Jurgis

That's funny. It does seem that prices in restaurants are going up pretty much.

Right. That's what I included in "In general though, the biggest risk is always human: leadership/management/operations."

20 year risks to BRK? - Clearly Buffett dying. Some people think it's not a big deal for BRK. I think it is. This been discussed to death (pun intended :P ). - I won't mention operational/leadership/management risks per business. See bullet above. - Reinsurance. What 20 year risks? Buffett says that already right now reinsurance is crap. It's not for nothing Ajit Jain spends more time on specialty insurance rather than on re. Might be better or worse in the future. I think it's cyclical. I think that modeling will improve in the future, but greed/fear cycles might not disappear while humans are in the loop. - BNSF. This one has fewer risks. Longer term (> 20 years?): hyperloop, self driving trucks, 3D printed objects (no need to transport stuff?) - Geico. Self driving cars - probably will change the face of auto insurance totally. - Berkshire Energy. I think this one has fewer risks too. People mention off-grid-solar, but that's possibly far. Yet, 20 years... hmm. What businesses did I miss? In general though, the biggest risk is always human: leadership/management/operations. Anyway, as I said above "I would not be comfortable to buy anything for 20 years, except perhaps market weighted index." Others might think differently. We can't test these beliefs though, since nobody is forced to hold their purchases 20 years with key thrown away. ;)

Now you do. ;D

I agree with Grey512 that looking at 20 year horizon, BRK has risks as does his other picks. I would not be comfortable to buy anything for 20 years, except perhaps market weighted index. Regarding Grey512's picks, I think this is not the place to discuss them. I asked him the question because I was interested in the context/comparison of what he considered more attractive than BRK. Thanks

You realize that you are actively killing your Brier score? ;) http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/mauboussin-sharpening-your-forecasting-skills/

it's money ROFL. 8)

In the spirit of Mauboussin forecaster thread, I'll go with the following predictions: - 10% chance of regime change in Saudi Arabia by the end of 2016. - 5% chance of civil war inside Saudi Arabia by the end of 2016. - 80% chance of oil price over $60 by the end of 2016. - 30% chance of oil price over $70 by the end of 2016. - 10% chance of oil price over $80 by the end of 2016.

Interesting paper. Some good things to keep in mind when forecasting investing results. I'll throw out some issues that the paper does not address. - Paper suggests that short term predictions are easier to make or train to make. Couple questions based on this: - is this true in investing? - is this true for interesting questions in investing? (Not interesting question might be "Will stock price of A be within 10% of current price after six months?") - how does this reconcile with long term views (and long term questions). Clearly a lot of Buffett disciples would rather take a long view. But are long forecasts possible and trainable as short forecasts are? (Clearly if you make 5 year forecasts, you will only know results in 5 years, so your training feedback loop will be very slow). - Predicting for GJP is quite different from predicting in investing: - you can pick your own questions. Which may be positive or negative. - you can pick easy questions sometimes (Buffett's one foot hurdle) - you may be forced to answer difficult questions if you want to outperform an absolute (10% year) or relative (index) hurdle. - Measurement and evaluation - Measurement is needed for feedback loop and evaluation of your skillz. Is it an issue that you measure yourself (unlike GJP where someone else measured you and classified you as superforecaster, forecaster or a loafer. What is a good measurement for investor forecaster? - Assuming you measure, when do you evaluate yourself as superforecaster, forecaster or a loafer. What do you do if your evaluation shows that you're not a superforecaster (yes, training is possible, but some of the qualities mentioned in the paper are nature and not nurture). Anyway, these are the things that come to my mind now. I should read the book for some answers perhaps. ;)

I find websites that present you with a wall of text of legalese that you have to "agree to" before seeing the content highly annoying.

I suppose it is tempting, if you only hold FFH, to treat everything as if it were deflation. ;)

Thanks for posting. Edit: I agree that there are very few clear opportunities available. I disagree with a lot of above, but this is not the thread to discuss it. Good luck. :)

Pray do tell what is in your opinion "best investment opportunity offered by Mr Market at these times" then.

Which is possibly why BRK is so cheap. BTW, BRK ROE was always low. Nobody ever bought BRK for its plain ROE.

