Liberty

+2

Same for me, but as long as he likes it, I guess he can spend his money however he wants... And now that it's been sold for that much, the signal has been sent to other collectors that it's worth at least that, so Cohen could probably sell it again and not lose money (as long as he's timing the art cycle a bit and doesn't offload it at the bottom)...

Yes, of course! Don’t you remember we had a discussion about his latest album “Popular Problems” just a few days ago? ;) Cheers, Gio Right after posting I thought "was it with Gio that I talked about Cohen?". Sorry, memory failed me on that one. :-[

I got the new album/compilation but haven't had much time to listen yet. Gio, are you also into Leonard Cohen? Another great writer.

Thorndike on buybacks: https://hbr.org/2014/11/when-stock-buybacks-are-not-a-waste-of-money/

http://25iq.com/2014/11/08/a-dozen-things-ive-learned-from-henry-singleton-about-value-investing-venture-capital/

From where interest rates are today, and with the hedges, my point has been that needing "only" 7% on the portfolio is a tall order. Now, if underwriting kicks in (as it did last quarter) it changes the calculus. 15% isn't my goal though. I will be happy to make 10% a year from this investment. I think 10% will be easy if underwriting stays like this. That makes sense, thanks. Hurdle rate definitely matters.

For durable goods, or for stuff where there's a real difference in quality, the value option can indeed be to buy higher quality, because you actually get more for your money. There's a saying about how poor people pay more for shoes (or boots, whatever) over time because the rich person will buy a good pair that will last for years and years while the crappy shoes will need to be replaced every few years, resulting in a higher cumulative price.

Anything that is based on a subjective experience is full of these interesting psychological effects. I'm sure you've heard of the study where they make people taste some wine, and their feedback varies a lot based on what they're told the bottle cost, even if it's the exact same wine. So two products that would score equally in a double-blind test might see the branded one win against the generic one in a non-blind test (which is how products are actually used). My algorithm with this is to always buy generic/store brand first, and if I don't like it try branded stuff. In most cases, I never get to brands because the cheaper stuff is just as good, or at least fine to me.

Thanks. Slightly off-topic, but Mediafire is doing a nice job of hosting PDFs and allowing download. Everybody take note, and don't use Scribd.com please. Thanks!

I think it definitely is pretty strong, for a store brand. It's different from a single-product brand that is sold in all stores, but that doesn't mean it's not valuable and that shoppers don't use it as a shortcut to make decisions about "quality" and "value" and won't look for it (at Costco, anyway).

Yep. My mother in law once brought her bottle of Heinz ketchup to our house because we buy the cheaper store brand ketchup..

Congrats Gio, well done. I'm happy for you :) "There is only one success - to be able to spend your life in your own way." - Christopher Morley Looks like you're doing exactly that!

Ok, thanks. Maybe I got the wrong impression from some of your discussions with Gio a while ago.

I find this a bit surprising. You've been fairly critical of FFH and of insurers (leveraged bond portfolios) in the recent past. Was this you trying to kill your thesis and still finding it an acceptable investment despite the flaws that you highlighted, or did your thinking on their prospects change in recent months?

Just seeing this now. Nice quarter, kudos to the FFH crew. I'm also curious to learn more about Eric's thinking here. Was this just a quick trade that you'll get out of soon (if not already), kind of like MBIA, or is this an investment?

Someone posted this on Twitter. Sorry, I don't remember who it was. It's a 4 minute excerpt from an interview where he speaks about the power, predictability, and durability of brands.

I know what the problem is. His new office doesn't have a computer (trying to immitate Buffett?). That's why he doesn't write here anymore... http://www.luxuryfurniture-store.com/images/director/OR3101.jpg

I think he owns (or owned at some point) Nestle.

As Elon Musk put it, it's stupid to run a massive chemical experiment with our life-sustaining atmosphere. Even if some level of global warming was good, it's not like we're going to any specific level, we'd just plough through that level because of the massive inertia in the system.

http://glennchan.wordpress.com/2014/11/02/portfolio-update-november-2014/ Lots of interesting stuff in there. 100 shorts, wow.

http://oraclefromomaha.wordpress.com/2014/11/02/update-im-back-at-least-for-a-while/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-10-29/while-you-were-getting-worked-up-over-oil-prices-this-just-happened-to-solar.html

Ok, thanks. I'll give it another chance.

I started reading this one, read maybe 150 pages out of 1300 (ebook pages..) and I can't say I'm enjoying it too much. Has anyone else found it to be slow going in the beginning and not always so well written (they kind of assume - at least so far - that you know who Gupta is, what Galleon is, etc). Does it improve as you go deeper in, or should I just give up because it's all similar to the beginning?