mysticdrew

By that logic why do people go to anything when results/summaries/presentations are released right after? People go because they think it's an experience.

It's usually a matter of preference and timing. If you think you'll have low taxes this year either due to favorable laws or low income vs lower taxes when you're retired, then go for it. If it is a large tax bill then you're not really gaining anything to doing it now and also consider if you have have the extra cash on the side to pay the tax. Personally, I would roll it to a regular IRA and deal with the tax consequences when I retire. Yes tax rates most likely would be higher in the future, but my income will likely be a lot lower and you can manage it with lower distributions that get taxed instead of a lump sum tax.

Long term trends in aging and health care. high growth in diabetes and kidney disease, increased use of dialysis. Potentially some moat around brand and scale. I can't really name another nationwide competitor.

Considering millions of people live in those areas... it's not really hype IMO

Could try Gurufocus. I believe they have each of these.

The video is from 2006 when AUM was smaller.

I'll be honest, I've never given this any thought ever. Is there any particular reason why this concerns you so much?

Yea Buffett has mentioned these examples before... especially the farm one for years.

I was hoping he'd discuss Marvell and Seagate again especially since their (Marvell especially) recent large declines. Still enjoy his letters regardless though.

Here we go

Same problem here... can't get video 1 to play with either VLC or Quicktime.

Enjoyed the article. Good to know his range of skills expanded beyond just picking stocks.

Not sure but reading the investment process on the website... it implies something formulaic with rankings of relative discounts, so my best guess is magic formulaish with some bottoms up insights mixed in from the analysts. "The firm's proprietary research is the foundation to an investment process which allows Gotham to systematically analyze the absolute and relative valuation of stocks. The Co-CIOs and their team of equity analysts employ Gotham's proprietary and analytical framework to re-rank stocks daily and adjust the rankings to incorporate changes in stock prices and new fundamental information. The long portfolio is re-ranked on a daily basis and rebalanced to weight most heavily those stocks that are priced at the largest discount to our research team's assessment of value. In general, as a company appears cheaper its weight in the portfolio increases. The short portfolio is ranked and rebalanced daily to weight short positions most heavily that sell at the largest premium to Gotham's measures of value."

I know the feeling lol

Let's say you're a beginner investor with a small portfolio.. say $10K. How would you go about using this? It's a bit unrealistic to buy 50 $200 positions (transaction fees alone would be a bit hit).

Something doesn't jive with me on the article... This line in particular when the author is contrasting their styles: "Diversification in the portfolio is a key to Pabrai’s strategy." If anything Pabrai has a concentrated strategy and Russo has much more diversification and holds many more positions. The author has a much different definition of diversification than I do. Not quite, after the 08 crisis, Pabrai publicly commented that concentrated holdings was a mistake and he'd run a diversified strategy in the future. Yea, but it was still more concentrated than most I believe with a 2% 5% 10% sizing which would result in less holdings than Russo imo. Also, he's since gone back to the 10x10 concentrated size.

Something doesn't jive with me on the article... This line in particular when the author is contrasting their styles: "Diversification in the portfolio is a key to Pabrai’s strategy." If anything Pabrai has a concentrated strategy and Russo has much more diversification and holds many more positions. The author has a much different definition of diversification than I do.

Yea it looks like a Whaaaattt? type of situation but we don't know how good of friends these people are. I've written letters for friends who did some very very bad things and it doesn't mean I condone/support what they did... it's just what you do for your good friends.

It's interesting that he said that BAC was worth $20, and AIG is about $65, yet he recommend buying AIG, given that BAC at $9 would be a better value. I'm guessing the difference is time and or catalysts. He probably thinks the us treasury sales will lead to value realization quicker.

From pops I believe. If I remember correctly, Charlie doesn't share Warren's views on passing on money to his kids.

Sign me up

I'm not sure why you are making him into a villain. Remember, business and the world works through incentives. His incentive based on what he thinks policy decisions by a continued Obama term is to shrink and lay off employees. Who are we to say he can't or shouldn't run his business based on those incentives?

My take on Taco Bell impact is that it's less to do with taking away CMG's current typical core customer and more to do with taking away it's growth potential and thus reducing it's multiple.

Sounds reasonable as I think that's that no management fee structure... similar to what pabrai and buffett did. Is the 9.1% before or after fees?

No he's not... the issue was focused on philanthropy and I guess forbes deemed him as the most philanthropic of celebrities