Parsad

If and when ECRI's call (http://www.businesscycle.com/news_events/news_details/5065) materializes, it will be interesting to see what bullets we try to conjure up - Dalio's interview back in October at the Economist's Buttonwood conference seemed to indicate the next downturn may not be pretty.... There truly isn't much left that would assist the economy and not cause any future problems. QE3 would create problems going forward. I think we'll have a better idea of how things are as the housing inventory shrinks. If prices don't start to rebound, and unemployment doesn't rebound, then it could be a slow slog. So far, things look quite positive, but China is slowing and we will have to wait and see exactly how they stop the hard landing. Cheers! Someone said today that it will be interesting to look back in ten years at the fact that Apple's market cap is greater than the entire US retail sector. I think the same can be said (not a new revelation whatsoever, I'm just saying) for Bernanke's ZIRP. I'm not nearly smart enough to figure out what he is distorting, but there has to be some type of distortion building up in the system right now that will materialize within the next ten years. I'm not particularly anxious to find out.... I agree. I think what they have done so far is manageable and can be unwound, but the longer it goes, the more you artificially manipulate the system, the greater the distortions you create...and there truly is no way for them to know or anyone else to figure out. Just so much money has flooded the system, and you still have a very weak economy. It could slow down further, or it could rev up and become difficult to control. Either way, the balance is incredibly tricky! Cheers!

You treat people with contempt, as if they are your inferior and could never comprehend your genius. You came off that way in your phone calls with me as well, thus I've never entertained another one. I had not responded to any of your recent posts until you took a shot at Dorsia. So yeah, I'm pretty ornery and disrespectful to people who behave that way to others.

Then post your analysis, instead of showing up once every 6 months to take a shot at boardmembers because one idea worked out for you. Don't delete your old posts. Deal with everyone with a touch of humility. Cheers!

If and when ECRI's call (http://www.businesscycle.com/news_events/news_details/5065) materializes, it will be interesting to see what bullets we try to conjure up - Dalio's interview back in October at the Economist's Buttonwood conference seemed to indicate the next downturn may not be pretty.... There truly isn't much left that would assist the economy and not cause any future problems. QE3 would create problems going forward. I think we'll have a better idea of how things are as the housing inventory shrinks. If prices don't start to rebound, and unemployment doesn't rebound, then it could be a slow slog. So far, things look quite positive, but China is slowing and we will have to wait and see exactly how they stop the hard landing. Cheers!

He,he...Harry you're so funny! Thanks I needed that. I think everyone on this board needed that today! See you can contribute in positive ways that give all of us a good laugh. Way to go buddy!

Someone messaged me a few months ago, and I forgot who it was, but everytime "Munger" shows up on the board...just go long! ;D I suppose absence makes the heart grow fonder. Regardless, while I think the U.S. will do better than just about every other economy in the world going forward, we are now officially out of bullets. So it's either this thing gets its legs going and GDP starts revving, or we go through a continued slow, slog of deleveraging for another 3-5 years. Cheers!

Dorsia, You can find it here: http://seekingalpha.com/article/268689-mtr-gaming-group-the-money-lever-to-pull-in-this-casino-is-the-hold-percentage But make sure you see the fourth comment (from last May) where Harry exits the position! Priceless!! "I am personally unhappy reading the 10-Q that the cash flow isn't as strong as I would have expected.. I have to move on if the cash flow isn't there. Apologies to my kind readers. I truly believed the cash flow would be stronger. I will revisit this in the coming quarters to see if things change." Wait a minute... What am I missing here? The thesis seems to have been posted on May 9, 2011 on SA and the comment above where he expresses his disappointment and "exits" the position was posted on May 11,2011 I gotta be missing something right? Please tell me I'm missing something... He just says he was disappointed with the cash flows and would have to move on, but he would revisit it over the next few quarters. So, no confirmation if he ACTUALLY exited. Apparently he didn't because he's gloating about his idea on here today. But we'll never know because he will not provide his returns. It's a cliff-hanger! Stay tuned. Same bat time, same bat channel! ;D Cheers!

