Parsad

Use Fairfax as a guide. Prem took care of the business instead of buybacks, and the stock price followed. BAC needs to make sure their balance sheet can withstand almost any liquidity crisis that would hurt their peers...so is it better they buy back shares or focus on strengthening their balance sheet? My choice is the latter, and the stock price will follow over time. Buybacks should only happen once you've taken care of everything else and have excess capital, and then at that point you have to decide if your stock is cheap to intrinsic value and there is no other better alternative. You don't buy back shares just because they are cheap, but because there is no other use for the capital that would provide a better return. Currently, BAC can use all the capital they can get to quell any sort of innuendo or rumour. Look at how one comment created such a whirlwind this week. They just need to shut the critics up and give them no excuse whatsoever, and that will happen after 2012. Just like it did at Fairfax! Cheers!

Warren, to his great credit hasn't said anything publicly about the rift with Alice. Warren's instructions to Alice were to tell it all, including the personal stuff, without sugar coating anything. In this, she followed his instructions. After publication, the other women in his life disliked having the unflattering parts of his life exposed for the world to see, especially the sadness of all the circumstances about his first marriage and Susan's death. It was especially hard for them when Ms Schroeder departed from her usual objectivity and characterized the other women in Warren's life as "Daisy Mae's", meaning bimbo groupies. That was the straw that broke the back of their patience. Warren then had no choice. It was risk the wrath of one woman being scorned or having every other woman in his family and circle being mad at him. I also think the parts about his wife upset him a bit. The long-held theory was that Buffett was the womanizer and cheated on Susan, when in fact Susan had drifted apart and left Buffett. From what I heard, he did not want that to come out and his children were upset with it as well. Regardless, I thought the great aspects of the book were overshadowed by the soap opera like inferences Schroeder kept making...his crazy mother, his need to be loved, his relationship with Susan and Sue Graham. Too much psychoanalysis! Cheers!

They want to end all doubts about capital and Basel III, so they are going to just continue to build the balance sheet this year. When they apply to return capital next year, they won't have any issues. Cheers!

Not bad. Some commodities looking good, and some getting killed. Intermodal looks nice! Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-22/north-american-rail-freight-carloads-for-march-17-table-.html?cmpid=yhoo

I think you've got it exactly right Compoundinglife! If you recommended to a family member or friend on why they should read a book on Buffett, and they read this article, how compelling does your argument suddenly become to them. In effect, the article does such a disservice to the individual whose investing life and results could be dramatically improved. I think that's why it's such a shame that the individual who wrote the article, who actually spent an enviable amount of time with Buffett, walked away only with the thought of how hypocritical his advice is. Quite a tragedy actually! Maybe we've been looking at this all wrong, and Alice deserves our pity, rather than our scorn. Cheers!

Ah, that's not Alice...don't know why guys think so, or did Shalab and Kraven just create a mess! ;D Incidentally, on Alice's own blog, from her January 11th entry: "...Another reason I have not written much lately is that there isn't much I want to say about Buffett or Berkshire. At some point, people have accomplished enough in their career that they should get to rest on their laurels, meaning that it isn't appropriate to comment on every little thing they do and say. If anything important happens, I'll write about it -- probably for Bloomberg -- and post the link here..." She took her own advice for about two months and then she wrote this diatribe. My whole point was exactly what she finally got into her head for a while. At some point, the poor slob has done enough for society and others to just deserve to go out in dignity. You don't need to de-robe the guy, just because you can. You can call me a fanatic...but Buffett changed (maybe saved is a better word) my life! I get to do exactly what I want every day and if I died tomorrow, I would be a happy man. So would Prem, Francis, Tim, Mohnish, hundreds on this board and I know a couple thousand more. We owe the man...so we do take offense at times. Cheers!

