Kraven

Good to see the discussion of whether or not FFH is undervalued come up again. It's been a couple months. I am disappointed however that whether or not they will compound book value at 15% until the end of days hasn't been discussed much this time. I miss it.

I don't know what it is, but there is no one more boring than Frank Martin. He doesn't perform well enough to be that boring. Something about his writing style is so forced and unnatural in my opinion that it strikes me as very practiced. I attempted to read his books (which are just collections of his past letters with a bit of additional commentary) and couldn't make it past about half of it.

Like many people, he's a guy who sits in an office most of the time. It just isn't that busy. There's plenty of time. Even when researching something it isn't like there is a deadline.

I thought it amusing that the guy picked to run Benjamin Moore was said to pass Buffett's test of being someone you want your daughter to marry. Yet, he missed part of his son's wedding to fly out to Omaha because of course he couldn't wait even one more day. Is that who you want your daughter to marry?

I never understand these one size fits all responses. There is no right answer and I don't care what some general answer about 8 being the perfect number or 6 or 3 or 15 says. It's very personal to the investor. It has to feel right. You will know what the right number is. Munger has 3 (if in fact he does which I am skeptical about) because he has 3 investments he feels strongly about. Schloss had around 100 because that worked for him. Not accounting for portfolio size, and despite Munger's inferences to the contrary, if you look at the results set out in the 1984 Graham and Doddsville article/speech Schloss had a better overall record over a longer time period. So do what feels right. Know yourself and you can't go wrong.

Just out of curiosity, what's going to happen when Buffett finally dies assuming those seances he's scheduled don't work? What are people going to do with their time? Are they going to idolize people like Tracy Britt Cool? Are people going to still want to go to the meetings? It will be like those bands where the lead singer is replaced and everyone shows up to realize it just isn't the same. There was a comedian I remember from many years ago who had this great bit. I don't remember his name, but he said he went to see Phantom of the Opera (back when that was the biggest show on Broadway) and expected to see Michael Crawford, the original star, and instead it was Robert Guillaume from tv's Benson instead. He said it was like going to see the Boss and standing in for him was (no pun intended) Who's The Boss' Tony Danza or going to see Madonna and instead it was Family Ties' Tina Yothers. Maybe instead of Buffett it will be someone like Sam Waterston, the guy from the TD Waterhouse commercials. Better might be James Earl Jones, but he's getting old too. Perhaps Morgan Freeman for that presidential air about him. Maybe they can go a bit younger and it can be someone like Matt Damon. Or a little edgy with Alec Baldwin.

What I think isn't clear without actually reading it is that it isn't a narrative. There is no "story" here. It's more of a reference book written in (long) outline form. It's "nothing but the facts, ma'am". I can't imagine the amount of work that went into collecting, dissecting and organizing the material here. It's recommended for anyone who wants the equivalent of an investing desk manual. Not in the "how to" sense, but in the sense of an encyclopedia of investing and related approaches.

Everything in life relates to a Seinfeld episode. My wife even jokes with me when she's frustrated, "Serenity now!!!" and then smiles. Absolutely true!

Maybe it's just me, but it don't see those things as difficult to admit, although when I was younger and in the thick of things I suppose it would have been.

I read this book. It's good, not great, but worth reading. It's a short, easy and enjoyable read. In some sense I think of it like the Titanic or Avatar of the value investing world. At the very least you see (or read) these things because everyone else is. That doesn't mean it isn't worth doing, but it's one of the few things that give us a sense of shared experience. This the kind of book that would have been nice if it came out in June or something. It's the perfect book to sit around the pool and read as you're on vacation with the kids. In terms of how it reads imagine Michael Lewis writing a book about value investing and that will give you a bit of the flavor of the book. It's most definitely not a how to on investing and that was fine by me as those books are worthless. There's actually not that much about investing itself. This is more a book about the progression and betterment of someone who happens to be a value guy. I wouldn't say there's much that's "actionable" but it did make me think and that's a good thing. I did appreciate some of the tips on how to improve the environment we work in and some of the thoughts on who we surround ourselves with. I think too we get a good sense of Guy's own thought process and who he is as a person. To be honest there is a lot of fawning and hero worship of Buffett, Munger and Pabrai. If I thought for one second it wasn't truly authentic (and I do think it is) I would be turned off completely and toss this book aside. For whatever reason I thought of that Seinfeld where Jerry's girlfriend convinces him to be more expressive about his feelings. When he opens up he finds he can't stop. Near the end he gets George to do the same. In the next scene you see Jerry with a horrified look on his face as George tells him all his deepest darkest thoughts and fears. Jerry tells him that he has "scared him straight" and walks out. One thing that I thought could have been done better is that it's sometimes confusing as to when something is occurring. You know the general time period, but it's within a few years in some cases. There are little mistakes as well that could have been picked up by more careful editing. For example, I'm not even a car guy, but there is a reference to 1950's convertible Mustangs and I believe they didn't come out until the 60's (1964 I think). Not a big deal of course, but just noting it. I think Guy comes across as a good guy (no pun intended). He seems like someone that it would be nice to have a meal with or a drink or coffee. Mohnish comes across well too. It would be nice for him to write another book geared less towards the investing process and more towards the types of things that Guy discusses. So in the end I recommend the book. Don't expect greatness, but expect something that's worth reading and that I think most on this board will enjoy.