Article on how investors are now buying golf courses. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-15/trump-post-tiger-golf-bottom-fishing-signals-rebound-mortgages.html

Looking really good except for coal, grain and minerals. Improvement from February's slowdown. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-15/north-american-rail-freight-carloads-for-march-10-table-.html?cmpid=yhoo

Because, as I've tried to show with some of my posts on this thread, reason dictates it. And, Sardar is nothing if not rational. Of course, in my subjective opinion, Sardar is no cheat either, but you don't have to share this opinion in order to arrive at the conclusion about the incentive agreement. Best, Ragu I totally agree with you that Sardar is no cheat. He's smart and he's good at what he does. But Sardar will always do what is in Sardar's best interest...shareholders be damned. Cheers!

Harry, you are one of those people where everyone wants to like you, but you're your own worst enemy. If you stop lobbing grenades at boardmembers everytime one of your ideas does well, and actually stick to your analysis which I think many find useful and interesting, you would find a more genial response...including from yours truly! You are smart and the boardmembers can learn alot from you, but you could learn a hell of lot more from the people on here. Trust me...I'm right on this...no matter what you may want to think or your ego is encouraging you to believe! Take a leap of faith and trust me, and you'll find that people will truly appreciate what you have to offer. Cheers!

Very nice performance by MNTG. Guess Dorsia was hard on me a little too early. It's done very nicely compared to BAC as well. Goes back to my point that it's better to find things that are neglected, than larger situations which are in the midst of controversy. Stop the rhetoric Harry! How did the shorts work out and have you actually provided results to anyone who has asked? This has become farcical and that is why no one responds except for me. I love a good comedy! Cheers!

Here's the link on Stockwatch: http://www.stockwatch.com/News/Item.aspx?bid=Z-C:SVM-1909254&symbol=SVM&news_region=C Cheers!

Why? Would it matter. Most of the reviews have been lacklustre, and you pick one of the bunch that likes it. Cheers!

So I guess Gretchen Morgenson's routine appeasement of her hedgefund cronies desires isn't so far-fetched after all. Morgensen wrote the article last week about this, and now suddenly Kynikos and Third Point are in on it too. I'm certain both Chanos and Loeb never looked at those front-running analyst reports John Gwynn used to give them, and they would never manipulate a stock. Slimey greaseball scumbuckets the whole lot! Cheers!

I'm very hard-pressed to believe WFC will ever be valued at 3 times book, and I prefer the conservative view that it would be valued somewhere between 1-1.5 times book. If the book value multiple stretches, then you are better off with the warrants, but I don't think the advantage is large enough conservatively for me to give up the dividends. For example, what if you do get a scenario like the one that the Fed tested? It could very well be that the warrants may be worthless after 6 years if such a scenario came to fruition. That's why I'm comfortable with the BAC warrants...they have the protection of the dividend payouts and the exercise price is around tangible book. Cheers!

About friggin' time. Cheers! http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-charges-sharespost-felix-over-204224679.html;_ylt=AseM5bSs24ekxrPUBrbzz_eiuYdG;_ylu=X3oDMTQ0MnR0ZTcxBG1pdANGaW5hbmNlIEZQIFRvcCBTdG9yeSBSaWdodARwa2cDZjkwZDA4YmMtMjZhMC0zOTVmLWE3MzgtNWY5YWRlMTViYjZlBHBvcwM2BHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnkEdmVyAzU5ZDc2OTQwLTZlMWEtMTFlMS1iZWVhLWUzY2FjMzFjYjFjNQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTFvdnRqYzJoBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

A couple of excerpts that I found interesting: WFC is the only money center bank that has to build reserves under the stress scenario, while the rest of the names experience reserve releases. Bank of America Bank of America has always been perceived to have the riskiest loan book, one that is most leveraged to the housing market as well as the consumer. We think the stress test should put this perception to rest; it is hard for any one to argue that Bank of America has significantly more losses on its loan book than Wells Fargo given the data from the stress test. We think management has been very prudent on capital, and these tests highlight the change that has taken place at Bank of America. One year, or even 6 months ago, Bank of America was generally considered to be the bank with the greatest capital challenges. After boosting Tier 1 common capital by 160bp over the past 2 quarter, it maintains a respectable 5.9% ratio through the stress period, putting it square in the middle of the range of other CCAR participants (Figure 2). However, Figure 1 highlights that BAC spread do not reflect this improvement. The name continues to trade much wider than peer banks that would do worse or as badly in a stressed environment, such as Citi, USB, PNC and WFC. Yup, good quotes. And the fact that they made up even more ground in terms of Tier 1 capital in the 4th quarter 2011 is an after thought. They raised Tier 1 common equity in the 4th Q by over one whole percentage point from the 3rd Q! That's huge for ANY bank! Cheers!

