Parsad

Yup, he's pretty stupid and annoying. Pretty bad rug too! ;D Cheers!

I'm just saying. Are they going to be like Kynikos and build their reputation like Chanos on one big call (Enron) or is there more. It's a redundant question pertaining to the article. Cheers!

not for nothing, according to NHL.com "In a shocking trade of top prospects, the Canucks traded Hodgson, a 22-year-old who had 16 goals and 33 points despite playing less than 13 minutes a night, to the Buffalo Sabres shortly before Monday's deadline in exchange for Zack Kassian," Canucks need more grit + toughness which Kassian will bring(that usually helps in playoffs though Kassian is only 20 years old), Canucks have plenty of pretty boys like Hodgeson. You ll like Kassian. I hope so, but it's tough to replace a 20+ goal scorer who scored some big goals for us and will be a good player for years to come. If Kassian helps us win the Cup, all will be forgiven! ;D Cheers!

What the hell are my Canucks doing? They traded away top rookie Cody Hodgeson to Buffalo for nothing! They gave up a future point a game player, and two-way centre for nothing. The Canucks have frozen their fan message board, so I have to vent here! Insane! :o Cheers!

Article on Muddy Waters. One hit wonder? Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-27/muddy-waters-losing-support-in-market-as-latest-calls-prove-inconclusive.html

Article on how Buffett's tax views has garnered him a whole host of new critics. Cheers! http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyle/the-warren-buffett-haters-club-02272012.html

Here are the CNBC interviews and transcripts: Part I: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46541258/ Part II: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46541556/ Part III: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46543484/ Part IV: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46543864/ Part V: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46544371/ Part VI: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46544809/ Part VII: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46546596/ Part VIII: http://www.cnbc.com/id/46546992/ Cheers!

By the way, if ABH is defrauding minority shareholders of FBK by stealing the company for $1/share, then would it not make sense for FBK shareholders to simply tender to ABH in lieu of ABH shares? All these shareholders could have easily sold their stock for $1.30 or better in the last week in the open market if all they wanted was cash. So what is the big stink about when they could easily receive ABH shares...who are apparently stealing away a company with $70M in 4th quarter losses and barely any cash on hand. Incidentally, does this sound like a company that is worth $1.30? They need cash pretty badly! By the way, I call bullshit on (i) and (iii) below. Let's call a spade a spade...FBK's management is crappy. Mercer and Fibrek also entered into a special warrant agreement (the “Special Warrant Agreement”) pursuant to which Mercer agreed to purchase 32,320,000 special warrants of Fibrek (the “Special Warrants”) on a private placement basis, at a price of $1.00 per Special Warrant for total subscription proceeds of $32,320,000. The Special Warrants are convertible into Common Shares of Fibrek on a one-for-one basis. Proceeds from the Special Warrants are initially to be used by Fibrek to reduce the amount drawn on its ABL Credit Facility given (i) the recent costs associated with its strategic alternatives review process in response to Abitibi’s Insider Bid, (ii) the high level of RBK Pulp inventories and lower than anticipated sales which have resulted in a 5-week market shutdown of the Fairmont Mill effective February 20, 2012, and an increased need for liquidity, and (iii) capital expenditures required in connection with Fibrek’s power-generation initiatives and other growth and diversification opportunities. Cheers!

