thowed

Very interesting, Investor20, thanks for this. It's always good to hear an independent view - it's easy for everyone just to say, 'this is great' without thinking.

I would be very grateful if anyone has any sense of what types of companies are likely to benefit from these amazing developments. General biotech, or more specific areas? Though presumably this will be priced in pretty quickly. Many thanks.

Gregmal - Cheers for the Druckenmiller info, which I'd missed. Some of the Bitcoin fanatics have overegged what he said, of course, but he makes some typically wise remarks about the relative timelines of the 'brands' of both Gold and Bitcoin.

I recently came across this guy - I'm sure some of you follow him. I love people who can be savage and entertaining about finance - does anyone know he is (assuming he doesn't prefer to stay on the dl). Cheers.

+1. Wirecard in Germany has turned out to be a massive fraud, but the smart people who worked this out early on suffered years of the share price going up and up, so made little net return when the whole thing collapsed. There are only one or two Long/Short funds that I think really can do Shorting well, and even they have struggled in the past 5 years - I think I'm done with it.

Great explanation. This is effectively why I am more 'Fisher' than 'Graham'. I go for 'Quality' because I like to be able to rely on a great Founder and Management Team to create the Growth that will make it good Value when I buy it.

This reminds me of late 1999, when I bought my first 2 stocks. One was a hot, small-cap tech stock. The other a cheap, large-cap Utility stock yielding 5%. Suffice it to say it taught me a lot over the following 12 months. I don't want to belabour the 1999 parallels too much, as this time obviously there are a lot of amazing companies making amazing profits, but there are also some pretty crazy valuations out there, and as KJP says, this might be a time to wait it out with a decent yield, until things correct and you have the firepower to take advantage of more reasonable valuations. My only quibble with your post, KJP, is that I believe that NYC will be the same in a couple of years, but I concede this is my own optimistic speculation!

I'm afraid I can't remember the source, but I read that the Algo is the WHOLE value of TikTok. Basically think how terrible prediction engines are (e.g. Netflix). Getting it right is the holy grail. TikTok really is supposed to be streets ahead. So it could be used for all sorts of other things. Of course, you are also betting that the engineers can keep ahead of the competition on this, which is more of an unknown. So I believe that this is what the buyers are interested in. Otherwise you end up with a 'hot' app for teenagers that could easily be the next Friendster/MySpace in 10 years time.

Some confusion here - 'the incident' was mentioned on page 1 with reference to Sequoia - one of the most respected names to suffer notably from the Valeant debacle.

It's not quite that bad, according to the mutual fund factsheet for June - I don't know why the discrepancy (he also has the offshore hedge fund and SMAs).

Thanks for the replies so far - good to hear a few new names - even if you can't invest with people, you can sometimes still learn from them. Edelweiss looks fascinating. Job Curtis runs a closed-end fund in the UK, which doesn't do it for me - not far from being a FTSE100 tracker. Three solid retail funds: Fundsmith: classic Phil Fisher quality growth stuff. First State Asia Pacific All-Cap: hard to pick one Asia fund, but this is another good quality growth outfit. CG Asset Management: A solid, multi-asset 'absolute return' fund, to balance stuff out. Would also be more than happy with Akre and Giverny.

I think undoubtedly, yes. I've definitely been guilty of this, when I look at my past errors. Knowing how many smart people there are in the game, I would think that a solution that is so seemingly so obvious couldn't possibly work, and look for something 'cleverer'. Five years later, the obvious thing had done much better than I had. And if you're the sort of person who's an intellectual snob, you may keep doing it, which is why I think humility and 'rubbing your nose in your mistakes' per Munger is so important for an investor. Separately, if people realise that sometimes the solution is simple, then it puts financial advisors in trouble!

Um, I agree with almost everything about this, but I do think your hashtag suggestion is at best gauche, and at worst offensive. Getting back to the point, I do think it's a shame, as Flatt is obviously a highly talented operator in so many respects, and it's a shame that his view of acceptable behaviour to minority shareholders is like this. On the nano-cap Family-controlled companies, there seem to be in particular a lot of these in Hong Kong. It seems that David Webb sometimes tries to take 5-10% stakes in certain of these in the hope of getting them to reform and catalyse significant value.

