Parsad

No, you don't negate the catastrophe losses, but stripping them out gives you the actual normal operating expense/loss ratio. Which allows you to make apples to apples comparisons between insurance years, and a better understanding if they are writing higher premium/lower loss business. For example, you look at Brit's losses and all you see is loss after loss for four years. But if you can strip out the catastrophe losses, you can get a better idea if their normal operating expenses/losses are getting better or worse. If they are going down, then you can assume they are either running more efficiently, pricing polices at a higher premium or are benefiting from reserve redundancies. Cheers!

+1! Regarding book gains, there is $37 coming from digit in the 4th Q, plus another $19 from excess above fair value of non-insurance businesses...so book will be around $618+ USD at the end of 4th Q or about $770+ CDN per share. I know some are concerned about Brit: The losses for the last few years ensures premium pricing will go even higher for Brit's clients, so while it takes some time, I don't think we'll see such losses going forward on a cyclical basis. Odyssey's losses are about in line with their normal expected catastrophe losses based on where and the type of business they write. I would be happy to see Brit write such business! Allied is killing it, as are most of the other insurance businesses. Cheers!

Based on Markel's results, granted they have more specialty lines and less reinsurance, they wrote at a killer 93% CR for the 3rd quarter and are writing at 91% for the year so far. Hopefully Fairfax's insurance results are as good. Cheers! https://finance.yahoo.com/news/markel-reports-2021-third-quarter-204400657.html

Oh the irony! At least it's less carbon output than if they all drove! Cheers! https://ca.yahoo.com/news/vips-including-jeff-bezos-flew-035647387.html

Now they are getting out of the business altogether! Cheers! https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/02/homes/zillow-exit-ibuying-home-business/index.html

Aha...3-5 mangoes a day...no wonder. I eat like maybe one mango a week...no wonder nothing happened to me. The tart ones make fantastic chutneys or Indian pickles. Try making a mango and avocado salsa with finely chopped red onions...you'll go crazy for it. Fantastic with salmon! Cheers!

100% Xerxes...I totally agree with this view! Fairfax should be conservative, and they often have been. But just their leverage alone is what forces them into a defensive position, when offense is what they should have been playing. If they had half the debt that they have, they would not have to focus nearly as much on macro events. Cheers!

Not entirely shorting. They also did not go significantly long after the financial crisis, as they were still expecting macro-events to unfold differently...just like Grantham, Rosenfeld, et al. They also did not go significantly long after March 2020. So, while shorting cost them alot, I think guessing on macro-events (particularly deflation and a huge market correction) was the main culprit. They underestimated the sheer magnitude of capital that the world would deploy after the housing crisis and then the pandemic. And the main reason they had to guess macro-events was so their insurance business would not get hit with the long-tail insurance they write and the amount of debt they were carrying. Markel, Berkshire, etc did not have this problem...they aren't as leveraged. But Fairfax had to short and hedge because of their leverage. I'm less concerned about Prem shorting markets when he thinks they are overvalued, then simply the debt load they carry which prevents them from going long when markets give them great opportunities. I would like to see the debt load cut in half! Cheers!

From what I understand, something was wrong with the algorithm they were using to evaluate purchases and were overpaying for the homes. Not sure by how much overall, but I believe I read 10% in some cases in another article. Cheers!

What a mess! Cheers! https://finance.yahoo.com/news/zillow-seeks-sell-7-000-184559654.html

Like Fairfax, is BRK going to have a huge adjustment to book with the Nubank IPO at $50B? https://finance.yahoo.com/news/buffett-backed-fintech-nubank-seek-140704906.html Cheers!

In my 50 years of eating mangoes, this has never happened to me once...perhaps, because I live in frigid Canada! Is this a naturopathic anecdote/symptom? Or is it like that episode of Seinfeld where George eats a mango, and his testosterone jumps ending his short-term impotence! Cheers!

The question is, were the hedges removed at a time when they would have been most valuable? with a ton of cash and short-term bonds, I think they are ok. But I'm not entirely sure removing shorting altogether was the best idea. Cheers!

Isn't this the refrain of every bubble? It's a new era, generational change, game-changing, the future! I'm a huge proponent of blockchain technology...have been following it longer than 99% of crypto investors...so I'm certainly not blind to the technological change. But the functionality, utility and volatility of the current crop of crypto leave me bewildered regarding how confident people are that these are investable. Combine that with the fact that there is nothing backing the current batch of crypto...no tax revenues, no assets, no cash flow generation, absolutely nothing. If ever there was a fiat currency, I would imagine crypto is it! Even tulips could be planted and new bulbs sold for pennies. What the hell will people do with wallets full of crypto when the bubble explodes? And it's this explosion that concerns me. How much capital will be destroyed (I would imagine at least $2.7T - 99%). Are certain companies, institutions and national balance sheets holding some of this potential risk that could create a systemic issue? The internet bubble destroyed about $6T in capital...the housing bubble of 2008 destroyed roughly the same. Maybe we have some ways to go before we see the crypto craze collapse based on the damage done during those bubbles! Cheers!

