Nnejad

Your cost basis math is probably wrong. They're selling 12.18% of the company, but they only own about 35% of it in total (if memory serves). You should multiply the carrying value by the percentage of Fairfax's shares that are being sold.

Obama + Sorkin seems shareworthy to me. Thanks for posting

Well, I wrote the first version of this on my phone and lost it trying to grab the link for another site. So apologies if this sounds more curt. You keep saying Fairfax forced the firm into taking the lower bid. In reality, an irrevocable agreement means they were forced to take the bid. And you can't say the lock-up premium was beneficial and then complain about the lock-up portion of it. Another example: http://www.fairfax.ca/news/press-releases/press-release-details/2015/Fairfax-to-Acquire-Brit-PLC/default.aspx Note, Fairfax is on the other side of this situation. Are Apollo/CVC doing something wrong by irrevocably agreeing to tender their shares to Fairfax? What If I came out tomorrow with a 400 pence bid for Brit conditional upon me obtaining 50% of the shares? Is "what one thought of [my] bid really irrelevant; the fact is it existed, it was live, and it was the higher of the two bids"? Finally, a few bullets: - There are very few instances where it makes sense to sell your 25% stake cheaply to a company where you only own 18%. - The timeline of events makes it clear that Resolute conjured up the deal. - Fairfax was also the last of the shareholders to agree to the lock-up. Anyways, you're already assuming guilt and moving on to discussions of punishments/damages, and to me it just seems a bit ridiculous.

Kind of extreme to call Prem's hard share lock-up agreement as Conrad Black-esque. Here was the original release, announcing a hard lock-up at a 39% premium before any news of a Mercer bid. In fact, thinking back on it, was Mercer ever really serious when it insisted on a majority tender as a stipulation to its bid? Seems like the whole bid was just noise thrown in to potentially protect a neighbor. http://resolutefp.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=28238&item=92853

There were also some fairly sizable special dividends. To think I passed on this at $13...

I've had a google alert on Bill Gregson since his Brick turnaround... but it looks like (at these prices) this won't be the opportunity I get to partner up with him again. I expect great things, though.

Two spectrums of thought on it, but it's definitely not the conservative way to do it - a lot of those investments are hampered by somewhat onerous investment restrictions brought on by insurance regulators. And, if you look at almost any insurer in the world, you could make the argument that for every $1 I invest in their common stock, I get $3 of investments. Why subtract investments from the stock price for Buffett, and not for every other insurer? The counter-arguments to that are that Buffett and Prem are much better investors than normal, even in fixed income, so they should get more credit than normal. Also, some of those investments are outside the insurance subs. Long story short, if you are going to subtract the full amount for Buffett, it's worth considering why BRK-A is preferred to other P&C insurers valued on that basis.

If you're going to value it like that, then why not choose Fairfax? It trades for a 42% discount to the value of its investments...

You do have a point Nick. I (we) may be getting jaded by recent events that make bad press. As if on cue, the front page of the WSJ reads: "Emails Track J.P. Morgan Hire in China Gao Jue did poorly on his job interview at JP Morgan & Chase & Co., he messed up his work visa, accidentally sent a sexually explicit email to a HR employee and was described by a senior bank as 'immature, irresponsible and unreliable,' according to internal bank emails and people familiar with the matter. Yet the bank hired him, saved him during major job cuts and later was prepared to offer him another position..." Regarding Shalab, court filings can be a tricky source. Look at how the US Government is depicted in Starr International Co vs the US.

I'm kind of shocked by the general sentiment. JPM's grown tangible book value per share from $23 to $45 from 07-14 while paying fairly sizable dividends over that period. I can't see how you would say Jamie hasn't navigated the company through the storm beautifully. And when you judge each of the company's two main segments (it is a retail and investment bank) independently relative to its peers, its performance has been best in class.

Didn't they reinvest EUR 300mm in Eurobank in April? Also, I think Eurobank shares had been doing very well relative to the rights offering price.

I don't know.. I glance through that critique and think, geez, Hussman's 6.3% nominal growth assumption is way too high for today's low inflation/growth environment. I'd think that alone would more than counter-act the other arguments.

I still think Wells is one of the cheaper stocks available today... It wasn't an easy decision, but we're up to 8x pre-tax pre-provision profit now. I'm trying to buy a small community bank at less than 5x in its stead.

Sold half of my remaining Wells Fargo today :-\

I noticed a few small positions added this quarter that had recent share tender offers (see also Morgan Stanley AFP). These could have just been arbitrage plays.