cubsfan

Yes - that is how the answer came off to me - and I know there is no way that is true if you read his letters and User's Manual. I was with 3 other guys that got exactly that impression from Warren's comments - and I kinda of set them straight at dinner. The numbers are really important to him. He probably could have answered the question better.

BTW - does anyone know what time the Markel meeting is today? I am assuming it is at the Marriott by Borshiems, but I have not be able to locate any details. Thanks in advance if you know.

Yea - what Howard actually said was - If you pressed him on where we are at, he would tend to think we are int he 7th inning or so, slightly on the right side swing of the pendulum. He said these thing are incredibly difficult to predict, and you should view anyone skeptically that is so sure exactly where we are at. So your comment above really agrees with his view - you can't be too sure. The Mark's presentation was great.

Go in on the south entrance, near the expressway. It's an elevated entrance, since it is somewhat on a hill. Most people don't even see it. After going to 9 meetings, this is the fast way in. Doors open at 7:00am. We get there a little before 6, with a cup of coffee. All the lines are plenty long. With this entrance, you will get in faster and directly to the auditorium. You'll get plenty good seats. If you are late, the auxillary conference & ballrooms have great audio and very comfortable seats.

Slides from the Value Investors Conference posted on Gurufocus: http://www.gurufocus.com/news/217194/francis-chou-presentation--2013-ben-graham-centre-value-investing-conference Russo, Chou, Robotti, McElvaine slides all posted.

Valeant is also influenced by Jeffrey Ubben of ValueAct Capital. ValueAct holds a board seat, was instrumental in some of their larger acquisitions, also involved in the current CEO selection - and influences the capital allocation process. VRX is ValueAct's 3rd largest holding at 14% - and continue to buy shares themselves, whilst the company executes on aggressive acquisition strategy. http://articles.marketwatch.com/2011-03-30/investing/30680551_1_valeant-shares-ubben-michael-pearson http://www.dataroma.com/m/holdings.php?m=VA

The download may be disabled, but you can still replay the sessions. It took me a minute to figure it out. Pick you session, then go to the upper right hand corner - press the arrow - and the echo player fires up. I've already watched a couple of them.

In case you're interested, I just booked a room at the Strathcona Hotel about 1 block away. Room rate is $144/night. Never stayed there, so we will see how it is. http://www.thestrathconahotel.com

I'm curious, when did Buffett mention vice stocks? Past AGMs? Don't recall this, though have heard him talk about how many letters from gamblers he gets (when talking about state lotteries). I think it's mainly Charlie, who has mentioned in several interviews that Berkshire would never invest in a casino because it's a dirty business. Buffett I think once said that he would never be in the tobacco business, but he doesn't mind owning a retailer (referencing Costco) that sells tobacco. I think they were once offered to buy a tobacco company, and even though they liked the economics, they chose against it for moral reasons. EDIT: As far as when they've said it, I'm not sure, but I'm trying to do a google search. Yes, that is correct - I think the company was called Conwood Holdings or something like that. Charlie talked about it. Said it was one of the best economic deals they ever saw, and the people were great - but they took a pass because of the business it was in.

GMCR - is $54 today. Expensive borrow. VALE - $19 - iron ore for China, etc - any hiccups here, Vale has issues Green Mountain heavily shorted, VALE not so much.

He made that comment in regards to the quality of Costco's private label products (Kirkland), starting to rival the branded products.

Farnamstreet: I was at the meeting as well. I took pages and pages of notes. But you make me look like a complete piker. Nice job - I'm sending a donation - as I like your notes way better than mine. Thanks much.

Here are some other notes posted by a few of us: http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/value-investing-hooligans!/ It was a fun meeting.

I really enjoy reading the SHLD and LUK annual letters.

"So it's a bit of an optical illusion." I never looked at it that way - so good point. It likely works better for those of us who stayed. I put 8 or 9 people into this fund, 2 bailed, as they couldn't take it. I kept hearing, no wonder he's down, he owns Sears, look at BAC being sued like crazy, what's wrong with him, etc, etc. So for them it was a permanent loss. It just so important that people understand the manager they own. Especially when times get tough.

Maybe I worded it poorly. He had to liquidate numerous positions at the worst time to meet redemptions. BRKb, GS, C, etc, etc - all liquidated - down to 5% cash from 30% cash. Those we are good investments - but he did keep his favorites. That was real havoc caused by the massive redemptions.

"Everyone seems to be making the assumption that BB will never open the fund back up to new investors. There are other funds that have stopped accepting new money when there is a lack of opportunities and then opened things back up when the circumstances warrant. What is to stop them from doing this?" Nothing at all. He wants capital that understands his strategy. The liquidation of 2011 caused a lot of havoc for the fund. He couldn't take advantage of the bargains when he had to meet redemptions on investors that came into the fund in 2010. This will give him a stable capital base for now. Having gone through the last 4 years with BB, I'm happy to see him close both of these funds to new holders, but leave it open for existing holder additions. It wasn't easy sitting through 2011, now I'm glad I did - I always have believed in BB - but he certainly tested the faithful during this period.

No I am actually just a long time suffering Cubs Fan. We never win anything, but Wrigley is a great place to drink beer. But no gaming for me!

Meeting length: Started at 10:00 - 10 minutes for business meeting. 10:10 - Charlie spoke for 20-30 minutes about the Daily Journal business and transformation. Then, roughly another 90 minutes for Q & A - lots of questions. No breaks. About right in my opinion. Meeting ended at 12:15. I'd say about 80-100 attendees. Nice forum, casual group, great feel. I've been to 5 Wesco meetings, and this felt like a Wesco event. Charlie looked great - and is sharp as ever. Charlie seemed to enjoy it a lot, and is as funny as ever. Also, Li Lu talked quite a bit about BYD. Maybe someone else can post those notes/updates.

