wisdom

Canada faces decade of 'significant risk,' influential hedge fund warns Ray Dalio - anyone have access to the article. Could you provide a summary. TIA.

Cash and minimal exposure to commodities and commodity producing countries.

http://centman.com/files/CNM18589_NewsletterInflationandGold_web.pdf Good read. Chance of inflation or deflation depending on Feds action/choices and why CM believes inflation is more likely.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-19/asia-futures-drop-after-fed-won-forwards-slip-oil-gains.html Chinese mfg still slowing.

I do not believe the IV would change much as long as the thesis is intact and there is no material change in the business. Mr market may react differently.

1% - thank you Sanjeev for this board. It is appreciated. Also, to individuals that contribute. It is rare to find people who can discuss ideas respectfully even if they do not agree with them.

I was watching an interview with Prem and the interviewer told Prem that his returns were better than Buffett's over the last 10 years. Prem's reply was that I only have a 25 yr record whereas Buffett has an excellent record over 40+ years. So he doesn't even come close. I doubt many individuals here have a 25 yr record close to HW. We are all experts as a result of the run up over the last few years. It reminds me of how people question every investment/decision Buffett makes only for him to be proven right in the long run most of the time. It is interesting to watch. Some names whose investments have been considered wrong over the last few years - Buffett, Berkowitz, Watsa, Lampert. I know who I would rather invest/bet with.

In Canada - the 25 year amortization is only for insured mortgages. Uninsured mortgages can have an amortization of 30 years.

Canada does not have 30 yr mortgages. Max is 10 years though that is extremely rare. Most people choose 1 to 5 yr terms and have to renew at that point. Amortization is 30 years.

He is investing in private businesses. The major indicies and large caps are not cheap. As a foriegner you cannot invest directly in indian markets.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6e3d05fc-8100-11e3-95aa-00144feab7de.html deflation in europe

What would be the minimum Investment required? I would be interested. Thanks.

bullish part 1 http://wealthtrack.com/recent-programs/ed-hyman-bill-miller-investment-legends-predictions-2014/ part 2 http://wealthtrack.com/recent-programs/ed-hyman-bill-miller-part-ii-investment-legends-predictions-2014/

Parsad what you are saying is too sensible. Human nature does not allow for that. :)

On bonds they have averaged over 10% over the last 15 years. with leverage 3x it is more like 30% on equity. That is 2x their returns on stocks over the last 15 yrs. From AR going back a couple of yrs Investments The table below shows the time-weighted compound annual returns (including equity hedging) achieved by Hamblin Watsa Investment Counsel (HWIC), ... 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years Common stocks (with equity hedging) 8.7 % 15.8% 14.2% Taxable bonds 13.3 % 12.5% 10.4%

US is different and should be a beneficiary due to the low input costs going forward and the fact that its corporations are so efficient. The sheer amount of R&D and leaps in technology happening in the US is overwhelming. It is truly amazing. In addition, US started its deleveraging before others and have gone about it better than most. They could have done it better but perfection doesn't happen in real life. US will continue to be the leader in science and technology in our lifetimes and i don't see anyone challenging that. For any bright mind in the world - this is where i would want to be - i can get financing and other like minded people to work with me. It is a huge moat.

I should have added that in a competitive world your increase in margins from the drop in commodity prices should not last as your competition achieves the same and could use this opportunity to gain market share by cutting prices.

True when looking at the big picture but it plays out differently on the ground level. My best explanation would be: 1) As revenues drop due to deflation business start looking for opportunities to cut costs to bring costs in line with new revenues - jobs, etc. 2) the still employed workers choose not to take pay cuts. It would be a better outcome for society if everyone took a proportionate cut in pay, but what happens is that companies end up laying off individuals while the rest keep earning the same as before. Hope it makes sense.

From the annual report cost of float v bond rates: Weighted average since inception (2.5)% 4.5% Fairfax weighted average financing differential since inception: 2.0%

Commodities going down in price isn't going to squeeze the producers of finished goods, is it? Let's say I depend on the price of steel to produce pickup trucks. I should worry about deflation's effects on my business if we are merely talking about the cost of steel going into the truck being cheaper? I don't get it -- that sounds like helpful deflation. I either make more profit on the truck, or I lower the price and make more trucks (getting full utilization out of my truck making plant, profits then rise). It is not helpful for commodity producers especially ones with debt. If it reduces earned income it would reduce consumers spending power. What will that do all the factory workers in developing countries?

He is speaking to the average individual and not investors.

I believe FFH would be fairly well positioned if that played out. From what I understand FFH has identified China and commodity producing countries such as Canada and Australia as potential risks. They believe a slow down in China could lead to lower commodity prices which inturn could lead to global deflation. One of the many reasons for their deflation hedges.

oddball - I was referring to 365 days of performance and not over a longer period of time. The statement had nothing to do with EMH.

It is easy to get carried away with results over the last 365 days, so I thought I might provide some perspective: I wonder how much of the performance is just because we had a larger exposure to the market than the average person and it so happened that equities did well. The fact you are on this board - you have a group that is more likely to be in equities. I worry about hubris - I would personally need to repeat this many times to believe it is more than me getting lucky this year. This board either includes the better than average (market) investors or else we could get reversion to mean at some point in time.

Float gives you permanent capital unlike a hedge fund plus leverage if done right. The switch from cigar butts to buying good businesses isn't as easy as it mind sound either - otherwise BRK would have never become what it is (everyone would have done the same).