Uccmal

So they've been dead wrong for the last 6 years, but the market declines over a week & 1/2 period, and now they're right? This thread is ridiculous. I know you don’t like how Fairfax operates. And that’s fine! But let me ask you a question: if the market stays in some kind of turmoil for a while (a few months), if US government bond yields keep going down, and if Fairfax share price declines with the overall market, don’t you think it could be worth buying at least some shares before they announce 2014 year end results? Gio Why point was more about the point of this thread than the way the company operates. It's like someone buying JC Penny at $40, and then boasting that they were right when 2-years later the stock goes from $5 to $7. Diogenes can stop his search now, put down his lantern and rest. Here is an honest man. I had to Google this. I am still laughing.

It blows my mind that anyone would commit to a 30 year locked in interest rate. The odds of that being profitable in 5 years, let alone 20 or 30 years is Nil. Only in the US. Our longest locked in, in Canada is 10 years at much much higher rates than a 5 year.

I dont see the oil price dropping that low for any sustained period. The geopolitics have changed since the Arab spring. Russia, and the major mideast providers have to keep the price high to finance the bribes needed to keep their populations quiet. The Russian economy is in tatters and there are signs of internal strife amongst the Putinites, with the arrest of the second in commands buddy. Deep sea drilling runs at around 50/bbl to pump out. To me that pits a significant floor on the price to keep those operations profitable. They will be the first to be shut in.

Why do you claim to know that's the case? It could just as well be that women are more upset by slights than men*. If gender stereotyping/injustice towards women is more common than gender stereotyping towards men is as far as I know not known. But I'd make a bold guess and say it's about the same for both sexes. After all, stereotypes exist for a reason, be they good or bad - or wrong. One thing that many people never think about is that women are seen as inherently more valuable for who they are (for natural biological reasons), while men are valued on what they do. That's also probably why you see such a huge, huge gender imbalance among the homeless. *From what I've read (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/04/men-are-harassed-more-than-women-online.html), males receive more abuse online than females, for example. You wouldn't know this from the discourse, because we, both men and women, are primed to care for females under distress. That, and the abused males "suck it up" or plain just don't care very much. Well, I find it quite upsetting whenever I am with a new woman and she says: "Oh, look at that cute little thing...its so small.". Call me oversensitive.

Oil is on a pretty tight cycle. The realized price goes down and the more expensive drilling slows. So, as mentioned above things like the oil sands, and offshore deep wells slow down. Once this happens the price starts to go back up. Natural gas is steady. The operators in Western Canada can switch nearly at will. I dont think Pennwest's dividend is at risk. They had more than 4 times coverage out of funds flow. Management had the opportunity to slash it during the recent accounting thingee and didn't.

Sometimes investing is as much fun as sticking a fork in my eye. I really would like to buy more PWT but I have enough at risk here. Good dividend, anyway.

Gary, Dont overwhelm us with information or anything.... If the story is mostly intact I would hold for sure. More mistakes are made in redeployment than standing pat.

Me too. My soft target is somewhere way above $20, based on comparables. Alot of US Law firms trolling for clients but they seem to lack plaintiffs so far.

longinvestor said: "We can learn from experience and also from other people's mistakes. In fact, I just shared my top ten investment mistakes with a small group near here. "Mistakes I made that you don't have to" I would like to think that is true, but I suspect I learn more throughly by making some of my own mistakes. I'm not convinced. His partnership and pre-partnership days are a black box from 60 years away. His investing shifted around the time he bought Disney, and Amex. By that time he had been investing at least 10 years.

Well said. I have never used a DCF calculation. I tried but it made no sense to me. Kind of like when physicists apply the Universal fudge factor to make their equations work. The Drake equation is my favourite example of adding BS with BS and getting well more BS. If a company seems cheap on a P/B, p/E, p/cf or p/dividend then it warrants further investigation. At that point we start dating and get to know each other. As we get to know each other more we either break up or continue seeing one another, perhaps more. I agree that not acting can be important to learn. I disagree with the notion that most successful active investors are minimally active. I think the twenty ticket thing is an outcome of experience. The only way to gain experience is to make mistakes, alot of them, along the way. Its the best way to develop a style and philosophy that works for YOU! The problem with Buffett is we only hear about his successes... there is a reason he changed styles to more qualitative version. There is no substitute for the experience of buying Washington Mutual in August 2008 - yes I did that. Sold the position right quick when I realized I had walked into a firestorm. I would guess that I have held somewhere over 300 companies over 18 years. Each one provided part of my philosophical and procedural framework, that I use today.

