Uccmal

He holds 12000 shares of FFH - I guess he can afford to retire, if he wants. Probably made a killing via NB as well when it was bought back in at a 30% premium.

Float is 13B - 650 per share based on ~ 20 M shares. Its all in Prems letter and the first pages of the AR after that.

Harper is impossible to work with. His brand of politics is just plain nasty. He would rather shut the doors than debate anything. His government has no vision, he hates women, and is a bully. What more reasons do we need? I am in the anyone but Harper camp right now.

Check his letter to shareholders. He prints a table showing float, cost of float etc, every year. Defines exactly what it is as well. Float is ~ 650/share; bv = 379; Debt~120: total invested per share: 1140 = ~ 25 B.

Hi Shalab, The float is around 11 B as per your original estimate. The 26 B number he reports as investments per share includes the value of the operating companies, holding company cash, and float. Dont know if this changes your calculations. What Prem is trying to show us is the justification for the operating insurance companies by providing the return on float.

Coalition: NDP prime minister with liberal cabinet ministers included. Ignatieff will have to resign. Harper will have to resign for losing the government... finally. No change in general economic policy except gradual deficit reduction. Northern European Countries run successful coalitions regularly. There is no reason to suggest Canada cound not successfully do the same.

As I said, no more from me Harry, ever! Too much flogging a dead horse.

Harry, You fancy yourself a teacher. Why dont you pay attention to what some of your audience are saying, instead of getting so defensive about it. Your style turns alot of people off. I am not the only one. Alot of board members have stopped engaging you at all due to your abrasive take no prisoners attitude. You talk so much about learning but refuse to learn anything yourself. Thats the last you will hear from me on this topic. You really should start your own board or rejuvenate your blog.

Harry, You are obviously very knowledgeable and skilled at analyzing companies. But, The first rule of teaching is to know your audience. Much of the audience on this board are people who get double digit returns on their value investments year in and year out. I personally have met at least thrity of them. They are very, very good at what they do unlike those on any other message board. The style you are using turns much of this audience right off, especially when delivered via the message board. It would likely work much better in person as per your video on SURW. I think you will find many more receptive if you tone down the attacks on those who dont agree with you. Couple this with the fact that many of us, being value investors, are very suspicious of self promoters, having all been stung at one time or another. Alternatively, Why dont you follow your own suggestion and set up your own message board. You can post the links on this board so your supporters can find you, and you can really focus on them as students. Try attraction rather than promotion! Al.

An interesting historical note: I was asking Brian Bradstreet if he knew Dr. Michael Burry at the time of the events in the big short. He said he spoke to him regularly back then but had never met him face to face. They had a some money invested with Dr. Burry, and had offered to buy all of Burry's disgruntled partners out, but Burry wasn't interested in letting his (ex) partners off the hook. Brian had good things to say about Burry. Brian is always really interesting to talk with because he has deep working knowledge of all aspects of the business. Very bright fellow.

I am going to let Sanjeev or someone else comment on the details of the dinner and meeting. One thing that board members might be interested in is that some of the FFH employees, including Prem, read this board regularly.

Well, most of that was taken out of context by the media: There was no such recommendation of stocks. He only showed those 4 companies as examples of companies that FFH had bought, and would hold, as we all knew already. Andrew Barnard commented on the earthquake being in the results next week - estimates, and possible price increases in re-insurance. The fellow running the Middle East company spoke for a few minutes about their business. Alot of the rest of the meeting was retread stuff about the economy, the hedges, and the CPI derivatives.

When your young the order should be Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll: #2 in moderation, the others in excess. ;D Prunes, if your on this board and following investment discussions I wouldn't want to tie up all of your money for too long. Before long you might realize that you can outperform most of the best funds out there.

LessthanIV - does look kind of strange like someone goofed up or just realized he holds a reportable amount.

This is a beauty in the annals of stupid ideas. In order to grow corn you need to provide fertilizer, primarily nitrogen. The nitrogen fertilizer - Urea - is produced from methane feedstock. Methane is of course natural gas. In the end game the carbon footprint for ethanol from corn turns out to be at least that of gasoline. So we take natural gas and make ethanol through a convoluted process involving planting, harvesting, and sunlight instead of just using the natural gas directly as fuel, or even better, just using the sunlight as fuel. I came across this little gem in this weeks Businessweek.