Focus, lean, mean...continue to build up capital. Cheers! http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120321-709055.html

If she was as vicious as you paint her as, why would buffett's own son like her? Which son? Howard didn't like the way he was portrayed. From what I understand, both Susie Buffett and Howard Buffett didn't like the way their mother was portrayed, and that was the bulk of the reason Buffett's relationship with Alice deteriorated. As well, I spoke to a few other Buffett authors in Omaha shortly after the book came out, and they were all taken aback by some of the details in the book. You can call them fanatics too if you like, but the general tone of those around Buffett or knew the man was not positive on "The Snowball". Cheers!

1) Would you say her notoriety as an analyst increased significantly after Buffett started to solely speak to her at Berkshire meetings, or would you say it decreased? Had you heard of Alice before that? Would you say her notoriety after writing "The Snowball" increased or decreased? 2) She took a pay cut to write the book. How much do you think she made from the book, or her speaking engagements after? That's like saying Buffett took a pay cut after leaving Graham-Newman to start the Buffett Partnerships. And by the way, its got nothing to do with the so-called "fanatics". The fanatics read the book and really none of us complained much about the gossipy side of the biography. It's the stuff after the book that has really left a bad taste for many people. No one is saying Buffett isn't flawed, but Alice seems to be intent on kicking him around when he gave her such access that most other authors could only dream of. Her job was to write the biography, warts and all...not pound the man with her fists every other article. Cheers!

no, criticism is one thing, lack of insight is another. her psychology is monumentally ill-suited for someone like buffett & munger. might as well have asked cramer or some other fast money trader to have done his biography. therein lies whatever disappointment WEB or his admirers might have for Alice. Ive spoken with her on numerous occasions in person, have heard munger & his crew opine on her and her book, and i completely disagree with everything you said. id say shes similar to munger in many ways. I've heard her in person as well, and I can't agree with you at all. She is in no way similiar to Munger. I couldn't believe the stuff she was talking about in her presentation on Buffett. It started off well and then fell apart ending in answers regarding his emotional state, vices and hypocrisies. Have you ever heard Munger say anything about Buffett or his insecurities? Munger is blunt and has plenty of criticisms regarding behavior and ethics, but he doesn't stoop to innuendo or unqualified psychobabble about a person's mental state. Cheers!

He's probably seen it, but he won't respond. You'll have to keep guessing! ;D Cheers!

Buffett has made at least one truly significant, irreversible decision that has haunted him for some time. He humbly and graciously tapped on the shoulder of some completely obscure, no-name analyst at Morgan Stanley, trusted her intimately, and then made her a millionaire several times over after she wrote a book on him and gained the type of notoriety she could only dream of. I'm sure she'll be sobbing madly the day Buffett dies, and then as certain as I am that the sun will rise tomorrow, she will write another book on Buffett that will sell millions, followed by tons of interviews, articles and paid speaking engagements...all on Buffett! I've really tuned her out now...along with Mary Buffett...Doug Kass...Jim Cramer...and Snookie! Cheers!

Article that discusses the only two bank stocks we own...WFC and BAC. Cheers! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303812904577293790642621590.html?ru=yahoo&mod=yahoo_hs

Some companies you do, some you don't in North America. Fairfax does not require it right now, but maybe when they are even bigger they will...just like Berkshire. Cheers!

Sure,... at least seems so, unless Sanjeev would have taken down the payment link to purchase tickets. Here's the link: http://cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/ You buy the tickets at www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca (top of right hand column) at the PayPal link. Everyone that wants tickets, has done it this way. Hope this helps. Thanks Berkshire! Folks, We are about 90% sold now, so if you want tickets, you better get them soon. About a month left and I will probably be shutting it down the week before, because I need to finalize numbers for the Fairmont Royal York by then. Cheers!

Hi Steph, Yes, and I did receive your payment for two tickets, so you are good. Cheers!

