twacowfca

I think it was from Dale Carnegie that he learned to criticize generally and praise specifically. This is kind of an extension of that, it seems. No, I understand that and why he does what he does. He had no choice but to fire Sokol. I just believe he did so much for the company and Berkshire, that you don't simply heave it all away. Buffett should have made mention of what happened, why he made his (or the board`s) decision, and that they obviously had little choice in the decision. As well as indicate that the company still appreciated the years of service Sokol showed. This guy, for all intents and purpose, was the one who was going to run Berkshire when Buffett was gone. You can't just bury him! ``Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless``, just doesn`t cut it here. Cheers! I respectfully disagree. That happened early last year, and was fully addressed at the AGM. Time to move on. Cheers! :) By the way, did you notice that their next CEO has been tapped ( with two backups ). He ( or she if it's J. ) is described as being well known to all members of the BOD. I've got my idea about who it is. What's yours?

The Investment Survey has a nice, brief report on each company written by a financial analyst and updated about every one or two months as well as most of the key financial metrics and ratios in a nice chart going back about 15 years. You get all that on one page at a glance! The metrics on the small/midcap version aren't as spiffy and the brief financial analyst's report is replaced by what is merely a description of the company.

I hate it! Too many clicks to get what you want, not to mention persistant failure to automatically recognize subscriber ID. Does anyone have a tip for solving this automatic subscriber recognition difficulty that seems to be especially problematic with the ipad and iphone on many expensive subscription sites compared to auto recognition software for subscriber ID thats available for regular computers? Any help would be much appreciated.

Our board welcomes novices who want to learn about investing. But only one Investing 101 question in 90 posts?! This is an investing board, with an occasional political rant to blow off steam. It's not for people who care less about investing.

Southern Yankee did have one post on investing. He asked what is a short sale. ???

BRK. :)

So what's the big deal? Imaginary grilling by a Republican US House of Representatives Committee Chairman: Congressman: Mr. Buffett, would you say that what's good for the USA is good for Berkshire Hathaway? Mr. Buffett: Yes. Congressman: And vice versa? Mr. Buffett: Yes, I suppose so, but it would be even better with Mungerville. (Sorry, Warren. I couldn't resist). :)

"Now under new ownership." I wouldn't be surprised either to find out he was a buyer around $5.00 per share because someone put a concrete floor on the price at that level, judging from the price action then.

Cool it!

LOL ;D

I wish I were half as crazy as you. Tell me what you see for IRE. Again, it is my humble opinion that it is important, in order to keep this forum as intellectually honest as possible, that posters who say half their portfolio is in IRE, add a small note such as, (But I am in College and have a $5k portfolio) just so we all know what were dealing with. Last time I mentioned this all hell broke loose, but it was really something I felt strongly about only because I see the level interaction on here, and how much time posters will spend responding to almost anyone. I disagree, assuming a modicum of skill. A Bayesian analysis recognizes that all information is useful. I don't have a particularly high opinion of the skill level of most large fund managers, at least when it comes to picking securities, present company excepted. They are greatly handicapped by having to have a large, diversified portfolio that generally keeps their returns around the market averages.

Don't ignore that the Giants had a Moneyball type of quant edge over the Patriots. Check out the WSJ Weekend edition story about the UK quant team that tops all NFL analysts.

Agreed. BRK is the safe and secure and growing end of the barbell of our holdings. And don't ignore the free put. :)

I wish I were half as crazy as you. Tell me what you see for IRE.

I wonder though if you were to open a spa in New York or Los Angeles, how much would customers pay to bathe in a bathtub full of cash? That might be considered to be torture under the Geneva Convention. Currency bills are loaded with pathogens, more than found on a toilet seat. A new take on the concept of filthy lucre.

The good news is the BAC B warrants are up about 2 1/2 times the $0.30 we paid for them in Dec. The bad news is that this somehow through a bizarre set of circumstances turned out to be a small position rather than a large position. We are now moving into another European Bank that also looks like it has a lot of get up and go. We'll tally things up EOY. Short term tallys merely serve to reinforce confirmation bias.