He wants a business that can be run by ham sandwhich because someday a ham sandwhich will end up running it. I think one of the deeper points in that statement is a company with a strong moat will be more likely to survive sub-par management for quite a while. If you own a business for a very long time there is a good chance you will get some bad managers in there. The Moat can help mitigate that. The bad manager does some damage for while and you boot them out and recover. In the long run the brand or company is not severely damaged. The new coke fiasco might be an example of that. Agree. WEB, as usual, is trying to get a point through, and I think here he meant to say that moat maintenance is something that is far easier than moat building, i.e. even relatively mediocre managements can look good if they judiciously maintain the moat. However, the larger the company, the more complex the moat because it faces more "dangers" - diverse customer bases (e.g. go to a McD's in Russia [while they are still open, LMAO] and adults will have coffee or tea, not coke, while kids will gobble up coke like in the US), regulations, competitors - it's more of a headache and the larger the proverbial perimeter, the higher the chances of somebody sneaking in unbeknownst and slipping off with the Crown Jewels ;) Also agree. I think a "a somewhat durable situation (sds), is probably what Buffett has in mind. In that context Apple has an sds, as does Google, probably moreso. Google is interesting in that we dont know what is going to unseat them at this point. They too have too spend huge amounts to stay ahead of the curve.

Apple maintains its high end Moat by continuous improvement. Coke maintains its moat by continuous advertising. Disney spent a fortune creating Frozen and opened up a whole new audience by tapping girl power. All companies spend money to maintain their competitive position. Even Peter Lynch's gravel pit needs to spend money getting environmental approvals, building roads, etc. Even a real live moat in old times needed to be managed with resources spent on it. Apple is no different. Buffett has said somewhere that he wants a business that even an idiot can run. He was wrong in this statement. Coke required really good CEOs to maintain its leadership position. Buffett has been involved in ousting weak CEOs at coke. Management is always key. There are no exceptions.

I am really surprised that Stevie himself hasn't come to some sort of accident, yet.

I was operating on the assumption he had the ability to make a deal to get to Stevie. Perhaps he had nothing of value. We need Michael Lewis on the case.

What if he is going to prison for the safety of his family? You don't leave a criminal enterprise and go back to normal life. Yeah, I guess thats possible.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-08/ex-sac-fund-manager-martoma-sentenced-to-nine-years-in-prison.html Okay, The dude is 40 years old. We was willing to take the fall for Steve Cohen. He has little kids at home. I dont get it. Life is currency that is worth more than money. I would happily trade Stevie for freedom, but thats just me I guess. He could always go on the speaking circuit, like Sam Antar. If he has an agreement with Stevie how can he trust it will be fulfilled? Stevie has thrown dozens under the bus to save himself.

My two thoughts: 1. Why buy company A at a premium when another likely exists with similar prospects but a better price relative to intrinsic value. 2. The longer I've been an investor the more I've come to realize that you'll likely get another bite at the apple you desire. Prices go up and down all of the time. Pick 10 random companies and look at their 52 week highs and lows for each of the last few years. Chances are that for almost every one of them there will be a 50 to 100% difference from their annual low to their annual high year after year. Intrinsic value obviously doesn't fluctuate that much, but yet the prices do. Year after year. That may not have been the case for Berkshire, but it is for many others. Take advantage of those situations when they exist for good quality businesses. +1 I'll add to this that sometimes you just have to wait.

Amen brother. A simple scan should reveal if there is a problem. A friend of ours got bonked playing hockey. She had a couple of years of the exact symptoms crackspread describes. Ended up leaving her job and going on long term disability due to fatigue, headaches etc. And she is one tough cookie. Concussions are very serious business.