You guys are welcome, as I've mostly been a lurker and not a poster. Happy to contribute something for once. I also asked Charlie about Gov QE and it's role in distorting the value of the economy and stock market. When should it be reduced? What should government's role be in influencing growth and what should it's involvement be - and when should it end? I thought he had a very interesting answer: It kind of goes into the "too hard" pile - no one really knows when you should stop Keynesian stimulus - obviously it can create more problems down the road. But he thought it was more important to err on the side of more to avoid a negative outcome (recession) - and try to end it a little earlier when the economy looks like it's truly revived. All in all, a very tough problem with no easy answer. Easy to be swayed by the eloquence of guys like Paul Krugman, etc - but no one really knows.

Regarding the Q & A: Asked about legal actions against rating agencies. Response was rating agencies showed very poor judgement, maybe not illegal, as they were selling Opinions, not Gurantees. But who knows what happens in front of a jury when damaging emails are presented. Could then have very serious legal issues. Pretty confident that when millions get spent to comb through years worth of emails - they'll likely come up plenty of emotional and embarrassing indictments of bad behavior. As a side remark - he couldn't understand young people leaving a historical record on FB for the world to see - bound to be something they would regret. He can't imagine if there were a public record of HIS comments over the years - and not having many he would have regretted. He sooke about investing mistakes. Example 1 - he invested 10% of his net worth ($600K) in Diversified Retailing - and regretted it very shortly. We got it wrong. "The competition was huge" and "The business consumed capital like crazy". So we immeadiately stopped investing in it and he and Warren could not wait to exit it. Example 2 - Not investing enough when you know you have a no brainer. He spoke about his investment in Bell Ridge Oil, where "the stock price was 20% of the value of the oil in the ground" and he had a chance to significantly increase his position - and he did not. Subsequently Bell Ridge was a 35X bagger. Lesson was - he was too timid. He could see not possibility for a loss - and he left many, many millions on the table. The really no brainers don't come around very often - and you make a mistake by not hitting them hard. He said - "of course you would show my portfolio to some finance professor - and he would say you are absolutely crazy, but this is how you get rich". He talked about retail - "it's too tough". Should view every retail investment in light of the Costco, Walmart, and Amazon steam roller. His view is we are over retailed anyway - too many stores. But the private label biz of Costco (Kirkland) is even threatening the dominance of Proctor and Gamble as Costco continues to roll out Kirkland products. Be careful with retail investments. "What's the ideal business?" - One where you can raise prices beyond inflation. Of course he talked about See's and how surprised he and Warren were that they could raise prices by 25 cents/pound - on an annual basis (like clockwork) - and it had no impact on sales, but drove up there profits. Said that was a great lesson for he and Warren. Now See's annual profits are 300% of what they PAID for the entire business. Without the lesson of See's it's unlikely that they would have been so aggressive with the Coca Cola investment. At this point - I stopped taking notes, since I was trying to ask a question. Very enjoyable meeting for me.

Yes, sorry, needed to get on my flight to O'hare. - Regarding the DJCO: Initially Charlie spoke about the Daily Journal and it's transformation of business model. Newspapers are not a great biz, but foreclosure boom drove DJ revenues to be a very good biz. Compared it to " The funeral parlor owner during the plague". That got some laughs. DJ transition from paper to electronic successfully, and service is highly regarded and valued by judges/lawyers as a "trusted unbiased source". DJ has been rolling up "public notice rags" cheaply, which gives it a "free call option on growth". DJ has also bought a software biz that did 5X their DJ software revenue - feels it will be a reasonable purchase, with some possibility of being something big. Compared it to "venture capital". I thought this was very interesting. This particular newspaper business has a sound base and model and is preparing for the transition to the future. All this was very interesting, but not at all why I came to the meeting. But I found it very interesting that this biz was transitioning into the legal publishing/subscription space of the Duopoly of Read Elsivor (Lexus Nexus), and another name I forgot. Charlie termed it "as a good gamble with a small chance of being a bonanza". Mentioned he and Rick Guerin have never sold any shares and don't intend to.

Wow - sorry I missed you guys. Had no idea there would be others there. I came in from Chicago - and sat next to a gent from First Pacific Advisors. Enjoyed the meeting. Got to ask Charlie a question near the end of the meeting about Gov QE support as it's a prop to the market and economy, should it be withdrawn, and when, etc, etc. Hope to meet some of you next time!

Bruce said today he has virtually no regulatory restriction on how much AIG he can own in the fund. With BAC or any bank, he does have % restrictions for regulators, so this is mirrored by his holdings. From what I heard today, he likes both AIG and BAC equally - and one shouldn't construe that he thinks any less of BAC, because the position size is smaller than AIG. He made these comments today at Columbia University event.

Last June, at the Morningstar conference in Chicago, I spoke to Fred Frankel of Fairholme. I've owned FAIRX and FAAFX for a number of years. We spoke about the tough 2011 at length. He told me they were disappointed in all the "fast" money that came flying into the fund in 2010, and then flying out in 2011. Being named Morningstar Fund Manager of the Decade attracted hot money, which created the eventual liquidation in 2011. I told him the simple solution was just to close the fund. Why hadn't they done that? He said they would consider that seriously after what happened in 2011. The rapid liquidations took them by surprise and indicated that "new" shareholders didn't quite understand the fund.