cubsfan

Well - that's a very good rule - one I should have adopted. Metro seemed like a simple bank model, just basic banking, seemingly nothing messy. Your point about them not understanding the UK rules is a good one. As to the integrity issue, this leadership team has little credibility left after the way they handled investor communication. I'll let others try and separate the surprises from the lies.

I have no facts, I have my strong beliefs, which I'm sure you do as well and are entitled to. Don't hold your breath is right.

Thank you Read, that is very kind of you. Investing analysis and developing keen business insights is difficult enough - when you couple it with dishonest management - it becomes really treacherous. Having spent years in the software business with extremely promotional management who felt there job was to pump the stock - and be damn the investors - I should have know better. Sometimes, you can ask all the right questions - and it just won't matter, depending on the character of management with which you are dealing. Seems every few years - I need to be truly humbled by the investing process - and I am. But you are correct - learn and don't repeat, as you refine your process. Excellent advice Read.

Hi. I've been looking a bit into that. Seems very interesting. Have you seen a decent writeup anywhere or mind to share a couple of points? What's obvious is the deposit growth, which is incredible. The culture is based on the Commerce Bank model, that Vernon Hill "invented" in America. The culture is real - I can tell you that. Both customers and employees love this company. You have 56 "stores" going to 100-130, roughly in 5-6 years. The "store model" is totally repeatable - and UK will eventually support, perhaps, 200 stores. There are structural reasons for the growth - by that I mean - the UK banking sector is being forced to shrink (I mean the legacy banks) as the UK regulators and the public's interests have not been served. (RBS is still 65% owned by gov). So some assets are being dispersed, the market is opening up, and legacy branches have closed at a fast rate due to cost cutting and poor locations. So there are significant industry tailwinds for the growth of "challenger" banks. Metro is the best of them all. It's the fastest growing bank I have ever seen in my life. Looks like Metro Bank is blowing up. Risk weighting for mortgages off - they had RWA for commercial mortgages at 50% rather than 100%. Did they forgot to read the manual for bank accounting in the UK? Looks doomed to me, or at least has to raise capital. On then surface, it still looks adequately capitalized, but I stay away from financials that can’t get their accounting right - a lot of them become doughnuts. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/british-lender-metro-banks-2018-072746266.html Dumpster fire continues - cash call: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/metro-bank-slumps-shareholder-cash-081129938.html My worst investment of last year. What a lesson for me. Buffett says you want management that is smart, energetic and honest. And the most dangerous management is smart, energetic and lacks integrity. Unfortunately, that is Metro Bank management. I bought it hook, line and sinker. I hope none of you followed me in to Metro. You can not believe anything they tell you.

Misterkrusty - I'm sure the truth hurts you - and you'll find out soon enough. Like you can't see that Comey, Rosenstein, Brennan, Clapper are criminals - give me a break..

Well, trying to get rid of an Oracle database is like trying to get rid of all your Excel/Word suites - not so easy. The conversion costs are going to be massive and take years. Oracle will still make plenty of money on license upgrades, etc. Most corporations have better things to do then spending time & money converting applications that work. I'll be real interested to see how Amazon pulls the off.

Well - I'm not sure I totally understand the DB area anymore either with SAAS in the picture. It may be that with Amazon's move away from Oracle DB, which is relatively recent, that creates some fear of Oracle's moat eroding. Never thought I'd see it happen with Oracle, but who knows.

I love this guy: --When pressed for further details on the mystery deal, Buffett says, "I'll give you a hint. It's on this planet."

I'm in favor of selling California to Mexico. I love this idea - but they need to keep the fruitcakes too!

Ha! Hey, don't confuse facts with a good anti-Trump narrative! Don't you know the purpose of fake news?

There can be no serious talk about cutting spending and doing something about the debt unless military spending cuts are #1 on the list. Military spending is out of control and needs to be slashed massively. Certainly will be easier to do if Trump gets NATO members to kick in their committed shares.

I'm there Doo!!

Oh, that is such a brilliant comment, and hits at the crux of the problem in America. So many people, (gov workers, etc) - want something for NOTHING. Where did the idea of sacrifice and work ethic go? With government - cutting spending has to happen - I live in Illinois - and there is going to be a tax revolt here one of this days. Real estate taxes are out of control, Chicago city taxes are out of control and city workers don't actually work. Pensions, etc - they all want to retire at 50 with full pension/benefits and get a second job. It's a ticking time bomb - raising taxes will be the route they take, until the public revolts and forces spending down. I hope I am out of here by then...Florida, here I come!