We know: FBK advised FFH management, in good faith, of their intent to execute a value enhancing acquisition. Had the acquisition proceeded ALL shareholders would have owned a smaller share of FBK that was worth more, but there would supposedly have been a diluting share issue. We know that at about the same time 1) FFH rejected a solicitation from Merc for their FBK shares at $1.00/share, & 2) ABH was negotiating for a hard lock-up with FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai. - The ABH lock-up was rushed to spike FBK’s deal & avoid dilution of the combined FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai stake in FBK. It deprived FBK shareholders of the acquisitions value enhancement, circumvented the governance we pay our senior management to do, and could not have been accomplished without the FFH explicit agreement to enter a hard lockup. The transaction was a clear minority shareholder abuse, it defrauded all shareholders except FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai, & it was abetted by FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai. You have no idea whatsoever what the "value enhancement" from the acquisition would have been. It could very well have been a terrible acquisition, and Prem/Oaktree/Pabrai are preventing such an acquisition by their lock-up with ABH. They are probably in a much better position to judge this than you are. And if they think it is bad for them, then it is probably bad for the minority shareholders as well. - There is no reason to believe that existing shareholders would have been denied the opportunity to maintain their existing proportionate ownership, or that there would not have been a subsequent share consolidation to bring the trading value of FBK’s shares > the minimum $5/share institutional threshold. If it wished, FFH could have chosen not to participate, allowed its holding to dilute, & sold consolidated shares into a stronger & more liquid market after the fact. This is pure speculation! Did FBK announce that they were considering a share consolidation? Deal with the facts please. - Give FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai the benefit of the doubt, & assume they didn’t fully realize what “it’s just business” really meant. The lock-up abets a transfer of the IV of FBK minority shareholders to ABH shareholders at below fair value. At above 66 2/3% FBK minority shareholders will be forced to accept an offer on the ABH terms of $1.00/share at best –materially below Merc’s competing price of $1.30/share. A “just business” current defraudment of $0.30/share that is not possible without the explicit lockup consent of FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai Again, explain to me how minority shareholders were deprived from realizing the full value of their shares. They could have sold millions last week at well above the $1.30 offer price. And the assumed "$0.30/share" that they have been defrauded assumes what the true value of their shares would have been correct? Then why is Mercer buying 32M warrants at only $1.00! Who is defrauding whom? - We know from the recent 51.5% tender that ABH/Steelhead/Other Affiliated have been buying FBK, & that the shares could only have been purchased at well > the $1.00 ABH offer price. Within the terms of the ABH bid, the purpose can only be to coerce a tender > 66 2/3% & perpetrate a defaudment on FBK minority shareholders. Rubbish! This is actually libel...that you are accusing ABH and Steelhead of a coordinated fraud. Whatever shares they are buying is no different than boardmember here who were buying at $1.00 or higher, speculating that this deal may get done for a little more. If ABH is buying shares to solidify their ability to close the tender, then that is one thing. To say that Steelhead and ABH are working together is libel. - We know that ABH unsuccessfully attempted to spike the Merc offer of $1.30, & that FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai publicly supported that ABH effort. FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai have a fiduciary obligation to their shareholders & investors to maximize the value of their holdings – & they cannot meet that obligation unless their opportunity gain on the ABH side of this transaction exceeds their opportunity loss on the FBK side. To take this approach, is to imply that FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai are in full agreement with the intent to defraud. “It’s just business”. I think you are confusing taking care of their shareholder interests versus taking care of everyone's interests. I believe that some level of this type of accusation was thrown at Fairfax earlier by some shareholders regarding their purchase of Odyssey. It's their responsibility to take care of their shareholder's first. Just like it's FBK's executives responsibility to take care of their shareholders as well. Do you believe selling 32M in $1.00 warrants to Mercer to be in FBK minority shareholder's interest? Or would you categorize that as "It's just business." - We know that if FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai were released from the lock-up tomorrow, & the ABH bid put on the same 50%+1 terms as the Merc bid, the ABH bid would fail. It would fail because it is below the $1.30 Merc bid, & FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai have each have the fiduciary duty to tender to the highest offer. As FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai have not spoken out, ABH has not released the lock-up, or matched the Merc $1.30 bid - we can only conclude that ABH intends to defraud by coercion, & that FFH/Oaktree/Pabrai have agreed to it. Glad you can read their minds Sharper! Cheers!

