merkhet

I suspect that the engineering link is because the margin of safety concept is key in both disciplines.

When you're the CEO of a company, you have a bunch of people reporting to you. The board, as others have pointed out, while supposedly an authority, tends to be a social club in many aspects. In the end, you generally find that most of the people who surround a CEO tend to kiss his or her ass. It's no different than a smaller version of becoming a celebrity. (When hundreds of thousands of fans spend time fawning over you, it's hard not to lose your head.) It makes those people who can resist such things all the more special.

So you're saying that @ 100% of the market and with 30% margins, it'll only be priced at 28x earnings? Such a steal. :)

Uber Gets an Uber-Valuation Car Service Secures $1.2 Billion in Funding, Valuing It at $18.2 Billion, Among Highest Ever http://online.wsj.com/articles/uber-gets-uber-valuation-of-18-2-billion-1402073876?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories *sigh*

Barry was a professor of mine. Incredibly bright guy in person. I'll have to check out that book.

So incredibly helpful. You are my new personal hero.

In order of importance: (1) Poor Charlie's Almanack (2) You Can Be a Stock Market Genius (3) Nudge (4) Security Analysis (5) Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits

I must have missed the publication of his investment record. How bad was it?

Agree with wellmont. It's a pretty bad summary of the Fannie & Freddie issues. "Emily," who tries to describe takings law completely misses the fact that there's such a thing as regulatory taking that doesn't require physical taking.

Cognitive dissonance exists everywhere...

+1

Clearly, I was talking about stocks. If you see See's, GEICO or Iscar traded somewhere, let me know so I can buy myself a piece of that...

At the beginning of every Q&A session, they always say they are not going to talk about existing investments or future investments. I don't know why people think they're going to get a stock tip out of these meetings.

These books had a formative impact on my life growing up. I really enjoyed them and think they are particularly applicable to investing.

Well, Doug used that as a platform to ask Berkshire to give him money to run a short book for them -- so I'm guessing that probably didn't endear him to Buffett and Munger.

This is probably #1 for me as well. His speech at the University of Florida in 1998 was particularly instructive: For this little nugget of wisdom, I am eternally grateful.

It is usually a good idea to come off as condescending when trying to explain something. It creates the right tone and environment for explanation and learning. So you are saying sarcasm is more effective? :) But yes, you are correct (or at least the opposite of what you wrote being what you meant is correct) , I should have left all of that out of my post. Exactly. Sarcasm >> {everything else} :)

It is usually a good idea to come off as condescending when trying to explain something. It creates the right tone and environment for explanation and learning.

+1 That was my first thought as well.

I can hold 4 of Berkshire's holdings as 100% of my portfolio. Berkshire cannot have 4 holdings as 100% of its portfolio.

+1

I love the idea of a "1% Club."

I feel like a lot of people are investing in this based on analysis that is compromised by emotion. (i.e. This is wrong, and I will be vindicated.)

Donated as well -- I hope to be able to donate more in the coming years.

Dang it merket! I said the same thing and you didn't even read through the posts to find it! ;-) Good artists copy. Great artists steal outright! :)