Jump to content

alwaysinvert

Member
  • Posts

    994
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

alwaysinvert's Achievements

Apprentice

Apprentice (3/14)

  • Conversation Starter
  • Dedicated
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. He mentioned in passing that "he knows a guy" that produces as many smartphones as Apple. AFAIK, the only one that really fits that description is Jay Y Lee. I didn't know that they were personally familiar with each other. BRK had a small investment in Samsung a few years back, which he sold for a quick double or so. Maybe he's back in again. BRK would be a pretty logical taker of block trades associated with sales of Samsung stock in order to meet inheritance tax obligations. Samsung owner family is 3 trillion won short in inheritance tax payment (koreatimes.co.kr)
  2. Agreed. I also feel compelled to answer here since the risk is that you will get responses disproportionately on the sycophantic side. It would be a short-term cash grab in exchange for the longevity of the site, as new blood is always needed to keep it going. There is no cachet associated with being a member here, as opposed to something like VIC, so ease of access is important. To be fair, the site has already been heading downwards in quantity of posts so it could be a good trade-off for the owner if we are looking at the inevitable anyways (not saying that's definitely the case). Sadly, the new forum design is worse than the old one without seemingly adding any relevant functionality from the member's POV. You did a donation drive a couple of years ago and I think I gave a couple of hundred bucks in that one, but tbh I'm not really up for being a customer of a message board. Having 20+ years of experience from all kinds of different niche forums, I strongly doubt that I'm alone in this. It doesn't matter what the hardcore "social" users say here - think about the ones who are going to provide new fresh stock pitches continuously, which is ultimately the life blood of the site. Maybe high monetization can be done, who knows. But be too aggressive and you *will* kill the golden goose.
  3. I hear COBF is already negotiating with numerous spacs. Murmurs of a valuation north of $2b for this SaaSy name.
  4. If there are multiple hedge funds going under from "infinite" squeezes here it seems logical that there could be a role for BRK as a bailout provider once again? They need someone with pretty much unlimited capital to come in and save them from complete wipeout by giving them certain staying power. What could be more logical than Berkshire for this purpose? Buying hedge funds for 5 cents on the dollar seems like Buffett's kind of business and it was a somewhat close call with LTCM back in the day, so it's not like it would be unprecedented.
  5. This would be a foolproof argument if they *could* easily buy oodles of stock over the market. But they can't. I'm not saying that he thinks it's at 50% of IV, but probably - at most - something like 80%. There is room to be somewhat more aggressive with bids over the market, but likely not as much as people seem to believe. If suddenly buyback volumes in a quarter were ratcheted up 100% from these levels, the stock would take off, making further buybacks that much harder. There is both a volume problem and a serious front-running issue. Also, as Munger expresed recently, other opportunities are dwindling while cash is growing. He has every incentive to undersell the fact that they were doing buybacks all the way up until Dec 31 and that's what the overall effect of the letter was, while still, oh-so-galantly, offering to relieve people of large blocks of stock. Just like he last did in the 1999 letter, mind you: I'm sorry, but I'm with Viking on this one. I don't buy the it's hard to buy stock argument. You have to keep in mind that this is Buffett we're talking about. He may be a geezer but he's probably one of the savviest stock traders that ever walked the face of the Earth. He didn't have a problem buying huge amounts of stock in ANY company if it meant making money. And we're not talking here just large companies like Coke and Apple. We're talking obscure shit like Sanford Map and other stuff. The man know how to buy stock if he wants to. But all of a sudden it's hard for him to buy stock in the 5th largest corporation in America? Nah man. If he's not buying huge amounts of stock is because he doesn't want to, not because he can't or doesn't know how. I guess Buffett is just completely full of shit here then:
  6. This would be a foolproof argument if they *could* easily buy oodles of stock over the market. But they can't. I'm not saying that he thinks it's at 50% of IV, but probably - at most - something like 80%. There is room to be somewhat more aggressive with bids over the market, but likely not as much as people seem to believe. If suddenly buyback volumes in a quarter were ratcheted up 100% from these levels, the stock would take off, making further buybacks that much harder. There is both a volume problem and a serious front-running issue. Also, as Munger expresed recently, other opportunities are dwindling while cash is growing. He has every incentive to undersell the fact that they were doing buybacks all the way up until Dec 31 and that's what the overall effect of the letter was, while still, oh-so-galantly, offering to relieve people of large blocks of stock. Just like he last did in the 1999 letter, mind you:
  7. I see that people extract from the letter that Buffett is implying that Berkshire is trading at 95 cents on the dollar. This is a severe case of bad reading comprehension. He is saying the *exact opposite* of that. By juxtaposing that passage, which is a hypothetical, with the fact that he has been buying at current levels, he's emphatically signalling that in his view the stock is trading below 95% of IV (and likely comfortably below).
  8. Right. There is a reason why block transactions between market participants customarily, in normal markets, go for a discount to market. Buffett offers the open-ended opportunity to trade large blocks at market. It's a great deal for high-volume sellers.
  9. Avg daily volume is 80M+ on the As and 800M on the Bs. Why would you call? You can sell faster, with less brokerage costs and no risk of pushing down the market price if you are in a hurry. Let's say Ackman gives up his activism, is hit by large outflows or finds another cheap opportunity that he wants to reallocate to because it offers higher returns. What will he do, drip feed stock into the market or call up Berkshire and get stock taken off his hands immediately? The rational answer is obvious.
  10. It surely would be a logical solution for Berkshire to directly take the 5 million Bs they sell into the market every quarter. But this has been discussed quite a bit and appearances may make it less than ideal. Also, why wouldn't they have made the arrangements for that already then? Maybe it can now more easily be done as part of a larger policy of buying back on demand outside the market.
  11. $2.2b for the quarter. Adjusted for share issuance in Q4 but not in Q1 thus far (as we don't know those numbers), there should be additional repurchases for just shy of $400m up to Feb 13. Top price paid in Q4 per B of ~226 and probably a bit higher than that in Q1. The hotline number for selling back shares takes a proper tender offer off the table for at least the next couple of years imo. But maybe you can frame this as a form of "sneaky" tender offer which could potentially give extra large volumes from institutional owners if we ever see significant outflows from the market again. It will be interesting to hear if he touts this offer on CNBC on Monday, as the awareness of it from the letter alone may not be enough. A dividend will definitely not happen either before this method of buyback has been tested. Anyhow, it is finally something of an admission that the market just will not acommodate large enough volumes for repurchases, at least not until enough of Buffett's shares get out there.
  12. Can't read it, but at what point does it become anything but "horrible" to call for some action? $200b in cash? $300b? $400b? Obviously he will do whatever he wants but the option value of the next billion at this point is probably pretty close to 0.
  13. When was Buffett's last televised interview? Googling tells me he was on CNBC on May 3 but I can't find anything after that and I don't remember anything after the annual meeting rounds. Has he ever stayed out of the media for that long in the last 10 years or so?
  14. Nobody has mentioned him yet so I'm going to say that in the last few years writser has been the best contributor, hands down. There are a couple very smart people here, but he stands out in terms of idea generation and willingness to share.
×
×
  • Create New...