There has been a debate on the Berkshire board (Motley Fool) re: the BNSF deal - there are some smart guys there. Here is the best post on the issue (IMO): I love the BNSF deal. Best thing ever. Quite aside from any increase in the value of the firm and retained earnings, it returned an after tax dividend yield to BRK averaging maybe 10% in the first 10 years of ownership, depending on how you estimate the cost of the acquisition. After the purchase, former BNSF shareholders represented owned 5.765% of Berkshire shares. So, did we get good value for that dilution? Even if you assume (somewhat heroically) that Berkshire was worth 1.75 times known book on closing day when BNSF was purchased rather than the market price at 1.403 P/B on closing day, the total purchase cost was $35.95bn of intrinsic value. That includes $2.92bn of "invisible" cost for our estimate of the gap between market price and intrinsic value on closing day. $8bn of that total cost was and remains financed at low interest rates. For practical purposes that debt can be considered to be secured by the BNSF shares acquired, even though it's a general obligation. In any case, Berkshire's head office gearing has been lower than usual in recent years. It's not like they stretched. My main point: overall I think that block of financing is best viewed as part and parcel of the acquisition. So, for ~$28bn out of pocket value paid we got all the ongoing returns from BNSF less the ongoing interest cost on that debt. It's hard to estimate the value of the railway these days in a way we'd all agree on, but we can look at the cash return in hand. Dividends averaged $3.43bn/year in the first 7.88 years of ownership, net after tax in Berkshire's hands. Interest has been maybe $160m a year on the $8bn financed, for a net after tax yield of 11.72% on the ~$28bn notional acquisition cost. Yes, debt has risen at BNSF HQ, but the value of the firm has risen even more, so that's a net hidden gain on top of the cash yield, not a drag. Arguably the railroad has outperformed the average other asset at Berkshire. By extension, the modest amount of stock used to purchase a fraction of it was well spent. If the railway had been bigger it would have been sensible to issue even more stock to buy more of it. But it was only so big.

You have a good point - and that visual is enough to keep me away..

Merry Christmas to all of you ! I offer my sincere apology to ALL of you for delving into the subject of politics at all this year. I'm done for good - and promise to be a better citizen of CoBF going forward. Peace to all the great minds here.

Thanks - only good news of the day.

Doug Kass loved to put these shorts out on BRK when it was a little pricey - always got the headlines and scalped a few bucks here and there. Even got him an invitation to be the featured short bear at the Berkshire meeting on the panel with Becky Quick, etc - where he shamelessly promoted himself in front of 40,000 attendees.

There is no doubt China has been the leader in industrial espionage. The Chinese Red Army steals trade secrets every day. It's been going on for years. I have friends who work at CrowdStrike and have traced so much of the activity back to the Chinese Red Army. This hardware play is new to me though, but on the software side, it's a business for them. The US government has know about this for years, but feeling that China may actually move toward democracy, and being such a valuable trading partner, etc - we've not rocked the boat. The plan always seem to just try and block them via technology. Perhaps shining the spotlight on them with the public is the right way to go.

Fantastic - thanks for posting!

Most boards are lap dogs anyway, what the heck - might as well spread it around to the women. Good for them!

But these are perfectly good reasons for retaliatory tariffs on China - as they do not protect US producers and have been stealing US intellectual property for years, both here and in China. If Chinese IP was stolen by US companies in the USA - the US company or individuals would be prosecuted and protected by our government. We are a nation of laws and respect the rights of others. The Chinese are not. Trump is using his leverage and doing the right thing.

COB - Chairman Of the Board But I don't know what it is in Danish - ha!

Thank you, Mike. My pleasure John - thank you!

Hi. I've been looking a bit into that. Seems very interesting. Have you seen a decent writeup anywhere or mind to share a couple of points? What's obvious is the deposit growth, which is incredible. The culture is based on the Commerce Bank model, that Vernon Hill "invented" in America. The culture is real - I can tell you that. Both customers and employees love this company. You have 56 "stores" going to 100-130, roughly in 5-6 years. The "store model" is totally repeatable - and UK will eventually support, perhaps, 200 stores. There are structural reasons for the growth - by that I mean - the UK banking sector is being forced to shrink (I mean the legacy banks) as the UK regulators and the public's interests have not been served. (RBS is still 65% owned by gov). So some assets are being dispersed, the market is opening up, and legacy branches have closed at a fast rate due to cost cutting and poor locations. So there are significant industry tailwinds for the growth of "challenger" banks. Metro is the best of them all. It's the fastest growing bank I have ever seen in my life.