mpauls

Look, you don't need Buffett's 50 Years of knowledge to do extremely well. You might however need Buffett's 50 Years of Knowledge to do well with the amount of wealth created from 50 years of way higher than average compounded interest. That said you do need at least 5-10 years of the kind of knowledge you get by locking yourself in a room and thinking deliberately about repeatable business failure and success. And there are no shortcuts. When you get really confident that you know something valuable and you think you are ready, you probably have a few years left before you are ready. How do you know you're there? I tell people (as a rule of thumb) you'll know you are there when the problems/questions you wish to solve/answer can not be found in any textbook or any other source i.e. when you can no longer lean on anyone else for answers-either by choice or otherwise.

I recall reading somewhere that at his 80th birthday party he gave a speech in which he reflected on his life and didn't mention his investing career. Yes, and he quoted Twain.

I think you got some of the years and editions wrong. When you say the 4th is a waste of paper and Graham had nothing to do with it, I think you mean the 5th edition. The 1940 edition was reissued as the 6th (not 5th) edition. I completely agree with you though the 5th edition is a waste of paper. I was shocked at how bad it is. I always got the feeling Dodd realized it, but was kind of like "hey, everyone else is getting rich in the market [this was the mid to late 1980s], so why shouldn't I, as one of the deans of investing make a few bucks too?" I think by the time it got to the 4th edition Graham was already out of the investment business (since about 1956) and have been in LA for 4 or 5 years teaching at UCLA and dabbling with various mistresses. I think the intellectual stimulation provided him by investing was largely gone by that time and continued to wane until it reached almost zero (never quite zero though). I recall reading somewhere that at his 80th birthday party he gave a speech in which he reflected on his life and didn't mention his investing career. Yes you were correct. I noticed it too and made the adjustment in the original text, but thanks and good eye!

[EDIT] The 5th edition (1988) is a waste of paper and clearly Graham had nothing to do with it the 1940ed is still the classic (also the 6th edition revised). Greenwald says Graham's involvement in the 4th ed was also limited. Outside individuals certainly contributed to certain sections i.e. discussion on utility companies, but the whole of it certainly feels and reads very much like graham to me.

I didn't look into the transaction so I don't know what was paid, but I'm familiar (or used to be) with this company and it's actually not a bad "bet" assuming a reasonable price, which given Prem is likely.

"The death of equities". That's an expression for idiots (i.e. incentive caused bias/"I have no shame" PIMCO). I guess the idea was that everything would be 100% debt financed.

How about full financials? Can be standardized, but I'd adjust the units so they are not as stated. That way no one is tempted to look up the numbers.

My fiancé used to throw random company financials at me from the S&P 500 Stock guide while I was doing some menial task. I love this sort of thing.

lol, I didn't read the entire thread.

Thanks for the link Matt ... and if you could tell us what you think of the book... Reading it now, so far it's a good read.

Sounds like you may work with Wells Fargo. They are in desperate need of help resolving their Wachovia legacy problems (Risk Management Department).

Great introduction, you could be a salesman for a FOF; lol. Geez, could you lump me in with anything lower? ;D Cheers! Whitney Tilson? Ppphhhttt! I just spat out my coffee. LOL! That was funny. Cheers! lol. Seriously though, nice introduction.

Great introduction, you could be a salesman for a FOF; lol. Geez, could you lump me in with anything lower? ;D Cheers! Whitney Tilson?

Great introduction, you could be a salesman for a FOF; lol.

I had someone build a database from scratch for such purposes. He's planing to take the product to market as the low cost provider. He developed the FCC's database among others, so the product is quite good. I'll update when appropriate.

Strange enough, I got the book for 6 dollars with shipping. The second link below however turns up another set of (higher) prices. http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B000GK212E/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/1587981459/sr=/qid=/ref=olp_tab_all?ie=UTF8&coliid=&me=&qid=&sr=&seller=&colid=

Here's something I put together a few years ago, but the valuation process is still in tact. http://www.scribd.com/doc/33298273/BerkshireHathawayWEB

You'll earn roughly 18% per annum.

It's hard to argue that Berkshire isn't undervalued. The question is always, are there better opportunities available? If you know what to look for, the answer is yes, but if you are a pension fund you should probably only hold Berkshire.

Arlington, Virginia!

"As of Friday, the S&P 500 was within 1% of its upper Bollinger band at virtually every horizon, including daily, weekly and monthly bands." hahaha. Good one. Thanks, I needed that.

Yeah just think Cramer, if everyone thought as clearly as you they would have lost 90+% on your recommendations to a conference audience the day prior to the end of the tech bubble.

I hate to see people fall for this trap. If you would like, I am happy to explain to either of you why she should seriously reconsider her approach. If you send me a private message, I'll give you my number.

When I get some extra time, I'll upload the other talks.

It is a bit noisy at first. http://investinginknowledge.com/info/2012/02/bill-miller-bruce-greenwald-2012-columbia-investment-management-conference/