The title of the thead says "Fairfax's action on Fibrek - is it fair to the minor shareholders?". Who else are you talking about? Cheers! okay, let's say Prem loves the deal but does it mean it's fair to us? okay, let's say Prem thinks FBK management sucks (which I agree), does it mean it's fair to us? What I'm saying is that we don't know exactly what Prem thinks, and it's probably unlikely that he's supporting a specific decision where it may not be entirely beneficial to minority shareholders simply because he wants to make a buck or take over Fibrek. Let's see what he has to say about all of this in the next month or two. In the meantime, the market in the last week gave minority shareholders an opportunity to reap a price better than the best deal offered. If minority shareholders didn't take it, how is that Prem's fault or even Abitibi's fault? I think some shareholders were waiting for the deal to be bid even higher and that's a risk they decided to take. Cheers!

I think it was from Dale Carnegie that he learned to criticize generally and praise specifically. This is kind of an extension of that, it seems. No, I understand that and why he does what he does. He had no choice but to fire Sokol. I just believe he did so much for the company and Berkshire, that you don't simply heave it all away. Buffett should have made mention of what happened, why he made his (or the board`s) decision, and that they obviously had little choice in the decision. As well as indicate that the company still appreciated the years of service Sokol showed. This guy, for all intents and purpose, was the one who was going to run Berkshire when Buffett was gone. You can't just bury him! ``Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless``, just doesn`t cut it here. Cheers!

For those that may have not read the letter, and would like a little bit of a summary: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-25/berkshire-says-board-has-decided-on-buffett-s-successor-as-chief-executive.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-25/berkshire-profit-declines-30-as-gains-narrow-on-derivatives.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-25/buffett-says-he-s-on-the-prowl-for-large-acquisitions-to-build-berkshire.html http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sometimes-even-warren-buffett-gets-wrong-220255890.html http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/02/25/brian-moynihan-earns-warren-buffett-seal-of-approval/?mod=yahoo_hs Cheers!

The title of the thead says "Fairfax's action on Fibrek - is it fair to the minor shareholders?". Who else are you talking about? Cheers!

Good letter! It was more of primer than anything particularly new. I'm sure there have been alot of new shareholders added with the BNSF deal and the eventual split of the "B" shares, so he's trying to make the letter as clear as possible for ALL investors. No mention at all of Sokol or what happened. He's made it pretty clear that he's completely excluding Sokol from Berkshire, as he credits Greg Abel for the efforts at Mid-American and Jordan Hansell at Netjets. No mention of the turnaround that Sokol actually did at Netjets and the culture he built at Mid-American that now allows those two managers to receive these accolades. Cheers!

Are you guys retarded, or have you been smoking something? Let me ask you a few questions: Have you guys heard Prem say anything really on this? Do you really think Prem is going to ruin all the goodwill he's created over his working life over a $250M investment in Abitibi? Did Prem make the tender offer? Did Fairfax make the tender offer? Do you know if Prem prefers Fibrek's management or Abitibi's management? And if he does have a preference for management, could it be because he plans on holding the shares in that company for the long-term? Do any of you even know this? Do you think that Prem felt the warrants in the Mercer offer would have been dilutive to long-term shareholders? Do you think Prem thinks Fibrek will do significantly better long-term under Abitibi, rather than Mercer? Do you think that both Abitibi and Fibrek may have better access to capital if they were together, than if they were alone or if Fibrek was within Mercer? How come none of you are asking what Mohnish is up to and how he is screwing you guys? He coughed up his shares just like Prem! I know some of you are pissed because your $1.30 offer is up in the air, but you could have easily sold your shares at that price or better last week in the open market, as millions of shares traded at $1.30 or better. But I guess it's much easier to bitch about how someone else is screwing you over, when your own greed is actually the root of the problem. Is Prem really screwing the minority shareholders over, or are you guys whining because he's looking after his shareholder's interests, instead of only yours? Cheers!

The annual letters are on their site, but for those years you have to go to the annual report which has them. For the early years, I really recommend you read the entire annual report, because the business was simpler and it really is neat to see how they built it over the next decade. Cheers!

