mcliu

4x unlevered on land? That sounds pretty impossible..

After a very rigorous analysis of global financial markets, my prediction is that stock prices will likely fluctuate next year. ::)

I think you should try structuring your readings in a way that's enjoyable to you. Maybe try having discussions with people about what you've read. Talk with management. Attend annual meetings. Start a business and apply what you've learned. Or just take a break and come back to it after a while? I think deliberate practice can help you become above average, but by no means would it propel you to genius levels if you had no talent or inherent advantage. I mean even Buffett himself said something like nobody thinks they can do what Bill Gates does, but everyone thinks they can do what he (WB) does.

I did the exact same thing. I find it very useful. I've also been keeping an investing journal for almost a year and that has been great too. Why do you guys typically put in your investing journal? Is it to write down your investment thesis for a particular investment, or just general investment thoughts?

I think at some point you really have to value FFH based on its underlying assets rather than using the P/BV shortcut. As the company acquires majority stakes in subsidiaries that aren't marked to market, the spread between intrinsic value and book value should grow wider.

+1 So true. Really good advice.

Thanks Packer. Seems like it'll be a big money maker for FFH if the investments work.

Will they be getting a management or performance fee from 3rd party capital?

lol maybe he'll just pitch Clarke next.

What kind of borrow rates are you getting?

Why aren't they building more units to absorb all this demand? It's not like there's a shortage of land in Canada and prices are clearly way above replacement value..

On the TSX, you can buy/sell DLR which trade in both US$ (DLR.U) and sell it in C$ (DLR).

+1 so smart!

$4.3B now LOL

For the capital adequacy ratios, what do the a/b/c/d/e's stand for?

That's somewhat like saying Alexander Graham Bell didn't have a large effect on the internet. True, but someone's gotta lay the foundation or light the spark for further development. Not comparable. Bell invented a entirely new technology. Musk didnt, he just made the current tech better. But current tech is worthless if we want to travel across solar systems. We would need break throughs in physics and not just engineering.. To colonize mars we would need breakthroughs in terraforming, in building very large and sustainable spacecrafts (and the problems with oxygen etc that brings), how to protect from radiation mars and in medical knowledge how to bypass effects of much lower gravity on human body. All things Musk likely wont provide. Again I think Musk is extremely awesome, but people are overhyping this all a lot. Still curious about the things he will do though. He has suprised people before. By that logic, Bell basically invented a better telegram. However, some would call that a breakthrough. Some would also call a cheap reusable rocket a breakthrough.

I have a small position in Village Farms. The company should do well if tomato prices hold steady and they get their damaged greenhouses online.

That's somewhat like saying Alexander Graham Bell didn't have a large effect on the internet. True, but someone's gotta lay the foundation or light the spark for further development.

You're comparing apples to oranges. The two situations are completely different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PRC_administrative_divisions_by_GDP_per_capita It will be hard to get to $25,000 GDP per capita in 20 years for the whole country. Not impossible though. GDP per capita has grown by 10x over the past 20 years. You only need 3x growth in the next 20 years to get to something like $20,000. That's for 1+ billion people. There's also a big discrepancy in the growth. If you look at the top cities, they're already at over $10,000 GDP per capita and growing very quickly. If you take the ones that are above $10,000, that's still over 210 million people. I don't think looking at China as a whole makes sense. Yes, the poor parts will still be poor in 20 years, but the rich coastal parts will likely be just as rich as developed countries. And the engineers in those areas will likely be just as competent by then.

It's just a matter of time. Fifty years ago Chinese engineers can hardly design a functional toaster oven and now they're building space rovers and bullet trains. Eventually they'll be able to design better micro-chips. People forget that China's gone through a lot over the past century (multiple civil wars, WW2, cultural revolution) that's really damaged the country's institutions. It's really the past 35 years that most of the country started to move beyond farming and basic manufacturing.

Is this for his personal portfolio?

I would disagree, because while information is easily accessible, it's easily accessible for everyone. Back when Buffett was doing his special situations investing, you can actually have an informational edge if you dug deep enough. With the internet, any new techniques, situations, events are quickly distributed, so it's so much harder to get an edge or keep an edge for an extended period of time. Also, I don't think it's a bias that people think they're not as good as Buffett. In most cases, it's probably true. I don't think I'm biased when I say I can't run as fast as Usain Bolt, I think it's the same when I think that I can't invest as well as Buffett. I remember Buffett mentioned this in an interview something along the lines of "no one thinks they can do what Bill Gates does, but everyone thinks they can do what I do." I almost think the bias is that too many people think they can have an edge in the markets or beat the market like Buffett does.

Asia Standard....man. This one frustrated me for a few years. As of 2011 they had a $2b HK market cap. For this you got: ~200MM HK operating earnings from a solid RE operation $4B HK in securities yielding 190MM / yr in interest / dividends. etc etc. It was ~ .25 book. What I missed was that it ALWAYS sells for .25 book. Going back to 2006. I glanced at it recently and nothing has changed. They are doing just fine, but the stock just languishes. Price Waterhouse was the auditor. I'm 99% sure it's legit. It's a mystery. I can't figure out what I'm missing. I finally just threw in the towel. I was just looking at this today as well! Good assets, very cheap, and simple structure, but I don't ever see minority holders getting any money of this. I was looking at the bottom of the chain (Asia Standard Hotels) and they're making HKD150M+ on their hotel properties, but it's all getting stashed away in debt/equity securities. Only 1% dividend to shareholders. You've got HKD 8 billion+ of assets at market value selling for HKD 1.3 billion. These families also don't seem inclined enough to close the gap.. I don't get it. To some degree, trading on dividend yield almost makes sense if you believe that you won't get any cash out of these companies within your lifetime!

Looking at Spyglass, how are they planning to fund their capex? At $12 cash net backs and 14,500 boed production, they'll still be short $30 million after dividends right? I'm pretty new to this whole sector so I might be getting the math wrong, would like to hear your thoughts.

Well unfortunately we can't all go back and undo our worst investing mistakes of a few years ago, if we could we'd all be getting 15% CAGR returns... Well at least you agree that it's not their stock-picking that's hindering returns, but their macro hedging. As for the macro, it's only been 3 years. Fairfax started hedging in 2004 before things blew up in 2009. It may be too early to criticize their strategy. Once they close these hedges, maybe that would be an appropriate time to judge their abilities.