Parsad

Parsad, don't you give him any credit for being right about BH and CBRL? They could have gone badly but they didn't. The outcome doesn't mean the decision was correct. Just like Prem's outcome for the TIG & C&F acquisition doesn't mean that what he did was correct either. There was every possibility that they were too late once they got to Steak'n Shake...it was closer, very close to going under. The tax reassessment gave them a lifeline and some time. Sardar had to work incredibly quickly at that time to save the company...I gave him credit then, and I will still give him credit now for doing that. Why do you think the compensation structure changed? Because he was the one who would have lost everything and had nothing left to show. He wasn't the only one responsible for the turnaround...there were two other people that played a big part. But going back to the original decision to put everything into SNS, or now into CBRL...these are not good decisions from a risk management point of view. Hey I'm friends with Allan Mecham, and I would not have done that either with Berkshire, nor the correlated risks in Mohnish's portfolio before the credit crisis. Mohnish learned from that...Prem learned from C&F & TIG. Let's see if Biglari does? Cheers!

Looking for a job? ValueInv, why are you being such a dick? Can you please grow up.

+1! Cheers!

+1! Excellent post! Cheers!

Article on the Pritzker family of Chicago, and former heirs to the Marmon fortune. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-05/pritzker-billionaire-brothers-turn-from-family-feuding-to-deals.html

A market-short fund, seeded by Julian Robertson, is shutting down. More wasted capital that I, among other value managers, could have been managing instead and making actual profits, instead of this stupid thing Wall Street mistakenly terms "alpha"! ;D Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/101171604

+1! Cheers!

He switched from Pepsi to Coca-Cola! ;D Cheers!

Crazy! I remember a friend of mine telling me he thought it was undervalued, when he ran his proxy against them. I had bought some around $16, but sold at $28. I think it's more than fully valued right now. Don't know if he owns any right now! Cheers!

40 years of hindsight should prove who he is by now. It may be that investors are weighing 40 years against 1 event that accounts for 2.2% of Fairfax's assets. Where is the logic in that? This whole debate is ridiculous. The man is no idiot, and his results for the last 25 plus years has been on par or better than Berkshire. He never came up with that moniker, but if anyone is going to use it, it probably fits him better than most. Hindsight will prove that this period was a significant over-reaction to an investment that may or may not turn out well. Cheers!

However, I made the same trade as tallpop; I bet on Prem's word that the deal would get done, despite my own belief that BBRY was worth far less than what he was willing to pay, and this was a bad deal for FFH. Someone serious about wanting to maintain an ironclad reputation for deals (such as WEB) would not have gone so public with such a high-profile deal (most high profile deal in firms history) and then backed out. Bottom line: I will not make a bet solely on Prems word again. Translate that into having less "respect" for his good name, if you want. Does this reflect on Prem, the investor, or both? Perhaps they were stupid and premature to make the comments they made until closing the deal. Perhaps, investors were stupid for making this bet? I know Prem very well, and I did not make this bet, because THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES until a deal is done. You made a wager and it turned out bad...whose fault is this? Even if it was WEB, why would you make this bet solely on Buffett's word? Outside of the BBRY debacle, these are actually investor mistakes...piggy-backing instead of actually doing your own analysis and standing by it. There are lessons here, but for the investor. Cheers!

Hi John, We're quite fortunate. 95% of our partners have been with us through thick and thin. But we deal with individual familys, so they have a very different idea of a financial relationship than say fund of funds, institutions, etc. They are long-term! So, we are quite happy with the group that we have, and we look for more exactly like them. Cheers!

Parsad, you know I have the utmost respect for your money-management background, which is something you share with the great majority of the people on the board. But you also know that my background is different: I have started as a businessman and only afterwards I have looked at the stock market as a way to complement my strategy for building wealth in the long run. So, mine is the perspective of the businessman. And, according to Mr. Buffett, both perspectives, the investor’s and the businessman’s, are important, right? Now, given my background, I know personally many more businessmen than investors, money-mangers, or traders (if, of course, we exclude all the great people I have had the chance to meet on the board!). And all those businessmen that I know are alike: each one of them has built one business and runs one business: one and only one! And let me tell you that in their eyes I am the exception, the unconventional one: what are these stock market investments? They seem to ask. Why don’t you concentrate on your true business instead? And they seem to disapprove what I do. Now, it is true you will never read of them on Forbes or Fortune, because their businesses lack scale and will never grow very large, but, believe me, they otherwise have been and still are very successful! They have put everything they own in one single business and have been successful for many many years. In my world they are not the exception, they are the rule! And most of them have thrived! :) Cheers! giofranchi Gio, I am not your conventional investment manager. I'm probably the most improbable and most unconventional manager around...more like Francis Chou than Bruce Berkowitz! I have no degree, CFA, MBA or CFP. My view of the investment management business is as a businessperson, not as an investment manager. I know/knew both men...Biglari and Watsa...probably better than almost anyone on here. Watsa is no Biglari, and I can only be grateful for that. Cheers!