Myth, Respectfully, I disagree completely, except on the lack of values. It is the third year of a presidential term. QE may get reduced but it will not be eliminated until Obama wins the next election. They want jobs and they will get their jobs. That will provide the next leg up to where the Fed can back off. IMO, Inflation is being caused worldwide by government stimulus. If you remove the effect of government spending I am betting we are in a deflation right now. I dont see interest rates going up for years at this point. So, Companies that get cheap cash and turn it around into profits and pay it back as dividends are a good bet. I am not and have never been a dividend pig. My total portfolio is generating upwards of 3% a year on dividends right now. I bought some SSW on the dip the other day - 4% dividend. Will buy some more BAC.WS this coming week as they work through their mortgage problems - the thread discussing these is buried way back somewhere.

Another thing to consider is if a position goes in your favour before expiry. You sell puts at $2.00/share - the price of the stock goes up - your puts are quoted at 0.30 and there is still two months to expiry - get out with your gains. The goal here is too make money not end up with the stock. I know whereof I speak on this topic. Prior to and into the financial crisis I thought I might make a little extra money selling puts. Without exception I was forced out of my positions at a loss. Due to the confluence of events I got hit with margin calls and had to buy my way out of bad positions. An early chapter in the Buffett's Next Door features a fellow who has successfully employed put selling and covered call selling strategies. It seemed that he does well at it. Worth a read. Another issue with put writing is obviously taxation.

Or it can leave you with a margin call in a downturn and force you to unload your position at a loss! When you buy a long stock your margin ranges from 30% cash/70% leverage to 50/50 or something less. Selling puts is essentially the inverse of this. Sell GE puts at $18 for $1.00. GE at 20. At the time of sale you need to have margin coverage of 20% the underlying stock price plus the price of the option: This adds up to $5.00 in margin. Using margin is not an issue if you write a small number of puts. It becomes an issue if you overdo it in the put writing department which is easy to do. I dont find it an easy way to make significant returns unless you spot an unusual situation.

I dont think the there is any problem with the magic formula from a technical standpoint, or any other similar systems. The problem with buying stock in companies you dont understand is sticking to it when the going gets tough. Its very hard to hold onto a company that has gone down 30%, never mind buying more, when you dont really know why you hold it in the first place. That is why Graham's bottom up analysis works so well. It forces you to understand how a company operates and how safe it is for the inevitable market downturn. Caught a talking head on BNN tonight for 5 minutes. The caller asked the talking head what he should do with his Magna stock which he bought in the winter at $61, which is now at $44.00. Talking head to his credit suggested the caller ignore the market gyrations but obviously the caller doesn't really have any idea about the stock he bought or he wouldn't have paid 61 in the first place. That was always the problem with Greenblatt's formula. I wonder how many got scared out of it during the financial crisis?

So the US president, Canadian PM, senators, representatives etc. all make less than 1 million with no bonus. How to explain, how to explain. Shareholders need to be more discerning. I was looking at the proxies of three companies recently: LQW-T : Declined to buy because the CEO and CFO would have ate all the earnings with bonuses NBD - T: Forest Products - CEO and company collected large bonuses in the last two years and large paychecks while they consolidated the shares 10:1 and shrunk the share price by 10 x. Blamed sales on the economy. Justified their pay, somehow? Note to BAM holders. This is majority owned by Brookfield so you know where they are coming from. MTL - T: Mullen Group - CEO/minority owner Murray Mullen took a $1 pay check in 2010 for poor performance and no bonus. I own shares in Mullen, 5-6%, and a residual position in an RSP in NBD. Wont be buying LQW and likely not NBD unless I see a big lumber business expansion. I am betting the CEO of JNJ has not taken a pay cut for crappy performance either.

ge

Have you seen this: http://www.resolutefunds.com/tom_stanley.html Passed onto me by a friend of mine.

Call it potential energy.... most everthing else I have held onto has gone up alot.

mean, that was so mean.....Had me for a sec there.

Bronco, I dont disagree with you on this. Buffett needs to get with the program and develop and implement a succession plan. Berkshire is in dangerous territory if something happens to him in the short term. Just imagine what will happen to some of these operating companies with Buffett out of the picture. You are seeing a glimpse of it right now. Reminds me of the situation with Marshall Tito in Yugoslavia. You cant dangle the carrot in front of people such as Sokol and then not give them the chance to make their own mistakes. Buffett should have let the press roast Sokol and let Sokol take the bath but he should not have asked for his resignation, or taken it, or done anything else. Many CEOs have had their trial by fire including some where Buffett has held the stock throughout.