Ha ha - and don't take anything on the internet too seriously. It was a throwaway line - I should have made it more obvious. And known that saying anything Tesla-related could stoke strong reactions. I'm not trying to create a conspiracy. Personally, I like SpaceX. I don't like Tesla. "I think Elon Musk is peculiar and he may overestimate himself, but he may not be wrong all the time". That's all.

I love the videos. But afterwards I also think: this is a very useful halo to mask some of the more questionable governance at Tesla...

PeteC - you mean you've never read Asterix in Switzerland?? It's the only reason I know about poison rings...

Forgive me for a snap reaction without all the info, but isn't there a large bias here with Siegel? Hasn't he always been a MASSIVE Stock bull? So I would expect him to always say that bonds are toast. Not saying he's wrong, but I'd prefer arguments from more independent voices.

To put it most simply, I believe 'stickiness' comes purely from human laziness. If you're an IT manager, changing software provider means a whole lot of hassle - putting the new system in, training employees who are rubbish with computers etc. etc. Of course, it's a case by case situation, but I think this is quite a common situation.

I don't know enough about Icahn to take a view, but if you ask whether I'd side with old Buffett & Zell on one hand, or Ackman on the other, I'd be Team Oldie every time. I do take the point that old age can alter risk-taking, and I know Ackman has done some great stuff, but I think the oldies have a better hit rate. My best guess is that they see a wide range of outcomes, and don't feel comfortable i.e. no 1 foot hurdles at the moment. Those who do well from Corona may be lucky rather than skilful. I found the Zell book lightweight and overly self-congratulatory unfortunately - but a lot of good writers aren't great investors either...

My instinct would be to go with AKREX - only caveat being how long he'll be there for, and if his retirement will see many redemptions. I know the others have been there a while, and so they've got a better chance than most at continuing, but succession is hard. I just think Akre is class - the concentration, low-turnover is impressive, they haven't made many mistakes, and it's run by the founder with a very defined philosophy. I mean, I'm sure you know all this... Sequoia has an illustrious past, but it's not all the OG team any more, it feels more sprawling, a bit more turnover, and... Valeant. I still think they're impressive compared with most other funds, but I don't feel as comfortable as I do about Akre.

Amen, brother. MORAL HAZARD! I'm sick of it. As Munger would say, the incentives have gone very much in the wrong direction.

I'm no expert on this subject, but find it very interesting for portfolio asset allocation, so please forgive a perhaps naive question. Is mild deflation much worse than mild inflation? I ask as some people have suggested that Japan's livelihood does not seem to have suffered especially from mild deflation. So I am wondering if we are so afraid of deflation because of the 30s experience that it is like a 'System 1' thing - any mention of the subject makes us recoil. I suppose my instinct is that anything 'mild' is generally not a problem. Where the problem begins is if something cannot be controlled - and I know the fear of inflation is that once started properly, it is very hard to control. So perhaps the same is the case for deflation. Anyway, I welcome any thoughts, and will try to get to the interview. (n.b. I know that Japan has other problematic issues e.g. the enormous debt overhang. I also recall how the 'obvious thing' about debt in Japan has tripped people up so much, coining the term, the 'widowmaker trade' ).

Thanks - look forward to this - never seen a letter by him, just read the interviews, and was immediately taken by the whole 'capacity to suffer' etc. Can't remember if you know Lindsell Train, a sensational outfit who are a relative comparator in the UK. They have a bunch of very good think-pieces on their website that I think you'd enjoy if you haven't already.

Yes, I don't want to wade in on the politics, but last night (and at other times in the briefings), he just sounds like a confused grandad, rambling on incoherently.

To clarify, I (and I think most others) am not saying 'the old man's gone senile'. I wouldn't presume to know one way or another. It's just about being open-minded. I've known people of a comparative age to Buffett - some are gaga, and some are super-sharp, but they're all tired, and slow. I think there's a danger of people being too slavishly devoted to him.