gfp

Of course not. And no, I would not trust him to run the country either. Both jobs deserve a different temperament and both are pretty important.

Small acquisition at Marmon - http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160920/NEWS07/160929978/buffetts-marmon-buys-italys-dominioni-in-pasta-equipment-wager

Are you working with an Agora affiliate?

Here's an article talking about Jain's cost cutting memo at General Re from Insurance Insider: ---------------------------- Jain seeks cost cuts at Gen Re: Report Berkshire Hathaway's reinsurance chief Ajit Jain has told staff at Gen Re to fix the cost "problem" at the subsidiary, according to a memo obtained by Bloomberg. The letter called on employees to tackle the issue "intelligently" to give the carrier "a shot at making a real dent in the expense-to-premium ratio", according to the newswire. It reportedly rounded off by saying: "If we can't, we will need to explore other ways to do so." The executive called for Gen Re to become leaner and less bureaucratic as he looks to slash costs and narrow the expense ratio. He said this could be achieved by handing more autonomy to individual business units as well as accepting modifications to some reinsurance deals in a bid to reduce complexity. Jain reportedly said Gen Re had a "cost problem", adding: "The ratio of expenses to premiums is not where it should or could be." The executive talked about overhauling the reinsurer's compensation structure, arguing that its underwriters had an incentive to turn away business that had the potential to turn a profit. He blamed this on a model under which bonuses were tied to margins and not overall earnings. "We are fortunate that Gen Re has so many employees that place the interests of the company above their personal interests," he reportedly wrote. "But that doesn't justify leaving a plan in place that puts that instinct under stress," he was said to have continued. He suggested countering that structure with discretionary bonuses that were assessed using subjective metrics. This would see high-achievers compensated at the expense of underperformers. He discussed reducing bureaucracy in the business by slashing the number of levels of management from six to just four or three. Also in the crosshairs were travel and entertainment expenses for internal meetings. Jain effectively took the helm of Gen Re earlier this year as his oversight was broadened across Berkshire's reinsurance operations. He appointed long-time Gen Re executive Kara Raiguel as CEO of the unit, replacing Tad Montross, and signaled a change in strategy at the reinsurer to widen its distribution platform from its traditional direct model. The reinsurer subsequently signed a deal with TransRe for the Alleghany subsidiary to act as its MGA in the US broker market.

They've been adding to Liberty Global and LiLAC recently and they bought Liberty Media at some point in the past, which resulted in the tracking stocks. Interestingly, they sold some Charter. One or both of the T's are fans of Malone, that's for sure. So is Buffett.

Bloomberg ran an article on Precision Castparts and CEO Donegan today -> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-08-03/buffett-s-bet-on-a-relentless-ceo

Here's an example of the type of ROE they shoot for at the utility. There is a significant time lag before the ROE's are earned and actual cash taxes factor into it of course. To a certain degree, I also believe the utility is under-earning as a sort of marketing strategy to regulators so approval will come for large future acquisitions in this space. Going forward, warren is happy to make an almost guaranteed 8-12% perpetually in this rate environment and can live with locking in these returns "permanently" on that capital. Not a way to get rich - Berkshire is already rich. http://www.utilitydive.com/news/midamerican-energy-reaches-settlement-to-move-2-gw-wind-farm-forward/423385/ edit: hadn't seen benjamin1978's post before typing. i agree with him/her

BAC says it is $16.68 per share (tangible bv per share)

Do you want the companies with negative earnings subtracted from the total of the companies with positive earnings or do you want the total of the companies with positive earnings? I'm not sure the Russell 2000 had positive earnings as a group for the trailing 12 months (on a net eps basis)

