Parsad

Matt Miller, along with Joe Koster, are the tandem analysts at Chanticleer Holdings. Matt put together a terrific paper on Akita Drilling. Enjoy! Cheers!

An employee of an expert-networking firm, that provides market intelligence to hedge funds, has been charged. Cheers! http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Expertnetworking-firm-worker-apf-2131151926.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=

The one thing that I've thought about for a long time now is exactly what is CNBC's relationship with many of the people they cover. We know that Patrick Byrne was ridiculed for insinuating that he had knowledge of a specific fax machine at CNBC where information was sent directly, and we know that CNBC reporters have good relationships with certain hedge fund managers...for example Ron Insana worked for SAC Capital in some capacity from late 2008 to early 2009 after his hedge fund collapsed. Some of the journalism practices at CNBC vary markedly from other outlets, say for example Bloomberg. I would like to see the SEC investigate emails and relationships at CNBC, although I'm sure that will be difficult as they will hide behind the first amendment. I've had the same concerns with Buffett appearing so regularly on there as well. I hope Prem never shows up on there! Cheers!

Surprise, surprise! Cheers!

Shane, I find enterprise value to be a fairly useless metric. Most statistics in and of themselves are useless. The reason Fairfax has a negative enterprise value is because they have little debt and alot of cash. AIG has alot of cash, but they have a ton of debt...more than equity...thus the positive enterprise value. Now if you were going to invest in one of those two companies, and you only looked at enterprise value, you would think that AIG was in better shape relative to valuation. Not true. As well, in insurance, the quality of the underwriting and future liabilities also have to be considered. Using a single metric is absolutely futile, and even using a few together is just as useless. You really have to examine each financial statement, over multiple years, to get a good picture of what is happening to any business. Cheers!

Why is it that all roads lead to SAC in this investigation? Hmmm! Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-23/ex-sac-capital-traders-implicated-in-u-s-insider-trading-probe.html

Yes, I believe it has to do with making the end result somehow fit the prediction. ;D I think you may be asking the wrong board Elltel. Cheers!

Parsad, If the truth is to be told I do kinda envy his personal hockey rink but I think the world might be just a bit better off if the shark was swimming free and Stevie was floating in the tank. That's pretty damn funny! I also like the rink and he's probably got a pool, but the whole monument to myself thing is just so wrong on so many levels. Guys like him need that much space simply because they need somewhere to put their massive egos...it just won't fit anywhere else! Cheers!

Bringing things back to valuation, is there any monetary value in this or just protection of reputation for FFH? Don't include it in any valuation...treat it as a call option. It could be a significant monetary gain if they win, but I think it would be dragged through court for many, many years. At the very least, it would be a moral victory, but there is always the possibility of some sort of settlement if the courts back Fairfax. Cheers!

CNBC journalist Michelle Caruso-Cabrera says that there should be no insider trading rules, since the markets should allow the free movement of information...Milton Friedman told her so, ok! In that case, Warren Buffett's children should be freely allowed to trade Berkshire stock based on what he tells them about each upcoming quarter's results. What a stupid article, and I'm wondering if the recent insider trading investigations may put a damper on exactly where Cabrera and CNBC get some of their information from. I'm sure they can all start hedge funds at SAC like Ron Insana did...and then run them into the ground like he did as well. Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/40318804

The problem is that it's like the mob. The top guys are smart enough to keep a hierarchy, so you send the minions out to their own shops, not related to the main shop. When the Fed comes, they take out the feeder arms but it's very hard to take out the head honcho. Hopefully this isn't another useless investigation, but one that finds real evidence. Cheers!

I'm not completely negative on Tilson. He donates a lot of money and time to charitable causes and I think he is genuinely one of the "good guys"... I think you are probably correct. But I think a small portion of Tilson's network (Chanos, Herb Greenberg, etc) left a bit of a bad taste in the mouthes of some observers...yours truly included. Whether that taste also arises from being a Fairfax shareholder, his public persona, or past experiences, can always be debated...but it exists nonetheless and there are unfortunately quite a few people who feel the same way. A shame considering the terrific results the T2 hedge fund has produced over the past ten years. I can attest that Glenn Tongue is definitely one of the good guys, and I have nothing but respect for him and Tilson's partner in the Value Investing Congress, Dr. John Schwartz. Cheers!

It's coming up next year. I believe both Fairfax's and Overstock's trial dates are around September. Fairfax's in particular should be very, very interesting. The shape they are in now, relative to then, and the information that has come to light regarding some of the people in their suit, is quite illuminating and would be pretty effective in court. Cheers!

MrB, thank you as always for getting the info for everyone. Cheers!

