maxthetrade

Two Junior analysts with the Name of Rentrop and they are located in Bonn so they are probably associated with Norman Rentrop. I don't want to comment on him but you can find a lot of stuff by googling the name.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-01-20/news/46374822_1_prem-watsa-india-infoline-thomas-cook

I have always viewed Fairfax more as a hedge fund, so I have no problem with them speculating in CPI derivatives, buying BBRY or hedging their portfolio. My main criticism is that they got position sizing terribly wrong, e.g. people keep saying they invested only such a tiny percentage of assets in BBRY but I think the appropriate measure is the percentage of equity they invest in something. Or why hedge 100% of your equity portfolio, wouldn't say 80% have served the purpose just as well or better?

Buybacks are basically like any other non maintenance cap-ex and should be treated equally in a DCF. Whether a company buys its own stock, aquires another company or spends the cash on any other growth cap-ex is irrelevant, in all cases the cash can't be taken out in the year the Investment is made but future FCF will (hopefully) be higher. If you discount FCF and project future growth from growth cap-ex you're double counting.

+1

Good article about a major threat to the profitability of the reinsurance industry: http://www.pionline.com/article/20130826/REG/130829926 I wonder how much the recent moves by Berkshire and Lancashire are related to these trends. It will also be interesting to watch how Markels entry to the reinsurance field works out.

Why not go directly to the source? S&P gives 98.35 for operating earnings and 87.70 for reported earnings per end of Q1. As of end of Q2 with 81.4% of companies having reported the respective numbers are 99.50 and 91.43. http://eu.spindices.com/documents/additional-material/sp-500-eps-est.xlsx

Futures are by far the cheapest way to hedge currency exposure, simply roll them into the next cycle at expiration. Very cheap and easy to do if you have an Interactive Brokers account.

This is just unbelievable! http://www.irishtimes.com/news/recession-out-of-the-picture-as-fermanagh-puts-on-a-brave-face-for-g8-leaders-1.1409112

Congrats Sanjeev, clearly you can not only talk the talk but walk the walk!

I second what was said about IB. I think they are by far the best option for retail investors. I also like how they blend your equity and futures portfolio for margin and reporting purposes.

GMO is out with a new white paper on gold. Conclusion The concept of gold as a general insurance policy against systemic risks is dangerous, especially today. Gold prices are driven both by global monetary policy and emerging markets consumers. Emerging markets have been a significant positive force on gold prices for such a long time that it’s easy to forget that their impact on gold can very well go in both directions. Gold prices not only have extensive exposure to China and India, but their exposure to these countries is pro-cyclical by nature. Given both the cyclical and structural challenges the Chinese and Indian economies are facing, we believe the risks to gold prices today are particularly high.

She's super bullish: http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000152867&play=1

I understand all this and in general I agree with the reasoning but float comes with two major restrictions that do not apply to equity: you always have to hold some cash for cat payouts ($20bn in Berkshire's case) and regulators won't let you invest float as you want, i.e. you have to invest in fixed income securities. So yes float is like free money (or even better) in Berkshire's case but that free money must be invested in cash and fixed income securities. Would you really put the same value on equity and on money that comes with these restrictions?

Anyone who really thinks that scuttlebutt can't add tremendous value should watch this terrific interview with Paul Lountzis: http://www.simoleonsense.com/conversation-with-paul-lountzis-investing-scuttlebutt-research/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SimoleonSense+%28Simoleon+Sense%29

Summary of the 2012 letter: http://www.institutionalinvestorsalpha.com/Article/3152364/Baupost-Navigates-a-Tough-Yet-Still-Profitable-2012.html

Conference call transcript: http://seekingalpha.com/article/955941-fairfax-financial-holdings-limited-management-discusses-q3-2012-results-earnings-call-transcript?part=single

Well, Aldi just recently decided to sell Coca Cola and Beiersdorf products in Germany: http://www.thelocal.de/national/20120929-45263.html

That's why I said US stock portfolio ;)

Pabrai now has over 60% of his US stock portfolio in BAC, C and GS. He sure makes Berkowitz look like a sissy! http://www.dataroma.com/m/holdings.php?m=PI

Well, I guess I disagree. e.g. Buffett and Munger are virtuous but don't seem to have much interest in religion. Personally I never understood the fascination with superstition.

new 40min interview: http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000088395&play=1

You have to differentiate between refined/unrefined and or processed/unprocessed carbs. Unrefined and preferably unprocessed carbs like whole grains, sweet potatoes, potatoes etc. are good for you, refined carbs and some processed carbs like sugar, corn syrup, white bread etc. are typical junk food. Here is a good video about starches: http://www.drmcdougall.com/video/starch_solution.html

Exactly! If longevity is your goal I'd stay away from high meat/fat diets and rather focus on a plant/starch centered diet and caloric restriction.

Excellent article well worth your time if you are interested in nutrition: http://boingboing.net/2012/03/09/seduce ... and-t.html Snippet: "Diet trials have shown that a ‘simple’ diet, low in palatability and reward value, reduces hunger and causes fat loss in obese humans and animals, apparently by lowering the ‘defended’ level of fat mass (30, 31, 32, 33). This may be a reason why virtually any diet in which food choices are restricted (e.g., Paleo, vegan, fruitarian), including diametrically opposed approaches like low-fat and low-carbohydrate diets, can reduce food intake and body fatness in clinical trials. As stated by Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, “The common denominator of such diets is that neither allows consumption of the very caloric and seductive foods that combine high fat with high carbohydrates” (34). Hyper-rewarding/palatable foods—candy, chocolate, ice cream, chips, cookies, cakes, fast food, sweetened beverages and pizza—are uniquely fattening and should be the first foods to go in any fat loss attempt. Some people will benefit from further simplifying the diet. Dietary changes over the last several decades have contributed to the obesity epidemic. The solution to this problem is at once simple and challenging. Returning to a diet of simple home-cooked food, made from minimally refined ingredients, would probably stop the obesity epidemic in its tracks, although it would not be enough to return all currently obese people to a lean state. The challenge is finding the time and discipline to do this while commercial junk foods and sweetened beverages are tasty, cheap and constantly under our noses." And a related article from today's WSJ: "Several cancers linked to obesity and a sedentary lifestyle rose every year from 1999 through 2008, even as improved screening and a sharp decline in the number of smokers have helped push down the rate of new cancer diagnoses overall across the U.S., according to a report released Wednesday. ... The data add to a growing body of evidence that obesity raises the risk of these and some other cancers. As many as one-third of common cancers in industrialized nations are linked to excess weight and lack of physical activity, according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Obesity rates leveled off in the U.S. a decade ago, but an estimated 68.8% of adults remain overweight or obese, according to the CDC, and cancers can take years to develop. Obesity-related cancers include common ones, such as breast and colorectal cancer, as well as less common ones, such as pancreatic cancer. Excess weight can also decrease the chance of survival once a patient is diagnosed. The burden "is pretty substantial," said Marcus Plescia, director of the division of cancer prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and an author of the study. The report, published online Wednesday in the journal Cancer, is by researchers from the CDC, the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, the National Cancer Institute, and the American Cancer Society. The evidence of a causal link with cancer, while not yet definitive, is far clearer with excess weight and lack of physical activity than with specific foods or nutrients." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304177104577309921472809552.html