Liberty

http://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/editorialfiles/2014/03/03/2014-03-03%20Ask%20WarrenBuffett%20complete%20transcript.pdf

Found this transcript: http://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/editorialfiles/2014/03/03/2014-03-03%20Ask%20WarrenBuffett%20complete%20transcript.pdf Still looking for the full videos.

I usually look on the Buffett Watch page to see when they appear: http://www.cnbc.com/id/19206666 Looks like part of it is up. Not sure if there's a better way to find the videos or if they're already up somewhere else, though.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll have a look. Can you share the elevator pitch on what you like about it? How's management? I see that like Paladin they don't like debt.

That guy is not exactly subtle, but his record speaks for itself.

The part about the size of the shareholder was mine, not Cook's. As for the rest, some things are so obvious.. I don't think Cook should have to explain how being a good place that cares for its employees and having an admired brand for doing good things is an advantage for the company anymore than he should have to explain why his bathrooms aren't segregated by skin color or whatever. Sure, he could have handled it more smoothly, but we're all humans and some people get under our skin. It's not like Munger never criticizes.. Here's more detail on what happened: So he explained his view, he didn't just reject the question. There are certain things the company does first because they are right, and then because they can help profitability (ie. making devices accessible for the blind -- might not pass a straight ROI test compared to using same engineers on another project, but still the right thing to do). Telling him to sell the stock might not have been diplomatic, but it was straight-talking; if we're not going to change to be the way you want us to be, your best option is probably not to own the stock. If I buy Philip Morris shares and go ask them to stop making cigarettes because I think they're a bad thing, I expect the reply I get to basically mean "if you don't like the way we do things in an area where we're obviously not going to change, you probably shouldn't own the stock".

Wasn't it a microscopic shareholder who wanted to pass a resolution that would prevent Apple from doing anything that isn't directly profit-oriented (ie. don't work on discrimination, worker conditions, the environment, etc)? No wonder it made Cook angry, as I'm sure it would make Buffett or Munger the same. How many other companies would tie their hands that way? Now of course everybody tried to spin it into a big thing that it wasn't...

Sorry to hear the bad new, Gio. That always sucks.. But just never stop investing in yourself - and I don't mean financially - and I'm sure things will turn out well.

Here is the official answer to the question: Is Bitcoin a safe store of value? [glow=red,2,300]NO[/glow] The people who stole those bitcoins from Mt. Gox probably think they're pretty valuable ;) I see it a bit more as back in the day when someone stole your money from the bank, or the manager of the bank disappeared in the night with sacks of gold coins, and there was no insurance to protect depositors. Doesn't mean whatever currency was in the bank isn't a store of value, but it's definitely more of a Far West, you're on your own kind of world. Glad I don't own any and don't have to deal with these headaches, but it's fun to watch from the sidelines.

Thanks, good one.

Anything specific makes you think that or just a gut feeling?

I'm excited. This is so much better than xmas! :D

I think he just enjoys it now, as long as they come to him and it's people who he already knows (he wouldn't fly out to some studio in NYC to talk to some random talking head). He used to be so shy, but I think Kay Graham taught him that these social things could be fun once in a while.

Thanks Makisig, that's very interesting. One thing I would add, though, is that to me this is a bit like talking about general market valuation. It's useful if you're going to invest in an index, but if you're going to invest in a single company, it probably doesn't tell the whole story. I think Valeant is very interesting. If all they did differently from others was make more acquisitions, then I'd be worried. But what interests me is a combination of how management thinks and operates and the business model as a whole, of which acquisitions are only a part (an important one, though). In other words, I think they have a good chance of success because they do many things differently (and better) from most of their peers. I could be wrong, though. I have been in the past :)

A crypto-currency for residents of Iceland, 50% premined to be distributed: http://www.auroracoin.org/ Interesting what bringing currencies in the digital world can lead to.. They need to create one for Canadians, just in case it ever is worth anything.

"Biglari buys Maxim" For personal use? :-*

More about biotech, but interesting: http://compoundingmyinterests.com/compounding-the-blog/2014/2/21/biotech-popping-the-allegations-of-a-bubble.html

I don't spend too much time on macro, but I thought this was an interesting read: http://compoundingmyinterests.com/compounding-the-blog/2014/2/27/the-markets-betting-line-a-look-at-implied-growth-1.html

Thanks for the additional details, Makisig. I appreciate it.

Good luck with that: http://www.snopes.com/autos/business/carburetor.asp http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/712/has-a-200-mpg-carburetor-been-suppressed-by-the-oil-industry

That's true, but everything else is different. Blackberry was a failing company and one of the only things left with value was BBM, so trying to grow BBM even at the expense of the devices might have been smart. But why would Apple grow iMessage at the expense of its devices where they make money? Apple would gain nothing by giving iMessage to android users. It wouldn't sell more iPhone, in fact it might mean fewer sales. The iPhone already has all of Android's messaging apps (none of import are android only), but android doesn't have iMessage. It's one more reason to get an iPhone. It's not like Apple will ever monetize iMessage directly with ads. Its value is in selling hardware, just like iOS (unless you think Apple should also license iOS to other companies - another thing they'll never do).

I don't think they'll ever do that. No reason for them. People can install any other messaging app on their device if they want to, so it's not like the iPhone is a walled garden, but iMessage must stay something that adds value for the iOS/OSX ecosystem, and that stops being the case if it's multi-platform.

It's one clear indication that I'm not as smart as some posters here who always stay far away from threads like these, regardless of how ridiculous some of the things posted are. I'm working on self-control, but sometimes I just can't resist. I'm trying, and will try harder in the future :)

Telegram had a massive spike in popularity that seemed to coincide with the WhatsApp acquisition and then the outage that they had. Good for them to capitalize on it. I've been wanting to try LINE, which is very popular in Japan and part of Asia. They seem to have an interesting model. I'll have to check out Telegram too.

I never downplayed the benefits, I'm not for stopping the use of all fossil fuels overnight, and I realize that there was probably no other way for the civilization to reach this point than by harnessing buried hydrocarbons. But now that we know more and have other techs, I want to accelerate the transition to cleaner energy. This is different from a lot of cost-benefit analyses because the harm accumulates and can become more or less irreversible. It's not like "well, cars kill some people in accidents, but overall the benefits of the extra mobility is greater than the harm caused so it's worth it". Each of those deaths and maimings are independent, they don't compound each other. What we're facing is more like living on Easter Island a long time ago and cutting all the trees one by one. You can say: "Well, we make fire with the trees and cook stuff, that's more useful than having a tree still standing", but over time you run out of trees and the island can't support your civilization anymore but by then you can't really do much about it anymore because it's too late... Maybe it takes a really long time to get there and people don't really notice as it happens, but the end result is still very real.