Saw this in today's WSJ (Wall Street Explores Landlord Business, A1-2): Buffett... said in an interview on CNBC last month that he would buy up "a couple hundred thousand" single-family homes if he could do so easily, given the high yields on rental investments. I've really enjoyed this discussion. Why doesn't Home Services of America open up a property management office in each real estate office? Buffett buys the properties and has his own company manage them...as well as for others. I'm sure there is plenty of demand for quality property managers who provide good service at a reasonable price. Should be no different than the real estate franchise business. Berkshire could become the largest property manager in the U.S., and is probably one of the few companies that can scale that across the country. Also creates more recurring income for Berkshire, and keeps another service business within the company in a related industry. Cheers!

maybe you guys should get into short term trading! (j/k) Bsilly did join here, but the last time he was actually logged in was back in March 2010. Not sure if he reads as a guest still. Does anyone know if he still runs his fund? The interaction between him and Hempton was great back in the day on the old board. Cheers! Oh, if only. I was looking at my records. I first held the warrants at the beginning of September 2010, 1.5 years ago. That means I was probably looking at it even earlier. Same with WFC warrants, some of which I still hold from the first purchase. I started buying call options on BAC a year ago. LessthanIV - I too wonder what became of bsilly. I met him a few times in Toronto.

It's just the manic-depressive nature of the markets. You are just watching it in action. ECRI and Hussman are probably correct in their assessment, but missed the timing. The problem with forecasting is that you will be correct eventually...be it in a week or 70 years...the problem is the little gap in between! That's why investors should ignore the markets and focus on individual stocks only. After significant runs, start looking at obscure investments. We are back to hunting for unloved, small, distressed businesses...not companies you would find in the broader market. There were people screaming on here that a few of us were wrong, that the S&P500 was at historical highs on profit margins, that macroeconomic events were ominous, that the Fed was running a ponzi scheme...you name it. My argument was always I'm buying individual securities, not the market, so I don't give a rat's ass! But I always get more cautious when everyone else starts joining me...thus as the margin of safety diminishes relative to intrinsic value, I start pulling back. Cheers!

Doesn't this remind you guys so much of the old Fairfax days when it traded under $100...and then took off. We were all watching it like this then too. Cheers!

Investors always feel like that after a significant rally. We are in the fourth consecutive year of market gains in the U.S., so the odds are that things are significantly less cheap than they were in the past...even with better balance sheets and higher profits. We are building cash, as there is always a new opportunity around the corner. Patience is the hardest part of this game. Be patient and only buy when you feel something is truly cheap. And I would not be surprised if insider selling does increase significantly, if it hasn't already. Cheers!

Hi Hundredwaters, welcome to the board! One word of advice...if you are asking others for ideas, you are going to get burned again or be hesitant to invest. Best to check out the posts on an idea, read the quarterly and annual report for the company or investment you may be interested in, and then on things you have questions about...ask away. Anyone familiar with the investment will respond. Over time, if you do the legwork and trust your analysis, you'll always feel comfortable with a decision...and the opinions of others won't sway you either way. Cheers!

Apple is calling a conference call tomorrow to discuss its cash balance. Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/46779100

I thought a "Bollinger band" was what Al Roker had surgically implanted so he could lose weight! ;D By the way, we have plenty of cash and I did not use technicals to figure it out. Cheers!

I disagree with this statement, you are making a ton of assumptions about what will or won't happen between now and expiration. Anything can happen and will there for IMO anytime you at the mercy of time you are introducing risk. I don't disagree with the overall BAC thesis, I own warrants, common, and 2014 $10 calls. But I would never say that the warrants aren't all that risky. I think you are correct on that. Mohnish says that the warrants have a 7-8 year life...whereas equity has a 100-year life. Anything is possible in that 7-8 years period...good or bad. Cheers! Guys... come on. I said "aren't all that risky" Do this mean: a) less risky than the common b) same risk as the common c) more risky than the common If your answer isn't "c", I'm throwing a shoe. What? b)...yes, I agree...thwap! Ouch! ;D Cheers!