Xerxes

we will add this to list of things we disagree with. This is nothing more than Tehran’ attempt to broadly raise the “cost of doing business” in the region. A geopolitical bargaining chip, if you will. Nothing to do with the specific machination to raise the selling price of crude for the sake national budget. Thanks to the Americans in their attempt to crush the Iranians for the past 40 years anyway they could, Iranian economy is not a o&g concentrated economy as it was in the 70s or as it is now with the Saudi Arabia.

I have not seen. just my thoughts: The professor cannot be compared in any way to Cramer. Not even in the same zip code. I got nothing against Cramer. But he is what he is. A product of multi-decade low interest rate filled with lots of charisma and evergreen optimism. His program is no different than HGTV for those who like houses. Just a TV show to spice things up. The professor however is a real stock picker with workable framework. You can disagree on his framework but you cannot deny that there is well thought out framework somewhere in his mind.

^^^^ @SharperDingaan I would say that there are two major “geopolitical premiums” as it relates to crude oil coming out of the Persian Gulf region. The macro geopolitical premium is no longer there thanks to American ingenuity to unlock the shale formations. And the restructuring of the flow of crude out of the middle eastern basin into Asia. That macro premium is largely gone. The flow of oil through Straight of Hormuz and around there is just not as important. That premium has been in a long term bear market. However it does not surprise me to see Western observers still allude to it as they remember the Gulf Wars and the Saudi embargo in the 70s. Now that said, you may have a “micro” premium now and then. (Circa 2023) But that will always be “non sticky”. The players involved don’t shoot ships with an explicit purpose to raise price of oil. When you are under sanctions you cannot exactly reap those benefits. For Tehran, it is about moving barrels at whatever price. Its main buyer (government of Bejing) is not going to be paying a “geopolitical premium” that you are alluding to. It is a volume game for Tehran not price. The real winners are the insurance companies I think.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/12/17/world/putin-companies-economy-boycott-elites-benefit-ukraine-war.html Looks like that as major stock market indices took a plunge in 2022, as Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine to confiscate Nazi WMDs, it was in fact Putin and his pals that truly “bought the dip”.

How many of U.S. military personal were surprised after the fact, that almost everything coming out of Colin Powell mouth at the U.N. circa 2003, was mostly all made up stuff and lies. It was so bad that even Colin Powell didn’t know as he was being thrown under the bus by his “colleagues”. Soldiers follow orders. Just as the top brass does. It is that or treason. Only when one side has overwhelming won, can the other side setup courts to determine if the other side’ military top brass was following illegal orders. And it will all matter of interpretation, politics and the usual bullshit. Had Japan won the Second World War, there would be tribunal of the war criminals, and on top of the list would be: General Lemay

Enjoy Walt Disney’ best this Christmas !! Never gets old.

Happy Holidays everyone, all the best. Rest well for another round in 2024 !!

https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/defense-aerospace-report/id1228868129?i=1000639121637 Great end of the year discussion for us, watching from the peanut gallery

wrong. It is value investors that like and need perpetual instability and volatility. Not warlords. warlords, despite the “war” in their surname, like “controlled” stability with “controlled” flareups. 2022-23 had been anything but controlled for them. Both Feb 2022 and Oct 2023 largely spun out of control. None of those events were foreseen by the “warlords” who started it. Yes they may adapt (and survive in some cases), but the “journey” was not planned beforehand.

@ourkid8 thanks for resurrecting the thread. great closure and well done.

How about ETH. I thought you were holding that for a long time. I am thinking while BTC has the “halving” catalyst going for it in 2024, maybe ETH has more crypto-beta in the tank and might overshoot

@Dinar @Spekulatius Based on previous posts. you gents seem to be into luxury liquor related investments.

Folks need to revisit 2020 letter, where Buffett painstakingly describes the four pillars of Berkshire, some which are fully/majority owned while some are partial non-controlling ownership. These four pillars are: Apple, BSNF, BHE and the insurance outfits with its equity portfolio. With that in mind why is Apple even being discussed here, in the context of stock investment. The only difference in Buffett mind between Apple and other three entities is that there is a very liquid secondary market for shares of Apple. And none exists for the other three.

Buffett put nearly $40 billion to work in the last two months of Q1 2022. After few years of not significant equity purchases. If Greg was in charge he would be have been second guessed for using nearly a third of the cash pile in two months. That he would know he would be second guessed, might also play a role in him being an effective capital allocator. He would need to do his job and fight off public misperception.

I should say that in October I did the unthinkable (buying on top of the chart) by adding to my FFH position at $1084 CAD raising that average cost from $500 CAD.

thanks. I am looking forward to watch this movie 4x a year (through quarterly releases) for the next several years, watching it adapt and change. This almost beats reading Tolkien’ work. One thing that can be a bull case for artificially high ROE (in absence of external and internal opportunities), is a major return of capital that would drop equity, giving that ROE a low base to be computed from.

somethings are worth it. others not

Viking while earning on earnings would be logical, they could simply choose to hold steady and build up capital and not go on risk curve with their annual “proceeds”. Pre Covid, they have demonstrated their patience. Their investment “greatest hits” all revolve around accumulating drypowder for a big swing. I don’t think it is illogical to assume that the surplus won’t be re-invested with same market rate, either because (1) rate peaked or (2) credit spread didn’t blow out or (3) internal opportunities in insurance subs are less available. We just don’t know any of this. In absence of (1), (2) and (3), it would either accumulate dropping that ROE overtime or do a return of capital.

Nothing of the sort. “Peter the Great” is a very well written history book on a great leader that pulled Russia out of medieval age through sheer force of personality. “Nicolas and Alexandra” covers its demise. That said, like any other history book it may pay dividend in unexpected ways through knowledge compounding. I personally find Orient and Asia an area of interest. Maybe not for investment in a financial sense. But just interesting. If Canadian-Chinese relation go back to normal, I hope one day to be able to travel to Tibet.

If that famous constant $150 per share per annum earning builds up against 2024 equity, as that equity goes up and accumulates then ROE would drop in year 3, as equity now has a larger base. So there is a case for FFH not trade at a premium multiple in the out year.

One could argue that Berkshire “water the flowers but keeps the weeds to”. Besides the big 5-6 equity names there is a whole bunch of tracking stocks. And this predates the inception of T & T mini portfolios.

The whole “not locking in duration” decision also had an impact on market share that FFH could grab at the right time as its peers got walloped. Would that increase in market share show up anywhere other than now larger pool of gross insurance premiums. Is there a positive scale factor in for such a non-centralized entity ?

Dinar, Israel is doing God’ work with Hamas. Without getting into specifics, it is not easy to do that without collateral. And the optics is bad for them. That said it is also a slaughterhouse. Two things can be truth at the same time.

I highly recommend this specific episode where the host is interviewing former Mossad director and another gentleman. You can hear the pain and anguish in their voice. The event clearly left a mark. they seem to be right on point on many issues that need to be resolved. It is a great listen specifically for non-Middle eastern folks such as North Americans and Europeans whose interest and understanding ebbs and flows depending on what else is exciting and popping in the world.