No, I'm sure some journalist who used to write all these negative articles about Prem and Fairfax, will one day write a book about how brilliant he is and that he is really the heir to Buffett's mantle in insurance and leadership. Maybe Fabrice Taylor or Peter Eavis will write it! ;D I still remember the first time I met Ajit Jain in Omaha at the Berkshire AGM around 2004, and I mentioned that I was a Fairfax shareholder. We were talking about how he and Prem went to different IIT campuses, and how they met through the insurance industry, when a Wall Street suit standing nearby with a group said, "Oh yeah, Fairfax...isn't he in trouble!" Ajit barked back at the guy..."Is he IN trouble, or is he OUT of trouble!" The guy shut up. It was an awfully tough time for Prem and everyone at Fairfax. They know how many loyal shareholders stood behind them and supported them. That's why they always support our Fairfax dinner. He's always polite to everyone, even the guys who said he was a bum, but he knows...he knows who said what, and who trusted him. That's why he listens to all of you guys when you have a question. That's what a great leader does, and one who treats all his shareholders the same way he would want to be treated. Cheers!

No, the restatements were legitimate, but the media and hedge funds blew it out of proportion. They were mostly related to treatment of currency translation between subsidiaries. There was a lot of negative articles back then about the use of reinsurance as well. Many of these hedgies, Chanos being one and ICP another, accused Fairfax of using reinsurance to hide losses. But they never did. They legitimately used reinsurance to protect the company...for example, the $1.2B coverage with Swiss Re against the TIG acquisition. It was all on the up and up, but the hedgies (again, such as Chanos), Herb Greenberg, Peter Eavis (the man who wrote over 60 articles on Fairfax in a year, and then subsequently ran a tax-sheltered church), Fabrice Taylor (the man who bankrupted "Frank" magazine in less than a year...talk about laying an egg), and many others, made it look like Prem and Fairfax were cooking the books. Fairfax was only guilty of making a couple of bad acquisitions, being too leveraged and the company was too complex for most analysts and investors to fully grasp. Since then, they've turned around the acquisitions, simplified the company structure, backstopped their runoff business, strengthened their balance sheet enormously, reduced leverage dramatically, and protected shareholders from a 1 in 50 year storm. Now all they have to do is hammer these bastards in court! Cheers!

The medal of freedom is also going to Dubya's father, and former president, George H.W. Bush. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-17/buffett-to-receive-presidential-medal-of-freedom-highest-civilian-honor.html?cmpid=yhoo

Yeah, I guess the optics of that look funny. Cheers!

On a different note - It seems Obama is granting Warrent the medal of freedom - whatever that means. Would anyone here deny that Buffett sets the standard against which all other executives should be judged...both economically and ethically? He's donating the enormous pool of capital he's accumulated over his lifetime to charity. He spends considerable personal time with business students. He's encouraged other wealthy individuals to commit to donating their wealth. Many of the millionaires and billionaires he's created, have given back enormously to their community. He's inspired hundreds, if not thousands, of professional money managers who have accumulated wealth and given back. I think he's a worthy recipient...not just from what he's done, but as a role model for any good citizen. Cheers!

I don't get Buffett's rationale for the op-ed. The policymakers don't need more praise; they need more advice from a wise man. I also agree with that. Rather than him write these pieces or show up on CNBC every month, I would rather he take a more aggressive and poignant position where he forces government to listen to him before intervention is necessary. It would have been nice if someone had actually listened to him on derivatives years ago, and created a central clearing house for them, as well as put the kibosh on the more intricate structural products that were subsequently created. It would have been nice if regulators had listened to Munger years ago, and forced banks to focus solely on lending and deposits. Cheers!

Bernanke, along with Greenspan, led to the mess in the first place, so I'm not sure about the accolades Bernanke gets, but Paulson, Geithner and Bair all did a great job. Taxpayers not only will get their money back from TARP, but it looks like eventually the money for the auto companies and AIG will also be repaid. Steps taken to reform financial institutions, stabilize the banking system, enforce new SEC regulations, refinance the FDIC with injections from the banks...all are positive steps. Were there mistakes? Of course. But this isn't a perfect world and things were moving so damn fast at that time. Buffett is right, and I think he's been 100% correct through this whole debacle. He was dead on years ago when he wrote about derivatives. He was right about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He was right about the credit markets seizing. He was also correct on the effects of the trade deficit. If his reputation is fading, I would hate to see whose reputation is rising! Cheers!

Netjets will offering direct financing for commercial clients. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-17/buffett-s-berkshire-to-make-loans-for-luxury-jet-customers.html?cmpid=yhoo

I'm sure the last year and a half has resulted in Chanos retracing his historical returns from shorting! Oh, but then again, he's providing negative correlation to the indices for his institutional clients in return for those fat fees he charges. Cheers!

Ha, ha Bronco, very funny! Pittsburgh and Washington will kick your butt in the playoffs. And we'll play one of them in the finals. 40 years and no cup! This is our year baby...Vancouver all the way. Cheers!

Yup, that is notional value of out of the money puts. The actual dollar amount is nowhere near that amount. Cheers!