I watched the trailer. The trailer looks stupid. :-\ We'll see how the movie ends up being.

That was a short sale...

+100

Apparently this: http://www.siliconinvestor.com/readmsg.aspx?msgid=30246741

In http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/events/boston-area-meetup-september-19th-2015-in-burlington/ TREVNI suggested the following exercise: Here's my writeup on the topic. Not edited, so it's quite scattershot: Fortune 500 list from 1995: Tough to think as if I were in 1995, so some of this is Monday-morning quarterbacking, but: I would have thought that XOM, WMT, T, GE would stay in top 10 for 20 years. I would have thought that GM, F, Sears would fall out of top 10. I don't have opinion about Altria. Not sure what I would have thought about IBM. (Not sure why Mobil is in the list... anyway, see XOM). Looking at current list, I see I would have been wrong about GM and F (though GM went through BK, so staying in top 10 is not really a win...). Would have been right about XOM (joined by CVX and PSX), WMT, GE. WMT would have been a great investment in 1995 GE would have been OK (great if you sold in glory days) XOM - OK IBM - would have been great return Looking at top 10 from year 2015, I'll predict: When I did this exercise, I doubted that any of the top 10 will stay in top 10 in next 20 years... After thinking about it more, some companies might stay. Here's my initial reaction and later reaction: Oil will play much lesser role in 20 years. Still XOM may survive in top 10. Later reaction: mega oil(s) might still be in top 10. WMT has Amazon'ication risk. Later reaction: WMT may stay in top 10. BRK has Buffett risk - I don't subscribe to BRK-after-Buffett rosy dream. Later reaction: unchanged. Apple has product change risk. Later reaction: unchanged. GM/F continue to have both "other carmaker" and new carmaker risk. Later reaction: unchanged. GE - has who-the-heck-knows-what-they-gonna-do risk. Though perhaps they have the highest chance to remain in top 10. Later reaction: mostly unchanged. PSX - a bit similar to GE - it's a new spinoff CVS - I think it's very likely gonna be gone. Looking at 11-20, I'd say VZ and UNH have a large chance to get into top 10, but they also can be sidelined. Reordering current companies by market cap to get top 10 by market cap, I think that: Google, WFC, JNJ and GE may survive in top 10 by market cap. Predictions are tough, especially about the future. Amazing thing looking at 1995 list is: 5/10 remained in top 10 after 20 years. Pretty much all 10 did not change businesses radically. Only 1 (Sears) is irrelevant now. 1 (GM) went through BK. The inertia is quite amazing for 20th-21st century.

BTW, oddballstocks is running a micro cap conference for people who want to talk to the management: http://microcapconf.com/ So here's your opportunity. :) I am not affiliated with oddball or the conference. :)

I wonder how many roll-your-eyes makes-no-sense-this-is-not-how-it-works-in-reality moments the movie will have. I hope they manage to keep it close to reality. "Margin Call" was great BTW ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1615147/ )

Can someone compile a list of who plays show? I first want to know who plays Michael Burry... he is probably the most interesting story in book. Christian Bale. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596363/?ref_=nv_sr_3 So, if you guys had to choose: get as much money as Mike or look as Christian, what would you choose? ... eh, wrong forum. ;D

This is really my point. With larger companies, most of the material information is publicly available. To outperform, I just need to be wiser and more rational than the market. For small caps, I need to hustle AND be wise and rational. There is no doubt that the payoff for being right with small caps is higher. But the cost for being wrong is also higher. KCLarkin's Hierarchy of Investors: Smart-Eager: Micro/Small Caps Smart-Lazy: Mid/Large Caps Dumb-Lazy: Index ETFs Dumb-Eager: Real Estate +1. Though I think calling me "Smart-Lazy" is doubly wrong. ;) I'm not Smart - there are tons of people here who are much smarter than I am. And I am not Lazy - I don't call management not because I am lazy. I don't call them because ... oh well, we'd need to have at least 6 beers before I'd get to the reasons. :-X

I won't call management and will invest in mega caps. You guys can have a huge edge over me. Which I was trying to tell you. Are you satisfied now?

So, let's invert: if you don't phone oddballstocks and/or management, you have 40% handicap on a small cap. Suddenly mega caps look much more level playing field. 8)