As Churchill said, 'you shape your houses, and then they shape you'. The recent interview with Guy Spier where he describes his system to be patient is a great example of that. If you know yourself to be impatient, you can create an environment where it's easier to be patient (ie. a room with no electronic devices, don't look at stock prices during the day and only submit orders when markets are closed, move to a calmer city, etc). That is an interesting concept. I read about research done on the link between success and self control. It turns out that more succesful people make sure that they put themselves in a enviroment where self control is easier. They do not necessairily have more self control. Basicly, if you want to lose weight, do not buy cookies and do not go to the supermarket if you are hungry. And do not live across a really good bakery. Makes sense. We dont keep ice cream in the house because a certain someone is known to eat a litre a day - it isn't my wife or kids!

Lots of good thoughts. I am impatient with some things, and patient with others. This is very philosophical. Patience is a mixture of acceptance, and control over ones situation. It partly arises from experience. The best investors here are probably the most self reflective. We have all ridden stocks down by more than half, many times, and then ridden them back up to multiples of our purchase price. To do that you need to feel comfortable with the position which is the result of the "circle of competence" thing. Then you need acceptance that it is not going to unfold in the way, or in the time frame, you intended. Then you need to accept that you wont, and cannot know even a fraction of a situation. You need to be patient with your mistakes, and learn from them rather than beat yourself up. I know a little bit about alot of things, but am an expert at nothing. Knowing this allows me to make mistakes and move on, often very quickly. As Kraven and I often mention it comes down to knowing yourself. This morning I screamed at my son - exhibiting my impatience. I also yelled at reps from Rogers Cable, while I was cancelling my cable, because they are so difficult. When it comes to investing, I am very different. I haven't panicked in 15 years. No easy answer.

Shalab, Dont endorse it until you try it. Alot of government work is hell. Some is good but not much. I have worked in government as a professional and it is mind numbing. Most of the people I know can name their retirement date and its years or decades away. There is more to life than being beaten into mediocrity until you collect a pension. :-).

2) For the independently minded this option resembles hell. I have some experience with this option. 4) Just dont try to operate an existing franchise (Pizza Pizza, Dominoes). Franchisees with Pizza Pizza make less than minimum wages. 5) Restaurant, Terrible hours, work load, profit margins, labour problems etc. unless you have vietnamese and chinese family members who are working for nothing. 6) Handyman - very good. Hard work but lots of money to make if you are good. I know a guy who has done this for year. Never, ever, out of work.

Awesome thread. I had a long talk with a fellow, who was slowly selling a coin laundry in a small town in central ontario. I was doing the laundry. He was quite interesting. The coin laundry business is one of the few businesses where you get cash up front and pay your bills out over time. He had it doubly good in the small town he operated in. He left the doors open twenty four hours with no one around. You couldn't do that in the city. The only drawback with this business was that you or me have to collect the actual cash, or you have to have someone you totally trust do it. I almost bought the business but he wanted far too much for the adjoining land. Other businesses of this type that come to mind are car washes, and self storage units. None of them suffers from key man syndrome. Businesses at the opposite end of the spectrum require one to put cash up front before sales and rely too much on working extremely long hours. Convenience stores come to mind, as do most retail where some employees dip into the cash, products sit on the shelves if you goof up etc. Small manufacturing and distribution companies rely on the key man. If its not you, then who is it. After giving this alot of thought, I realized it wasn't for me. I am too good at value investing to justify the effort spent on running a business. If I had a good idea for some product it would be fun to produce it, but I dont. I am a lousy sales person, which is vital when running many businesses. I would be at the mercy of key man in the sales department.

I have always understood that stocks are a leading indicator to the broader economy. What your data shows is that nearly every recession is preceded by a bear or correction. But, not every bear market leads to a recession. The missing data bits are periods when the economy sputtered along at a slow pace after a bear or correction. There are always glaring exceptions such as 1987.

Lol... I dont think my Wife or kids would agree. The thing is they are never really gone, just managed. I think the same goes for depression, bipolar, and schizophrenia etc. So far, there is no cure all. There is so much about the brain/ and body we dont know. FWIW, you never struck me as someone who might have had an issue with depression. A.