Most annual reports he will talk about something. Usually the letters are there to praise the managers...never himself. If you have not read the letters, then you should. From the 2003 Annual Letter: Of course, our big mistake at TIG was not recognizing that its MGA model would not work, particularly with one broker controlling 40-50% of the business. We should have shut or sold the MGA business years back and built on the much smaller individual risk underwriting operations. The losses at TIG resulted in a weakening of our financial position. You can rest assured on one thing, unless there are exceptional circumstances, we will not ‘‘give our pen’’ away. So overall, TIG Re definitely delivered the benefit that we saw in it when we made the TIG acquisition, but we cannot count TIG alongside our many very successful acquisitions, which include our Canadian companies, OdysseyRe and Crum & Forster. There are numerous other examples, but I just pulled that one because it was easiest to find. Cheers!

I think the problem is that people put far too much weight into reputation and forget that all of these people, Prem, Buffett, Obama, etc are human beings, and they will make errors from time to time, or situations don't work out the way that people hope. The grand plan since Prem got involved with the University of Waterloo, was not to eventually buy shares of Blackberry, watch the stock plummet, join the board as the business disintegrates, and then make an offer to try to save the company that eventually falls apart and look like a failure. If anyone thinks that was the grand plan, then you would be a fool! I remember two of my fund partners contacting me back in 2008 about their investments in Pabrai Funds. One was deeply concerned and wanted to pull his capital. The other partner, it was his parents who had significant capital with Mohnish, and they were uncomfortable and were considering pulling their capital. My comments and opinion to both were the same: The man hasn't suddenly become an idiot! There were some correlated investments that got hit during the worst economic crisis since 1929, and the fund is down almost 70% since the peak...there isn't a lot further to fall...yet the upside could be significant and they could recoup a large portion of their investment. The first partner sold everything at the bottom and walked away with a huge loss on his investment. The second partner told his parents what I said, and they held on to their investments, recouping all of their losses by having faith in the manager. My opinion today of Prem has not changed one iota from a year ago. The man is one of the most ethical investment managers and CEO's you will ever find, who has had a stellar LONG-TERM record of building wealth for himself and his shareholders. He has not only treated his shareholders ethically, honestly and with respect, he has earned the affections and admiration of his staff, not unlike Buffett at Berkshire. This is a relatively small investment in a company with over $30B in assets...I can only imagine the ridiculous furor that would surround him if this had actually been a huge investment. If anything, I'm more disappointed and discouraged by the small-minded, short-term memories of critical shareholders than the transgressions and debacle surrounding the BBRY investment. The reason being: I'm an investment manager for my partners. If I created such wealth for them, as Prem has for his shareholders, I would have to reconsider why I'm working for such ungrateful assholes! And the funny thing is, that type of thought would never enter Prem's mind. His goal is only to salvage the investment for these very same critical shareholders! This is the guy you are currently losing respect for! Cheers!

True, but that's actually the investor's deficiency not the managers. Prem didn't put a huge chunk of his net worth, or Fairfax's net worth, into BBRY. It's also not entirely different than someone emulating someone posting on this message board, but ended up realizing they couldn't handle as large an exposure, or mis-read what the poster was trying to say. Cheers!

If they didn't get that tax reassessment at Steak'n Shake shortly after he took over, Steak'n Shake probably would have gone to zero, and the Lion Fund might have closed because it was nearly 100% in SNS. Do you prefer that type of behavior, or Prem's behavior to take a 2.2% position in a dying industry he feels has breakup value but doesn't work out? If both were running insurance companies, and at some point Biglari will, do you think a good insurance executive writes all or nothing policies or a diverse group of non-correlated risk policies? The former has a tendency to shine brightly and then blow up! Cheers!

Can't stomach it nor rationalize it. It's hard to understand why Prem takes such big bets/risks when there seem to be less risky or more predictable situations. It's easier to follow Buffet or BBerkowitz in their thesis than Prem/FFH. I think that explains the huge disappointement expressed today here. A lot of people thought Berkowitz was an idiot not long ago for his heavy investment in financials. Very few people thought they were less risky or more predictable than even Blackberry when he made those investments, but over time as legacy issues disappeared, the investments became more likeable and investors assumed more predictable. Cheers!

Not blind or crazy, but I have strong misgivings about Prem's entanglement with the BBRY "tar baby". I'm sure Prem at this point wishes he didn't have this entanglement either. But it is what it is, and either he salvages it or it goes to zero. He's not the type to give up, if that is one thing any shareholder should have learned by now. If things go wrong, he'll pay the price as one of the largest shareholders, then learn from the mistake and move forward. But he isn't going to give up, and this is scaring a lot of shareholders who can't stomach it. Cheers!