Jain bid on Transatlantic Re, but there may have been more to it than a simple auction bid. He may have been doing a friend a favor to get another bidder to come up or block someone - I can't remember the specifics but Berkshire didn't buy the company. Despite Berkshire's long stated "rule" that they don't participate in auctions, they absolutely do and this isn't new. Most of the companies they purchased out of Bankruptcy and several negotiated takeovers that had other interested parties over the years. Warren can define "auction" loosely and keep it in the "rules". It primarily serves to remind sellers that Berkshire doesn't like to duke it out with others so don't try it or you risk us pulling our offer, as well as the standard "we don't want to bring in managers/founders who care so little about their baby that they would sell it to the highest bidder vs the best permanent home" edit - Alleghany ended up winning TransRe, which Gen Re - now under Ajit's management - just signed a broker market cooperation deal with. I do believe Ajit is close with TransRe management and Berk's bid was a sort of favor for a friend. TransRe didn't want Validus to get the company for whatever reason.

I shared this elsewhere, but some here might be interested in this A.M. Best magazine article on Ajit Jain with comments from Warren - this links to the article in PDF format, might not be available forever at this link but working now: http://www3.ambest.com/review/article/July2016/32_KeyInfluencers_AjitJain.pdf

Why include Biglari with ZINC, SHLD, VRX etc? I agree. I think the common theme is "If it sounds too good to be true..." It certainly is interesting to watch a number train wrecks (SHLD, Biglari, Zinc were others ) that were so intensely scrutinized as an investment to run aground. It certainly should teach a healthy dose of skepticism and humility ton aspiring investor. While I never invested in any of them (they mostly did not look cheap or Were too complex for me), some did look god even to me at some point, I have to admit. I think more and more that defining one's circle of competence is the most important thing and should rule over almost anything else in investing. When in doubt or something even remotely smells iffy, just stay away on it - because from my experience, if you do put a lot ofwork into something, you inevitable think you understand it and put money in an idea that may be outside your circle, as it turns out later.

Same thing on iPhone

Wells was down around February lows. Picked up some shares there this morning. Added to Goldman Sachs as well. I realize those are probably not on your watch list. Added to ITB (homebuilders) as well. So far not that big of a change if you factor in that yesterday was a +270 day

I stand corrected - I had always been told the interest went to the plan administrator but have now read otherwise. What's the point of charging the interest at all I wonder?

http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0400-news/0100-press-releases/2016/release066-16.cfm

thanks racemize - that site has lots of potential. Really nice looking snapshot

In some markets, Berkshire Hathaway Energy's local companies are the low cost provider - MidAmerican for example. Obviously in Vegas there is a savings by purchasing power from other generators. NVE's rates are set by the regulator while a large customer can negotiate market rates directly with a producer.

They are the only transmission provider. The casinos will still be transmission customers.

How on earth were you able to make KAHL your largest position? There is next to zero volume

are you guys missing the "just one time" dividend question?

I'm not sure how to answer your question but I would suggest 1.3x book value isn't an expensive entry point and you could add to your position on any declines from there. Don't hold your breath for another trip below 130/share unless there is a huge drop in the market. If it ever gets to within a buck or less of the 1.2x buyback number, it makes sense to buy aggressively if you don't have your full position yet. It's not terribly difficult to value the company yourself, so you might as well make a habit of relying on your own analysis. Book value can be shown empirically to be understated by at least a small amount (KraftHeinz isn't marked to market for instance) so a small premium to book is a pretty safe entry point. With the company retaining all earnings and a shrinking portion of book marked to market your cost basis will end up below book value soon enough. What I see a lot of people doing wrong with BRK is trying to be too precise and not just buying the stock when it's close enough to a great deal. You can miss out on a multi-decade position if you fuss over the last quarter. You don't need a scale to tell if somebody is fat

Ted Turner wrote a book called, "Call me Ted" that I read a long time ago. I don't remember it being bad, but it's been a long time. His life was interesting but he isn't an entirely self made man (he started with a lot of billboards if I remember correctly)

This might be worth a read http://www.amazon.com/Capital-Returns-Investing-Through-Managers/dp/1137571640 a couple chapter intro excerpts are available here if you are hesitant to purchase without a sample - http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9781137571649#reviews as well some old OID issues have excerpts from his letters: http://oid.com/index.php?route=product/moneymanager&path=183