I think that is the goal. You take care of the business and the market price takes care of itself. If they have a solid balance sheet, people will care less about the loss provisions, litigation, et al, because they know the cash flow alone can easily cover all of that going forward. Frankly, I think they are provisioning as well as anyone relative to the book they were handed by Countrywide. Take a look at their annual non-performing loans and think about what type of shit they were writing before the downturn. The quality of their book is getting better year after year. Cheers!

We're not adding. We like what we have and the price we paid. We're up 70% on the equity and our warrants are up 15% now too. We did back up the truck, so it is a big position. We really thought this would be a four-bagger over 5 years, and I still think it's going to hit $25-30 in less than five years barring any significant broad market correction. Cheers! The last time you mentioned it, I think you said it was 5%--did you up from there? No, we had 5% in equity and 5% in the A warrants. So that has grown to about 14% of the fund now. Not to mention we had about 7% in WFC and that has grown to almost 10%. I'm comfortable with that exposure and not interested in adding any more. Cheers!

maxprogram, Keyword being usually. This is an unusual enough plan that additional thought is warranted. Actually, what is unquestionably true is that it is not in Sardar's best interests to propose a plan that dents BH's long-term intrinsic value, let alone one that is substantial. I'd be happy to hear reasoned arguments otherwise. Ultimately, this transaction boils down to the evaluation of the following two things: a. The cash flows that represent the performance fees of the Lion Fund (that Biglari gave up) b. The cash flows that represent the incentive payments to Biglari (that BH shareholders pay) For this transaction to be neutral/advantageous to BH shareholders, the present value of (a) must at the very least be the equal of (b). The conditions governing (a) and (b) are roughly similar (25% payout with a 5% hurdle rate for the Lion Fund vs. 6% for Sardar). Now, BH's equity is many times the size of the Lion Fund's limited partner interests. So, as of today, (b) will be much higher than (a). This will likely remain true for as long as there are payments to Sardar under this scheme. Therefore, in order for the present value of (a) to catch up (and exceed) that of (b), the payments to Sardar under this incentive agreement need to end. And, in time, they will. Best, Ragu What?! :o Why would he terminate the incentive agreement at any point? Over time, if the $10m cap is removed, he will continue to own more and more of the company...simple. It's no different than Berkowitz's share in Fairholme getting larger because other investors redeemed at the low, and he will enjoy more of the gains going forward as his slice of the pie got bigger. The incentive has little to do with it. The $10m cap right now keeps Sardar from getting more and more of the company, but once he has enough votes, do you think he will really retain the cap after the behavior he has shown in the past already? Greed and power know no bounds! He suckered shareholders into believing the name change was necessary for acquisitions. He then pushed an incentive plan that originally had no cap because he felt that was the best way to incentivize him. But that is history. Let's see what he does going forward. Cheers!

We're not adding. We like what we have and the price we paid. We're up 70% on the equity and our warrants are up 15% now too. We did back up the truck, so it is a big position. We really thought this would be a four-bagger over 5 years, and I still think it's going to hit $25-30 in less than five years barring any significant broad market correction. Cheers!

Incidentally, the numbers used in the stress test were 3rd quarter 2011 numbers. BAC raised their Tier 1 common to 9.86% from 8.7% in the 3rd quarter, and their Tier 1 capital increased to 12.40% versus 11.5% in the stress test...on par with JPM and WFC in the 4th quarter. Under the same stress test using 4th quarter numbers, I would expect BAC to fair significantly better than they did in the actual results. Moynihan should have BAC incredibly well-capitalized by the end of 2012 relative to peers! Cheers!

Article discussing Pandit's overexuberance before the results came out. He should have learned Moynihan's lesson from last year. What I like is Moynihan's attitude since then and this one comment from the article: “We are not asking to change the dividend posture because, frankly, we’re close enough to Basel 3 that we just want to blow through it,” Moynihan said in a Jan. 19 staff meeting. “For 2012, we’re sticking to building back capital.” Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-14/pandit-repeats-moynihan-misstep-as-fed-rebuffs-citigroup.html

Excellent article on natural gas production and supply. Exact reason why we are looking, but will not buy anything probably this year. Cheers! http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/a-natural-gas-disconnect-bargain-bin-prices-surge-in-supplies/article2368417/