This is quite unfair! Yes, it's a mess. Yes, it didn't pan out the way everyone expected. But Prem and Fairfax aren't making money off the backs of other shareholders, nor are their egos making them do stupid things like naming hamburger restaurants or companies after themselves. This thing got screwed up, plain and simple! It makes up 2.2% of the entire asset base, and even if you assume Fairfax funds the entire $1B convertible, then it makes up about 7% of assets. Compare that to something like CBRL, which if it went the wrong way, could have cost BH shareholders 30% of their assets! Not a fair or rational comparison at all, and something that is based purely on emotion. Cheers!

Yup, silly. But the bank robber probably can't afford a cadre of lawyers to battle the government for another ten years. Do you believe that US is cutting Cohan any slack in this case? I think Bharara would really like to throw the book at Cohen but this is the best they can do with the scant evidence they have. If they had more damning/smoking-gun type evidence (like Raj Rajaratnam), I'm sure Cohen would already be handcuffed by now, rotting in a jail cell. He's smart/lucky to have not kept any meaningful trail that would incriminate himself - hence he created such a complex web of entities that mostly existed only to shield him from personal responsibility/liability, while concomitantly funnel all the profits back to him. That's why all his underlings go to jail while his capture is elusive, at best. To think about what his actions mean for the economy and the world - it's mind boggling. A single person's machination that constantly and consistently embezzled the market participants by obtaining access to market-moving information ahead of all others and acquiring all the monetary benefit of bringing such efficiency, but unfairly. For what little he has provided to the society, he now possesses the power to obtain goods/services and channel society's hard work/labor into pleasing his whims to the tune of $9,000,000,000. Just look at his trades: Link Yup, you are 100% correct. But that $9B is a lot of money with which you can twist the courts and give yourself a decade or more before the worst happens. I think they will turn Cohen fittingly into this decade's Milken. He will fund minions while endeavouring in his philanthropic efforts. A puppet-master for many puppets to come! Cheers!

LOL! Most of you guys are my friends and very smart investors, but you're letting your emotions take over here. When I tell you guys that you shouldn't have everything in Fairfax, you don't listen. When I tell you guys to temper your expectations, you don't listen. When I tell you the man and company aren't infallible, you say he should be. Now some of you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater! I've only owned Berkshire and Fairfax 100% twice...Berkshire back in 1999/2000 and Fairfax through 2003-2005. Otherwise, as valuations go up, the holding goes down...price drops, the holding increases. Never fall in love with any one investment! Currently, I own no Berkshire other than 1 share, and Fairfax makes up about 4% of the funds. But at some point in time, that percentage will go up...it may come because of you guys letting your emotions get the better of you! Cheers!

Yup, silly. But the bank robber probably can't afford a cadre of lawyers to battle the government for another ten years. I would guess from the rampant allegations made by the government...a majority of the company's profits and Cohen's wealth came from such activities if the government is correct in the number of participants they've nailed so far. Cheers!

Expected to be announced Monday. Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/101164926

Hi Folks, We are getting to the finish line here on tickets! A maximum of 140 tickets this year. I will not be able to provide anyone with last minute dinner tickets or presentation seating this year, as we have limited space and the room will not be able to accommodate any more than that without making viewing for other patrons uncomfortable. If you plan on attending, even as a late straggler when Prem gets there, I recommend a ticket, as there will not be much standing room with Fairfax's guests there. Cheers! 2014 Fairfax Financial Shareholder’s Dinner The Fairfax Financial Shareholder’s Dinner we hold each year, is set for April 8, 2014 at the Fairmont Royal York in Toronto. We’ve always enjoyed support from Fairfax, and our last dinner was completely ridiculous, as Fairfax CEO Prem Watsa brought along 15 other executives, managers and CEO’s with him. The dinner is held in memory of JoAnn Butler, who was Prem Watsa’s executive assistant for many years. JoAnn passed away on May 12, 2009 from colon cancer, and she was instrumental in the success of our dinners each year. We raised almost $20,000 for “The Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation of Canada” in JoAnn’s memory last April. Fairfax Financial Shareholder’s Dinner Upper Canada Room - 18th Floor Tuesday April 8, 2014 Fairmont Royal York 100 Front Street West Toronto, Ontario (416)368-2511 Tickets are available directly if you scroll down the left side of the “Corner of Berkshire & Fairfax” website homepage at: www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca Prices are the same as last year. - $75 for presentation only, and free water, coffee, tea, as well as available cash bar. - $150 for dinner and presentation. We have a limit of only 140 tickets this year, as the Fairmont Royal York did not have a lot of room available. So get your tickets early, as we will definitely be sold out pretty soon. If anyone is interested in corporate sponsorship of prizes, or any donors for prizes, please contact me at [email protected]. Thanks very much!