You misunderstood the press release. The warrants are redeemable by FBK if it receives a superior proposal and therefore ABH is not at all prevented from submitting a superior proposal. This isn't shark repellent - in fact its the opposite. The warrants are meant to dilute the hostile $1.00 bid so ABH can't get control of FBK through abusive actions to the minority shareholders. If ABH reduces their minimum tender from 66 2/3 to 50% and takes up the current 52% tendered, MERC will exercise the warrants and dilute ABH to 42%. ABH knows this and therefore will not take up shares now. All they can do is withdraw or bump their bid. I think we'll see the latter. Also, there's another valid reason for the warrants - FBK burned through cash defending itself against ABH. A financing makes sense. Go back to the Perpetual / Profound deal, you'll see a precedent for this: http://www.bennettjones.com/BennettJones/images/Guides/external7446.pdf Hey Jetsfan, Do you still think I misunderstood the press release? Yes I do. The warrants were meant to neutralize the oppressive lock-ups, not thwart a take-over. The BDR made an enormous error. I don't see how FBK's appeal cannot be successful. I'll admit you got lucky on your call. It was definitely a 100:1 shot. Ppphhhtt! Yeah right. The warrants were not to thwart a take-over. And the executives at FBK aren't worried about their jobs. Cheers!

Wait a sec! First it isn't Prem making the tender. Second, the bid by Resolute is there on the table. Mercer's bid is a dilutive bid, even though it looks good solely based on market price. So for any short-term shareholder who simply wants to profit from the acqusition, the Mercer bid is what appeals to you because you are squeezing the most pennies you can in the transaction...but you don't care one iota for the actual business, employees, customers, etc. For any long-term shareholder of the business, who wants to see long-term shareholder value increased while maintaining their percentage ownership, how can the Mercer bid be the one you would want to support. Everyone puts their own interests first...be it the short-term and long-term shareholders of Fibrek & Resolute, or the executives of both companies. The correct decision seems to rest solely on what your own considerations are. Cheers!

Bloomberg article on the upcoming annual letter. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-24/buffett-warts-revealed-as-billionaire-prepares-his-annual-letter.html

Well this is the thing. For the things Sardar did that I did not like, he did plenty of things that I really did like and that Lampert could have actually learned from. You have to move incredibly fast if you want to save a sinking ship, especially a big ship! Think about what Moynihan is doing at BAC, and you'll see the difference with which Lampert is operating relative to others. Moynihan is not spending a single second hesitating to sell assets and strengthen the core business. Sardar did the same thing at Steak'n Shake but on a much smaller scale. I think Eddie thought that the brand was strong enough to right itself with some tinkering, and that the depth of the economic problems wouldn't be quite as bad as they turned out. You combine those two misjudgements with the sheer speed that their competition, and the emergence of online shopping, and you have a perfect storm for Sears to battle through. It can be saved, but they have to move at warp speed, not tip-toeing into this thing. They are getting killed, not simply beaten! Cheers!

Both could use some lessons! But at least Overstock's revenues are still somewhat headed in the right direction. Cheers!

Bill Gates said many years ago, that they should also charge a fraction of a penny for emails. So as to truly quantify the cost of spam and probably significantly reduce the amount sent. I agree with both ideas! Cheers!

He's going to be using those assets to keep this thing afloat. Unless they control the quarterly losses at the domestic stores, all he'll be doing is eating up those assets. Cheers!

Jeremy Lin has trademarked "Linsanity" and is putting his degree to work. Good for him! Cheers! http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/23/news/companies/jeremy_lin_trademark/index.htm?source=cnn_bin

Contrary to what the market would have you believe from the recent run up in price, including today, Sears 4th quarter was absolutely atrocious! Eddie's been far too slow in making changes, and now they are quickly trying to make amends with the rights offering and sale of 11 stores. They need to close hundreds of Sears domestic stores and sell them. Kmart and Sears Canada aren't the problem...the U.S. Sears stores are the problem. Just a terrible quarter with tax asset and goodwill impairments, huge operating loss in domestic stores, and they look like they are still going to be burning cash for the next 2-3 quarters until they start to stabilize this thing. Book is nearly a third of what it was four years ago, so any of you still holding on...be careful! Cheers! http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1310067/000119312512073963/d304294dex991.htm