disruption.
Any prospects you're comfortable sharing? Buffett in his latest letter reiterated the approach: worry less about price, buy high ROIC with long runways. Obviously hard to divine, but that's the goal.
-
Nice letter to read! Amazing they are still able to crank out 20+% operating earnings growth yoy.
Really glad he included comments on Oxy and Japan, and BNSF and BHE. Strong words on energy indeed!
-
2 minutes ago, gfp said:
I'm pretty impressed with Guy Spier lately
He's busy helping Mohnish install hardwood baseboards in his library
-
10 hours ago, nwoodman said:
A sucker for their music business.
That's kind of the only thing that attracts me to Sony as well.
I assume you think UMG is too expensive on a relative basis? UMG you get a pureplay and slightly better market positioning. I do like some of Sony's other businesses (gaming), but it's a huge conglomerate and my knowledge is cursory - I don't know what could be creeping under the surface.
-
3 hours ago, Hektor said:
They also exited StoneCo, which is (was?) a Todd Combs position. Earlier last year, he also exited One97, which own s Paytm in India. Both have similarities with Alipay/WeChatPay.
I just sold my LEAPs as well (StoneCo) two days ago. Rode that one up from ~9->15 in shares, then LEAPs from there to like 18.50. Thanks, Todd.
-
5 hours ago, Hoodlum said:
As long as we have a hard market and the share price is below intrinsic value, then I would want them to keep the TRS position in place as is. Any available cash would be best spent on expanding the insurance business. The TRS can be closed once the share price is much close to the value of Fairfax. It would be better to buy back shares during a softer market when share price is down from the peak.
Agreed. Almost every company makes the same mistake - they find themselves in super favorable business conditions, generating tons of cash. Shareholders clamoring to buyback shares. Buybacks inevitably commence.
12, 24 months later? The business landscape changes. The share price is half what it was, same with competitors/adjacents. Rather than being able to take advantage, the company spent hundreds of millions, billions, on buybacks at prices 2x above the current price.
-
1 hour ago, Viking said:
Net written premiums are estimated to have increased about 80% from $23.3 billion in 2019 to estimated $23.7 billion in 2023
BTW just a minor correction - net premiums from 13B to 23B
-
23 minutes ago, Hamburg Investor said:
FFH bought the biggest part (was it 90 per cent?) of GIG at a rather low price. And than they bought the last 10 per cent at a way too high price (that’s not what I am saying… was it at a 2.4 pb?). Than FFH revalues the 90 per cent of GIG it already owns at the higher price and consolidates GIG
Replace GIG with Fairfax stock and you just described many investors on this board. People with cost basis at 50% of today's price
-
21 hours ago, Gregmal said:
The whole “value investing is dead” rhetoric is total loser bullshit. If a company proves its ability to generate value for its owners, it will be noticed, and assuming no onerous capital structure, somebody will eventually get greedy and try to acquire it.
Agreed- what do you think old guys with liver warts do on park avenue? Spend time with their family? I don’t think so! -
41 minutes ago, This2ShallPass said:5 hours ago, LC said:
What you have unintentionally done LC (and other regulars) is give some fuel to the troll fire.
Fair enough, and I can understand the sentiment.
But I absolutely hate an echo chamber- even when the majority are correct. I'll entertain any nay-sayers as long as they have a good point to make.
Same to the point Greg was making about cowardly short sellers who don't have the sack to claim outright fraud. To me - I don't care, say whatever you want. We're all big boys who make our own buy/sell decisions. If you have a good point why a stock is overvalued, I'll hear it.
If the best short thesis is immaterial accounting treatment and articles by Brett "CFA" Horn...well, I don't find the short points compelling, and I was a buyer yesterday and today.
-
2 hours ago, Gregmal said:
I kinda have a theory too that with the spread of inequality and wealth concentration there’s a FUBU element that’s much more prevalent in what I’d call tier 1 assets. Real estate, stocks, private businesses. These are things for rich people, run by rich people, and increasingly becoming scarce. There is a finite number of places to put money. Debt is largely for suckers. Think pension funds and entities that need a return but aren’t practical about maximizing it. So real assets and things of value just continue to get sucked up. Think Hamptons parcels that were owned by normal folks, then sold for cash to middle class folks, who then got cashed out by developers, that then sold to families who put it in a trust and use it one month a year….
So my loosely held belief is that over time this adds to the bid under quality stocks. More “cash/money/currency” less “place to put it”.
Jpow is gonna give us 10% rates for 3-5 years. Crush the FUBU element you describe and reallocate some wealth to the "suckers".
Fairfax 2024
in Fairfax Financial
Posted
The million Canadian dollar question: are investors here buying, holding, or selling?
What % if your portfolio is Fairfax compared to say, 6 or 12 months ago?
Partly rhetorical - but is Fairfax as easy of a “buy” today, versus 6, 12, 24 months ago?