Txvestor

I think he just wanted to get affairs in order and saw a good valuation opportunity and decided to sell. When BRKb shares were approaching $500 and the market cap touched a trillion, and cap gains taxes are the lowest they'll be in the next 20yrs(or within your lifetime) and almost all your sale proceeds are cap gains, if you're a logical individual you'd want to sell atleast a part of your holdings.

Precisely, we can't anchor to past performance and miss the fruit picking days. 2012-2017 were frustrating days see in Q after Q earnings wiped out by what seemed like a gamble. 2017-2021 were even more frustrating as there was some movement in the company but none in the share price then finally the last 2yrs was the catch up, which I still don't think is complete, as the next 4yrs plus the insurance performance/valuations and growth and earnings potential of some of their subs like Digit and Poseidon are not adequately rewarded. In almost any valuation metric FFH.to is cheap compared to peer group. However regarding FIH-U.to When I see someone like Brian Bradstreet pony up a quarter of a million $ to buy shares I think that's speaking to clear undervaluation.

Yes I think with their infrastructure finance and industrial holdings in a 7.5-8% growth economy is to high teens is attainable in India. Regarding the fairfax mothership, the next 4yrs is clearer than the following 6yrs. I see them growing BV 15% next 4yrs, as the locked bond portfolio, apparently well functioning insurance subs and associates can be expected to deliver $4B or more in a year. However unlike FIH-U.to which is 30% below BV, FFH.to is now 1.25x BV after the run up. Any reversion to mean of these will favor Fairfax India. So all considered I think on a 10yr hold Fairfax India is better here. that said I am more confident in Fairfax hence my position size is 12% v 3% in Fairfax India.

Thanks for pointing out. Clearly reading both the annual letters caused some confusion in my head. Anyway, my larger point remains, currently all but 1-2 of their companies seem to be doing well and I think the case for a good next 10yrs is a solid one. With Fairfax, which is a core position for me, what happens after the next 4yrs is more murky,

I considered buying at the IPO and chose other opportunities at the time as I wanted to give the India story more time to play out. I initiated a 2% position last year and added a little to it this year. Averaging in at $13.3. I considered it a 67c dollar, with strong downside protection and a bet on continuing growth of the Indian economy. BIAL is clearly the crown jewel, but there are others. While I agree that management hasn't got it all right, there were also some hits from Covid to their travel and leisure(Thomas cook) as well as staffing companies(Quess) that were beyond management control. At any rate they are cheap, are positioned in potentially good growth assets, have a couple of potential catalysts to unlock value, and give me exposure to India which I lack elsewhere. I'd be OK with a 12-14% annual compounding return over the next 10yrs. I think if that happens and we get a closure on the BV to share price, we could have a 5x. I think there's a healthy chance that happens. I don't see that as likely in the Fairfax mothership. We'd be lucky to see 1/2 of that returns. Granted I didn't wait through the agony so maybe I am lucky or naive. But that's why I am not ploughing these funds into Fairfax.

I am a little concerned that they reported only 83M of losses related to the pandemic. Whereas MKL reported 325M in business interruption etc. I am wondering how well they are reserving. Their investment returns have been abysmal for this entire cycle everything from hedges to wrong stock picks to poor long term holdings here. So by now we have a balance sheet that is the most leveraged it been in a long time and I am not sure how well prepared they are for a big hit.

Wonder where are all the buybacks. The stock is languishing barely above TBV and I guess we will be hearing more in the next Q but I am not sensing that there is much activity. For all the talk of Singleton etc. Actions are proving increasingly worrisome here.

Modi reforms considered to favor the billionaire class and hurt the middle class. So some sheen has come off d agenda. In addition as mentioned here progress has been slower than people had hoped. It is correct that Congress and Gandhi unlikely to do anything positive. Most sensible people do realize that. Most likely scenario is a Modi minority gov't.

John Deere. I can't beleive they have not yet.

Not sure if you all heard the Shakespeare joke. Shakespeare's wife was apparently a looker, and Shakespeare of course is a literary genius. One day frolocking in bed, she said to him, if we were to procreate, just imagine, your brains and my looks, we would have a wonderful child. Shakespeare looks at her, smiles and says indeed love, but imagine the horror of one with my looks and your brains. As this was about Munger and he is the "Invert, always Invert guy", I could not resist. Babies and children don't always turn out as expected, and I think there are too many variables, genetic, environmental, cultural, luck etc. to do much more than try to get a mediocre level of success, if that. The randomness of life is astonishing and complex, and those of us with a number of adult years under our belt, know it too well.

ICUMD, Drinking the Modi KoolAid eh? In the end it all delends on the India thesis. If oil spikes as seems likely, and if there is a global slowdown in trade of goods and services, which is also a real possibility, then the Rupee will likely crater. Mr Modi's policies are centralizing power and control and I just do not see that as a recipe for economic success in a country as vast as India.

I believe they sold down most of that converted equity stake in 2012 at around $20. They more recently picked up a smaller $60M position in the low $30s area but their irigibal stake was much larger.

Thought he should have made a run on DE last year when it was trading in the 70s, but obviously he didn't and, i know it was on his radar cuz he had a stake in it, since sold. Felt like it was close to his agricultural roots, had a successful brand, a decent if not wide moat, a sizable financial arm, good management and was at a cyclical low. It has since doubled, but can't see it going anywhere in the next 25-30yrs. The agriculture economy is essential and its products indispensable. Its global foorprint can only grow from its home base.

Agree Cevian. Its crazy that this far into an economic expansion cycle, we have not come close to seeing a balanced budget, and the debt to GDP ratio is rising. We are yet to have most of the baby boomers hit retirement and draw medicare and SS, and we are not even close to discussing entitlement reforms in a serious way. Mr Buffett has made this choice consciously, but one wonders if it is really the right thing. I wonder if his social liberalism is what is preventing him raising his voice. In the past he proposed some ideas to curb the trade deficits etc. but has gone stone cold quiet about these topics since the GFC. Ironic since like you said, he has both brainpower, the perch as well as the respect of wide swaths of society in addition to a disarming communication style. I fear just like the blame everyone scenario with mass stupidity identified as the cause of the GFC, ie Lax lending, stupid borrowing, poor politicking, turn the other way regulating, and self serving corporations was the cause. Ie Multi factorial. Sound familiar? We will ironically come to the same situation on a much grander acale eventually as numbers are very concrete and the clock is ticking. Its really an unfortunate scenario for someone who manages their affairs prudently, just as it was in 2008/9 for the do it right homeowner, but everyone flushed "moral hazzard" down the toilet like it didn't matter. I guess immoral isn't so when done on a grand scale.

It hasn't been a buy and forget, because of all the missteps HW has made. Were it not for the equity hedges and deflation swaps, BV would easily have been 50% higer. And the multiple to BV would likely have persisted. If you buy here, you are betting that Prem will not do anything value destructive in the next few years. The market has not ruled put that possibility and I think the market is probably right. They jury remains out on the AWH purchase alone. To the poster stating he mentioned 2B and $70 per share, I was on the call as well. When an analyst asked, he was clear that this was not guidance. On that I would just say he has also touted 15% annual gains in BV for many years, and keeps saying over the long term, that hasn't happened in post crisis era either.