Cevian

There are much higher returns in purchasing, owning, operating private businesses than investing in the stock market. The main surprise to me when attending Berkshire and Fairfax meetings is how many people just want to talk about stock market investing as opposed to owning and operating actual businesses outright. Not sure if it is laziness, ignorance, hubris or fear but never understood why more value investors don't practice the value investing and management principles in investing and operating private businesses.

I understand market making but I didn't realize that trading could happen for 0.0001 (i.e. a hundredth of a penny?) or that the reaction between me thinking and almost pressing an order and the adjustment of the bid price to 0.01 to top my order.

Something very fishy going on with limit orders and I'm not sure if this is related to HFT or not but worth understanding better if anyone has any ideas. I have seen several cases of the following two different scenarios happening to me over the past few months. 1. Bid-Ask for a stock is 300-310, I put in a limit order for 302 and, within a millisecond, even before I almost press the button, the Bid has moved to 302.01. 2. Bid-Ask for a stock is 300-310. I put in a limit order for 310 and wait. Next thing I know, the price of the stock gets filled at 309.9999 without my limit order being filled. Is this HFT playing with pennies?

LOVE: - Amazon (Specifically, availability of products, fast shipping and Kindle Paperwhite - What they have done with ebooks in general) - Entrepreneurs, boutique small companies, the "little guy" trying cool things and being innovative with products and services (as opposed to monopolies - see below) DISLIKE: - Most Airlines (Specifically, for treating most customers as cattle) - Most Rental Car Companies (Specifically, for all the hidden fees and nickel and dime tactics each time a car is rented) - Monopolistic Companies (Specifically, companies who, instead of innovating, try to grab more market share by acquisitions while at the same time cheapening the product or service - BUD, Monsanto, etc.)

Just wanted to start a general discussion on, in my opinion, one of Buffett's strongest Assets. There are so many investment books out there trying to teach people how to "invest like Warren Buffett" but I don't see many addressing the question of why people work for Buffett in the first place. Prem also has this similar draw. I see two categories of individuals that perplex me: Category 1: Wealthy individuals who sell their business to Buffett and then remain and work even harder after the fact. This is usually very uncommon in practice since individuals who have built their business and decide to sell, then to want to be done with the business and will definitely not work harder post-sale. Category 2: Top performers who have intelligence, integrity and energy but decide to work for Buffett as opposed to going out on their own. Again I have seen this to be uncommon, especially with the newer generation who doesn't want to work for anyone but themselves. Does anyone have any valuable insight as to why these two categories of people work for Buffett as opposed to the alternative?

Who is attending the Dinner and Meeting this year? Would be good to put faces to names.

Premier diagnostics (PDH) The CEO is the most truth worthy guy I know. ;) It won't be fast and it won't be easy but, over the long run, this will be a multi bagger. This is a keeper.

Cayman Islands 8)

Are you sure that's Buffett's office? Why would Buffett have a large cabinet for Dakshana - Latticework?

I'm looking for a UK based value fund or manager for a client to invest in. Any recommendations?

I used to have the same concerns 8 years ago. I made the switch and have never look back. My recommendation is the same like a few others: Get Office for Mac. No need to run Windows and switch back and forth.

It is important to keep in mind how the "new CPI" is calculated. http://www.bls.gov/cpi/superlink.htm http://www.investopedia.com/articles/07/consumerpriceindex.asp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Chained_Consumer_Price_Index

We all have our opinions on the subject of Iran and it is front of mind of most individuals I speak with. It is also in the news, front and center. We may all defer in our opinion as to the probability of such an event or as to the possible consequences but, to get back to the subject of this thread, this is not what the market is ignoring. At the moment, I'm having a hard time trying to find out what it is truly ignoring. Generally, when there is a very strong opinion regarding something, coupled with some Hubris, there is a strong probability that the opposite is what everyone is ignoring. I'm not seeing anything everyone is in agreement on at the moment. In most areas, we tend to hear bulling and bearish arguments, nothing completely one sided. Please chime in if you see any areas most people are in agreement on.

For a Poison Pill to be triggered, it would need to be a factual 20% ownership which would be calculated as the number of shares owned divided by the number of share issued and outstanding.

I'm looking for a quote about stock market bubbles which talked about when new technologies or processes come into play, when everyone says the old valuation rules no longer apply and that there is no end in sight to the level the market can achieve. I don't think the words "this time is different" was mentioned in the quote but the tone was similar. Sorry I can't come up with much more but I'm sure there was a great quote on this by Keynes, Galbraith, Buffett or Munger. Any help would be much appreciated.

He may have been quoting Scott Fitzgerald: "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function"

Cayman Islands

I'm glad to hear some of the guys on this board like Ron Paul aswell. He is the only guy who actually has something to say (role of government, constitution, etc.), while all the rest seem to be giving the usual rhetoric "go go go, whoora whoora, take back the white house, time for change" stuff

I'll also be attending the meeting. Let me know if you guys want to get together beforehand since my flight lands at 1pm. Staying at the Doubletree Hotel near the restaurant. My email is info@cevianholdings.com

Assuming that instead of this being the US Government, it was a Corporation in which we were all shareholders. The Corporation was very large, employing millions of people and having many families, suppliers and stakeholders dependent on it. The Company, however, had a lot of debt and it was losing money every year. The articles contained a section which included a provision that had a debt limit which the Directors needed to vote on from time to time. This year, under that Clause, some of the Directors had decided not to raise the limit unless they all (including the CEO) agreed, and put specific measures in place, to change the Company's historical culture of running a deficit every year. As shareholders, wouldn't we be happy with that kind of clause empowering the Directors to perform their Fiduciary obligations? At the AGM, would we really be asking and voting to remove that Clause altogether? This is not a Party thing. I think this is an important discussion that everyone needs to have and, without this Clause, we would not be having it. We may each have a different answer as to how to fix the problem but I am surprised at the suggestion that the Clause which permitted this discussion in the first place be removed.

Unless you find yourself in a desperate situation, would you use short-term one day or one week financing to cover your most basic expenses? I've been reading a lot about the reasons why the Fed decided to intervene and pump money into the Financial Markets and one of the reasons being cited over and over is that a lot of the Fortune 500 companies depend on short-term commercial paper in order to finance ongoing expenses such as payroll. When this market dried up during the crisis, the fear was that companies not being able to meet their short-term requirements would be out of business and this would send shock-waves throughout the world economy. Now one thing I don't understand is why these large companies have put themselves in a situation where they are so dependent on this short-term nature of financing without having appropriate backups and safeguard available? Honestly, am I missing something?