With more and more people jumping on the crypto bandwagon, and some institutions/countries partaking in some form of participation in cryptocurrencies, is there a possible underlying systemic risk from potential losses that regulators aren't noticing? It's starting to feel like deja vu...we've seen new tools, instruments rise and create systemic risks as participants clamor for the new thing. Junk bonds, CDS, ARM mortgages, etc...is crypto the new financial nuclear bomb?! Cheers!

I spoke to Francis today, and he said the specialty lines aren't increasing much, but reinsurance is very strong. So I would imagine that Fairfax's reinsurance businesses are going to continue to do well into 2023, but their more generalized specialty lines will not benefit nearly as much. Fortunately, they do a ton of reinsurance! Cheers!

Yes, you can see the definite connections to David Lean's work in Dune. But all artists steal bits and pieces from other artists or are influenced by them. Cheers!

I think GOT was so good, because the producers and writers were able to take their time and tell the story...granted, I'm still pissed off about the ending, and I'm waiting to see how Martin ties up things in the final books. LOTR under Jackson and Dune under Villeneuve...two very different styles...and I agree with you it's because of the source material. That being said, I think both were amazing. Jackson's movies, like the original Star Wars trilogy would appeal to a wider base than Villeneuve's Dune. Cheers!

The book was one of my favorites, but it isn't easily digestible for most...especially if you've seen the Lynch version of the movie...which I actually thought was pretty good, but probably not most people's cup of tea. Villeneuve takes the political/Shakespearean atmosphere of Lynch's version and Herbert's book, but makes it more relatable to current or even past world events...not dissimilar to what Benioff and Weiss did for Game of Thrones...just on a much more massive scale. Combine that with stunning visuals and cinematography, fantastic character development and actors, and you have an epic powerhouse that could become like the Star Wars movies. If it wasn't for the pandemic and theater restrictions, this thing would be on it's way to making over a billion dollars. Just blown away by how good it was! Cheers!

Just saw Dune! Absolutely magnificent! So good, it might be the first sci-film to win an Oscar...which should have gone to Kubrick and 2001 or Close Encounters of the Third Kind in my opinion. Villeneuve has crafted a masterpiece that I think most viewers will want to see over and over. I'm not sure how I'm going to wait 2 years to see the 2nd half. By the way, it's almost certain that Dune 2 was greenlit from the beginning, and Villeneuve was going to get to shoot both 1 & 2 based on how this ends. Man, where was Villeneuve for the last three Star Wars, and too bad Timothee Chalamet wasn't the same age as Hayden Christensen. He would have made a perfect Anakin. Just couldn't get enough of Dune! Cheers!

I would imagine that they've already planned to announce the project, but are waiting to see what the box office numbers look like. They aren't going to give Villeneuve another $165M unless Dune is on target to make $500M+ globally. They should break $200M globally after this weekend. If it bombs, they may want to pull the plug, which would not happen if they made the official announcement already. Dune is not Star Wars or Star Trek...not even LOTR. It's a much more acquired taste. That being said, I think Villeneuve is probably the guy to make it a much larger franchise on par with those other sci-fi/fantasy stories. The global numbers look good so far...it's all up to the domestic audience to guarantee its future. Cheers!

My point was that at least Prem's kids have a business background, asset management skills and have studied finance. In either case, as both CEO's have long stated, their children are to act as surrogate stewards for them, maintaining the culture and legacy...not necessarily day to day operations. I'm inclined to think that's a good thing if the offspring are anything like the parents. I know Ben and Christine much better than I know Howard and Susan...that being said, my interactions with all of them have always been very cordial and while they may not be the leaders their parents are, they are certainly their parent's children in ideals, virtues and beliefs. Cheers!

For those critical of FFH's board composition with two of Prem's children, how do they feel about Berkshire's board now retaining two of Buffett's children? https://www.barrons.com/articles/berkshire-hathaway-names-warren-buffetts-daughter-and-money-manager-chris-davis-to-its-board-51634767965?siteid=yhoof2 Cheers!

...which is now closed. Cheers! https://finance.yahoo.com/news/big-short-investor-burry-says-215758318.html

I don't know, is it? In case it's hard to tell by the chart, the return from October 2006 to May 2010 was 243%, while the S&P500 was essentially zero. Yes, results were juiced by CDS, but you don't need juiced results to get to 100% in two years from today. Especially since the stock was trading above book value at the end of 2006 and slightly below book value mid-2010. We're starting at 0.7 times book now...that's nearly 50% of upside without any additional growth in book. Like I said, barring any massive catastrophe or market meltdown, things look good for Prem and FFH. Cheers!