ERICOPOLY

Suppose Berkshire winds up with 1.5b shares (including warrants). That adds $3b+ look-through earnings. How much does that increase Berkshire's earnings power, percentage wise?

Buffett ought to do a Sir-Mix-A-Lot spoof for the Annual Meeting.

Not moved yet. We've shelved Australia -- will get back to that adventure when the kids start middle school (oldest is now in kindergarten). We're headed for the LA region until then. My wife won't go to the San Francisco Bay Area (my first choice) because my parents live there, so we're headed for sunny LA. Fine second option! We can travel to Australia for skiing during the too-hot summers (now that the kids are of school age we can't do long ski trips during the school year). This way we can rack up the time in Australia to count towards my two years collective time in the country (at that point I can get citizenship for the kids).

Actually when BofA sold 400 million new shares into the market in December that was the perfect opportunity for Berkshire to add -- lots of additional liquidity. Considering how the market price dropped further, he was able to buy all that and more if he wanted (supply was clearly in excess of demand).

"Now under new ownership."

Ok Al, I'll bite! Why April 9th? Is that your birthday or something? ;D Cheers! Mine is April 10th. However April 9th in the US is the 10th in Australia.

And what has this got to do with the price of Tea in China? WEB been buying? The price of BAC is lagging due to a crisis of confidence. It's down nearly 50% over the past 12 months -- severe lack of confidence. Buffett brings leadership to the table.

Anyways the 13-F from Berkshire will be out next week.

racemize, It's still probably a 50 cent dollar or less (I'd say 40 cent or less). Hardly a happy/optimistic market! Was it happy/optimistic when it first hit this price last August?

Go! Go! Go!

I figure that tangible book will be $14+ by then. I have lots and lots of $15 strike 2014 and $10 2013 (and 2014). They were just so cheap! My thinking is to wait until this coming January and then write a deep-in-the-money 2014 call for every $15 strike call I have. Then take the cash proceeds from writing the calls and use it to exercise the 2013 strike $10 calls (defer the taxes another year while also holding for more gains).

lol, me too, on the tax losses. Carry back up here. And the Bac in black. Your carry back is a great and fair thing. I have a feeling though that in the next 6 months I will be able to use up my tax losses 8)

You guys should relax. You were expecting IKEA furniture?

Remember the Vanity Fair piece by Michael Lewis. Why can't they implement tax collection?

So Whos makin money? While my returns since the start of 2011 are only in the high single digits, I have a mile high of tax losses to carry forward. BAC in black, so to speak.

Italy needs to grow at 4.8 per cent just to avoid increasing its debt burden where its budget is balanced. Fortunately that's not necessary. The budget does not need to be balanced, it just needs to grow debt no faster than GDP.

Bruce is doing an interview tomorrow: http://www.fairholmefunds.com/pdf/ConversationBB.pdf

The last few years have been exciting. Going forward I am going to look at value investing as bending over to pick up 50 cent receivables. In recognition that I really don't know what the hell is going to happen while I'm bent over. I changed the word "dollars" to "receivables" due to recognition that macro forces are at work.

I think so too. It's hiding too much in the open for this to take long.

I don't like the BAC warrants that much either. We've got 7 more years to expiry. Break even point is $16.78. The $12 strike 2014 calls are 78 cents (break even at $12.78). They keep your foot in the door while deploying only 20% of the money. In 2014 you'll have a much better idea of how things are tracking vs today. So the break even point is fully $4 less and you are at that point only left with 5 years of remaining life on the warrants. There won't be significant dividends paid over the next two years. So you'll start 2014 $4 ahead (on a break even basis). At that time you can probably buy 2016 $12 strike calls or $15 strike calls or whatever. You'll have your foot in the door. Meanwhile you've got far less cash deployed. Things go very wrong over the first two years and you lose 1/5 as much. Things go as I expect with 99% of my heart and most likely you wind up with a spike to $20 in the first 3-4 years and you've got a lower cost basis as you roll your options.

Yacktman appears to have the right idea in terms of buying high quality businesses at fair to good prices that will give you a decent risk-adjusted return over time. And I'm not just talking about him because he "made money" last year. Yacktman's portfolio is the type of portfolio that someone who is really rich would want to have to first preserve -- and second grow -- one's wealth without too much stress. And guess what Yacktman bought in Q4? BAC.

They sold FAIRX and bought BAC after Bruce explained to his fundholders how much BAC would look like WFC in early 1990s, but the fund is only allowed to buy 5%. Okay, that's probably a small minority of his shareholders but that's what I would have done.

The article doesn't clearly explain why lawmakers would resist such a ban. ;D The political intelligence industry comprises hundreds of lobbyists, former congressional aides and others who scour Washington for market-moving tips about pending government activities that could affect stock prices. These political intelligence purveyors are paid by hedge funds and other Wall Street firms to gather information about pending changes in public policy the investors can use to make trades. A study by the nonpartisan Integrity Research Associates said the global market for policy research and political intelligence services is about $400 million a year and growing.

$19.86 -- April 15, 2010. What a crazy stock market.

Banning Congress from trading on insider information. Passed the Senate 96-3. Now it needs to pass the House. Found this quote funny: The focus of one of the Journal stories, Rep. Spencer Bachus (R., Ala.), became an unlikely champion. He helped revive the bill with a high-profile hearing in the House Financial Services Committee, which he chairs, and used the opportunity to press more senior Republican leaders for a vote on the House floor. Republican leaders initially balked, scolding Mr. Bachus in an angry meeting in December. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203711104577199113513037068.html?mod=WSJ_article_LatestHeadlines