Xerxes

that is hilarious

Howards is a debt investor. But his audience mostly consists of equity investor and I think he speaks mostly to the equity side when he gives interviews, unless when he is being explicit that he talking debt.

Great topic @Parsad I tend to agree with your view, eventough I prefer that you were wrong as I am capped out for the year hahahah. And have to wait till 2023 to buy more. I like to think one big bear market rally once the market “smells” softening of inflation data in 2022, followed by a “mild” leg down in 2023 reflecting a mild recession as the “e” of the p/e drops out. The market and general public are used to see “recession” connected with major exogenous events. Covid, Sept-11 and not so exogenous of the banking leverage. nothing is wrong with a mild 1994 style recession. PS: It is hard to put one self out there publicly at portfolio-level. Thanks for doing that.

If needs be C&F can use the funds to invest in FFH itself. While those shares won’t be earmarked for cancellation, it is an effective investment on an asset they know well. bottom line, the crew is creative enough to find ways past the the dividend capacity constraints if those are indeed hard constraints.

So all it took was the Fed chairman waiving his hand, and the phantom was turned into a shade of itself …

Folks with a bearish tilt tend to look smart in a bear market, until they overstay their welcome, while folks with bullish tilt look smart in a bull market, until they overstay their welcome. It is one thing to be a mega contrarian like Jeremie Grantham, making a bet a year before the top, and willing to look stupid for a year, but staying the course with that view. it is entirely another thing for media pundits to state what is safe to say at the moment, “I.e it has 20-30% more to go”. The same people were saying “it has more legs to go up” as that was the safe vector.

I am more intrigued about FFH allocation in Q2 than I am of BRK. The former has been for years waiting for quality at a price. A protracted bear market is their opportunity. on BRK, would it be too insane to say that perhaps BRK gobbled too much of its own stock in the past two years (at the back end). Clearly going forward it’s free cash flow will now have more options to be allocated (than just its own stock) but its own stock would also be attractively valued.

“Dark” the German TV show or “Dark Waters” the movie. I have seen a commercial for “1899” from the producers of “Dark”. “Dark” was brilliant.

Babylon Berlin (new season whenever that maybe) is the only reason why I would re-sign up for Netflix. where do you watch Das Boot ?

For the Canadians here, you can watch “1883: Yellowstone prequel” on Prime by signing up for a free one month trial for Paramount+ through Prime and than blasting through it.

finished them both. Great stuff. though I prefer Bosch as a cop than private detective. “We Own the City” is one season only.

If the regulatory environment takes a very sharp turn, the next $1 trillion FANG will the Amazon Web Services.

The last I saw him was in the Sopranos prequel. on a different news. this looks amazing. adding yet more to that expanded franchise.

Arab guy with a turban ? most likely it was a Sikh interestingly, there was a Sikh who was killed right after Sept 11, for looking like an Arab. Wrong place, wrong time, wrong looks. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Balbir_Singh_Sodhi

May he rests in peace. too young ! “Ray Liotta, 'Goodfellas' star and gifted character actor, dies at 67”

With the re-pricing of treasuries and global assets, I think “the next $ trillion FANG” can now de de-rated into “the next $600 billion FANG”.

Berkshire swallowing Markel is a highly bearish news for Markel shareholders who prides themselves in owning a Berkshire like entity back in time in 1990s. The whale had its fill for now with Allenghany. Not interested in Markel

My strategy is based on a key guiding principal: I am dumber than I think I am. With that in mind : So 40% of the portfolio is with BRK, FFH, BAM, Onex etc. Let them do their thing. 12% commodities 16% in big tech (heavy index exposure) 20% on blue chip basket the balance on semi-rubbish I got hammered on the rubbish stuff and big tech. But since I will be net buyer for the next 15 years, will continue to accumulate slowly. i employ zero margin

Sometimes you have a blackhole in the middle of a Galaxy.

i wasn’t talking about the deposits in the banks. That is clearly on the balance sheet as a source of funding Was talking about the stocks, bonds that the client owns that belong to the client. Those do not belong on the bank balance sheet. BUT the bank capture the management fees of that asset under management through its income statement.

It is all the same. If you use cash on hand from balance sheet, if you raise cash via equity issuance or take more debt to put cash on balance sheet. All three results in using cash from the company own balance sheet and resources to invest in that Luna venture. in contrast to using client money (not on your balance sheet) to seed investment

Citigroup must be managing several trillions dollars of assets. They do not appear on its balance sheet. It is not Citigroup money. I think same concept.