amecham

netnet, My friend recently started the attached blog. He's from academia and has little interest in investing - which is a good thing IMO. I know he's reached out to C. Munger and others about incorporating some of Mungers ideas into the classroom. His blog may be worth keeping on your radar. http://icrossthink.blogspot.com/ Allan

Sanjeev et al, Thanks for the nice comments. I've enjoyed this board for a long time (getting way more than I give). Best, Allan

For what it's worth, my two cents regarding macro and hedging, I'd answer the macro/hedging question with a question: What would you do if you owned 100% of a few quality businesses in your home town? I suspect you'd spend very little time on the macro (instead focusing on your competitive position relative to competitors), and probably wouldn't spend five seconds worry about hedging the S&P index or anything of the sort. In my opinion it doesn't make sense to alter ones behavior as an owner just because there's a daily quote via a public market. Allan

smo001, I subscribe to the FT, WSJ, and NYT. Sanjeev: thanks for the nice words - the board should take Sanjeevs' comments with a 'bucket of salt' as they're likely biased because I'm a fellow hockey fanatic.

Ravi, For what it's worth: I've run a hedge fund for nearly twelve years on 3 newspaper subscriptions, an internet connection, and value line. My experience suggests high priced bloomberg terminals or capital IQ are not necessary... Perhaps they are well worth the cost to other managers, but I haven't found them necessary. Good luck. Allan

Ha! Nice title, Sanjeev. I knew exactly who you were referencing and also laughing out loud. Classic. Cheers, Allan

I've had this discussion a few times with other investors... as our fund once held a 90% position in BRK - currently do not own any BRK shares. I contend that the only risk to worry about is BUSINESS risk. If you adopt a owner/business oriented mindset, 90% in BRK is really not concentrated at all - no single business represents an overly large percentage of the whole. I don't think 90% is dangerous/risky at all - and there are at least two other guys that agree with me ;)

The CR is just a component of the net result... Seems a bit silly to bemoan in my opinion. It's like getting all worked up over the Buffett partnership fees - The end result, NET OF FEES, was spectacular... Similar to FFH's results this year - absolutely spectacular! I could care less what the CR is if the net result is 25% growth in BV.