I pointed out earlier though that under a dividend franking system we could give US corporations the ability to pay tax-advantaged dividends out of after-tax income (so the individual doesn't pay tax twice on the dividend). The individual would then only pay tax if his personal tax rate were higher than the corporate tax rate. I find it surprising that I've never heard this kind of system discussed anywhere in the US media. Scenario A: A corporation that pays no tax will be one where the owners need to pay up to the highest marginal income tax on any dividend. Scenario B: A corporation like Berkshire that is a good corporate tax citizen (pays up to 35% marginal rate) will be able to distribute tax-advantaged dividends that are not taxed twice (individual only pays tax if the personal income tax bracket is higher than the tax rate paid by the corporation). Pretty straightforward solution to this long running argument. Perhaps the players aren't actually looking for a solution? The Republicans likely want a 0% individual tax rate, even if the corporations also paid nothing. The Democrats likely want to tax the dividends twice if they can. Very good plan. :) Thank you, Eric

Obama? Bernanke? Sorry, Teflon coated. ;)

One thing the Black Sholes model does well is to distinguish relative value in a set of options on the same stock. One of the best ways to do this is to compare the difference in implied volatility (IV) of what you are thinking of buying. WFC is a good bank that should tend to increase in value over the years. Therefore, the longer dated call may be the better buy, provided that its IV isn't higher than the shorter dated call. Many data sources will provide the IV of options displayed. You might also consider WFC's tarp warrants that have been discussed on this board. These are very long dated call options and may be an even better buy. You can calculate their IV by using an options calculator. I like to use the Wolfram Alpha options calculator. :)

A good strategy if you own a cash cow and have a record of making good investments.

The rally in EURO gov bonds was expected because the ECB is extending credit to insolvent banks by allowing them to post their high yielding sovereign debt as collateral to receive low interest ECB loans . . . That can then be used to buy more high yielding bad sovereign debt. . . . Repeat. :o

While I don't talk to management and don't find it helpful too often, I don't think the answer is to not talk to management. I think the answer is to just not get anywhere near the line. If you think you are close to the line, don't trade. Grind your teeth, bite a pencil if you have to, and bear the losses. I wish Einhorn would of done this, and I bet personally he does too. But the shareholders are the owners. Management just manages the business and the capital. You know this but if the manager never talks to the actual owners of the business, that has some very deep and troubling consequences for American business and markets. Managers are already overpaid and face little risk if they mess up, and shareholders are already too passive in the activities of the companies they own. Much agree. When we have a large, long term holding, we go in person and talk to management once or twice a year. This lets them know we care and that our interests are alligned. We get to know the managers and the business much better once the managers realize we are on their side and open up. We also get to hear their ideas related to long term thinking. We never ask them questions about off limits topics such as future earnings or even, "How's business?" One exception to our face time rule is BRK. Warren is so transparent in helping all shareholders understand the business that face time is not necessary, We do occasionally correspond, however, and as I write this post, I have a nice note on the table in front of me from both Warren and Debbie expressing appreciation for some small thing I had done for them. :)

Agreed. He entered a grey area where a reasonable case can be made either way. His big mistake was failure to exercise an abundance of caution, or use the Buffett standard of WSJ page A1. He should have known better and as his public profile increases he will get less of the benefit of the doubt. As a matter of habit, I try to conclude each conversation with an insider by confirming that material non-public information was not disclosed. Had Einhorn asked that simple question on the recorded call, he would not be in the trouble he finds himself in today. That's no free pass. It's the reasonable man test that applies. It's better to avoid any questions about market sensitive topics. Then, if something material to trading should be revealed anyway, don't trade on it. If something material reinforces a trading strategy in progress, cancel future trades until the news becomes public.

Einhorn's a big boy. He knows every aspect of laws and regulations about securities trading. The fact is that the FSA criminal investigation determined that his excuses were not credible.

That's all spin. Go to the source, the facts established by the FSA criminal investigation. The criminal investigation section of The Financial Services Administration says that Einhorn personally talked to a broker who was involved in the final stage of the effort of the chain of bars to raise equity funding and told Einhorn about it. Immediately, Einhorn phoned in a sell order for the stock which he owned, selling large numbers of shares over the next few days. The FSA says that Einhorn's statement that he didn't know that his actions were insider trading was not credible, and that such actions bring the financial services industry into disrepute.