constructive

It is a good article, but I think it undersells the difficulty of quality investing a bit. Buffett is a vocal proponent of high quality investing, but on the other hand his returns were higher earlier in his career, when he was more influenced by Graham and less by Munger.

"If she has no interest in investing, it doesn't make any sense to expect her to have any interest after you're dead." But she would have a responsibility to herself and the children, which would impel her to take an interest in things in which she was not previously interested. If she is not interested in investment, I don't think anything more complicated than an annuity or a balanced index fund is likely to be successful. You could put it into your will, so the executor would handle exiting your investments and putting them into a single fund.

Why assume that the prospective widow would not be able to manage investing herself?

I voted no - as described your example is double counting. But I think repurchases should be included in FCF yield. Repurchasing shares is one of the more optional or "free" things a company can do with cash. The problem of double counting only occurs when you add another metric which also includes repurchases. I think the phrasing of the question contributes to the lack of consensus on the poll topic.

More VRA and MIL. It's been a tough year on the short side, but short positions are working today and may be turning the corner.

What happens in the event of a tie for the bottom spot? Use the previous quarter's vote as a tiebreaker? Glacier sure has become popular - I think this thread did its job: http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/one-of-the-greatest-investment-opportunities/

The amazing thing about Mohnish's record is that it's actually better than almost all the people he copies. He is obviously applying some excellent analysis and judgement, and would be an incredibly successful investor whether he sourced his ideas himself or from other people.

Some of the mutual fund companies mentioned here have pretty average track records, ie Weitz, Yacktman, Southeastern, Oakmark, Third Avenue, Tweedy Browne, etc. I wouldn't copy them.

I had a similar thought the other day. It seems to me that the Marxist (now mainstream) labor versus capital dichotomy is flawed. Capital allocation is also a kind of labor, and there is not really such thing as passive income (dissociating capital from allocation / control). In fact capital in the absence of allocation is useless (cf. "a fool and his money are soon parted").

Shortly after I began stockpicking in 2008, I bought some "cheap" Chinese companies in 2009 which I found using screens. I figured my ignorance about them would cancel out in the aggregate since I diversified with several small positions. And it was initially very successful. They began shooting up, often making the largest daily gain list. This was the worst thing that could happen, since it generated confirmation bias. As 2010 and 2011 wore on, the Chinese small cap space was increasingly wracked by allegations of fraud. I ignored the signs that the problems in Chinese small caps were systemic. Finally an analyst released a damning report on China Integrated Energy which used video evidence to show that their operations were fake. At that point I realized my error and exited all my positions. It was not a large dollar loss but it was embarassing and a substantial wasted opportunity cost. I don't worry that much about mistakes of omission. Maybe once I get mistakes of commission tamed it will be time to tackle those.

MBI and FTP.TO look like they have a shot at making the list this time. But WFC is lagging in the early polls. I like a good horserace.

Sold and started fresh each quarter. I voted for AAPL, GNW, DTV, LUK and cash. 5th vote was a tossup between LUKOY and FTP.TO but cash edged them out considering the debt ceiling.

You can set your more illiquid securities to liquidate last. I only have ~160% gross exposure and have never faced a margin call, but I do this just in case.

CSTR = OUTR HPM = HPQ PBN = LTS.TO STP is a short idea, I don't think anyone has expressed interest in a long position. And could you add GS (Goldman Sachs), GNW (Genworth), LUKOY (Lukoil) and MIL (MFC Industrial)? All have been discussed on the board and should get some votes. Thanks.

This is an interesting comment. Consumer Handbag Survey "Vera Bradley’s ownership and awareness follow a barbell pattern with age and income; women under 30/over 50 years old and under $50,000/over $100,000 in household income lead ownership/awareness." Brand % Ownership # Bags Per Owner Coach 68% 3.6 Vera Bradley 41% 3.2 kate spade 34% 2.2 Michael Kors 23% 2.0

I think the problem with Aeropostale is that its attempts to knock off American Eagle and Abercrombie are too obvious. Consumers are OK with companies like H&M and Old Navy selling cheap clothes because they have a point of view and aren't pretending to be something they're not.

Paul Rivett and Alex Maloney respectively. And as Vice Chairman, Munger is not the second in command at Berkshire. He sits in his office in Pasadena and talks on the phone with Buffett.

Depends on your broker. IB splits the lending proceeds with you 50/50, which is much better than other retail brokers. https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=shortableStocks&p=stockyield

Yes - the bearish thesis is that inventory is stale and needs to be marked way down. And also that the brand is faddish, without the staying power of Coach, Michael Kors, etc. There is some truth to their problems, but with this valuation and level of short interest the risk-reward appears skewed. Personally I like their style and think it could be a very good company if they get inventory under control.

I've bought a few shares of FRAN and more VRA. VRA has a huge short position - there could easily be a squeeze.

Speaking of which, publicly traded law firms do exist - in Australia. And as you might expect, they appear to be good businesses. http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Tearsheets/Financials?s=SGH:ASX http://www.slatergordon.co.uk/ http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Tearsheets/Summary?s=SHJ:ASX http://www.shine.com.au/ http://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Tearsheets/Summary?s=IMF:ASX http://www.imf.com.au/

I like it because it has a conservative, cash-heavy balance sheet, combined with a solid earnings platform. I think the balance sheet supports an asymmetric risk-return probability. Which I think is particularly important when considering the current valuation of the market. I own GLW and TPCA, and may buy FTP.TO soon, because they are similarly cash heavy. But most of my portfolio is earnings driven rather than balance sheet driven. Michael Smith's presentations and conference calls are also persuasive about the plan to increase ROE.

I certainly believe shareholders deserve to participate in control of the company and to realize value in proportion to their ownership. But as to whether they legally own the assets, transitively through ownership of the corporation - no.

"Where we have been wrong on our qualitative inputs, our returns have suffered, as with Dell, Chesapeake, Level 3, and HRT." Which I think is interesting, since I found those particular losses easy to avoid primarily on a quantitative basis.

"The easier thing to do is figure out who loses. What you really should have done in 1905 when you saw what the auto industry was going to do is you should have gone short horses." Warren Buffett