Kraven is on reddit??? Joking aside, this is probably worthy of it's own thread. Things tend to get looked over otherwise. PS- Do you know about/follow r/SecurityAnalysis? Oh yeah, I'm bad, I'm nationwide. I barely know what Reddit is. I saw a link somewhere else. I'm not sure I know what Security Analysis you are referring to so I probably don't follow it.

Toby Carlisle is doing a live chat on Reddit.

So like the author did you spend "two years bedding some fine chiquitas and studying with some of the North America's most suave gents"?

I just read this and would recommend it. It's very interesting and informative and gives a good sense for how things were during the crisis in "real time". I hadn't been a huge fan of Geithner, but he comes across very well. He seems to be open and honest and says what he got right and what he got wrong and what could have been done better. I really came away from this book feeling lucky that he was in the position he was. I think without him things could have been a lot worse. For those who believe that huge investments in BAC, WFC, etc at their troughs were obvious this will give you a whole new perspective (or refresh an old perspective) on how close to ruin we were. Reading it a lot of the old feelings came back for me - the stress of wondering which domino was going to fall that day.

Let me suggest an appropriate title for the review: "Intern reviews boss's book and likes it" When asked about it the intern said "I absolutely loved the book. It's probably the best book on investing since The Intelligent Investor! And I really love working here. Everyone is so nice. Guy is really the best and very helpful. He even proofed my review and made some edits before it went out!"

Almost there... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-22/buffett-s-lapses-highlight-growing-pains-with-compliance.html LOL My headline should have said "Is Corporate HQ at Omaha too lean and trusting to run a $300B company?" At the AGM this year, Munger spoke a lot about the trust thing at Berkshire. Buffett chimed in by saying that with over 300K employees, someone will behave badly but the benefit of trust at Berkshire far outweighs the exceptions. Obviously the meddlers at NYC don't understand this language. All that said, this reporting issue is something even I can fix by having an Outlook Calendar for such things. Surely, one of the 24 HQ employees at Omaha can handle this! For the life of me I don't understand what trust has to do with it. A company has various legal and regulatory obligations. The fact that Berkshire runs their business with few corporate employees at HQ doesn't excuse this. The buck stops there not with an employee even if at one time that employee owned the subsidiary. If getting a pass because you're supposed to be able to trust your employees is a valid argument why doesn't the same rationale apply to say Jamie Dimon with the whale episode or even BAC with Countrywide? In the former case granted the desk wasn't a subsidiary per se, but that is semantics. In the latter, it is a subsidiary no different from any of Bekshire's and the events occurred prior to BAC owning them.

Some of the comments are great. Buffett is being blamed for just about all the ills in the world. It's the Zero Hedge mentality. Although one person commented saying he's Phil Fisher's grandson and that Fisher did write also about these issues. No idea if it's really him or not. There was no joking around in the comment so maybe it is.

Make no mistake they both have very high IQ, incredible memories etc. Which brings us to what smartness really means in the business of large capital allocation. Ignorance removal requires rare qualities like not deluding yourself about what you know while being fiercely independent; keeping it simple, like really really simple; extreme amount of patience etc. Lots of people have IQ but not the EQ. The IQ EQ combination is rare. And then the duo. How much of Buffett's ignorance has Munger helped remove? This is one of those self-deprecating things Buffett likes to throw around. I don't believe that either he or Munger really think there are too many people smarter than they are (if anyone at all) nor do they really think they are ignorant of too much. This is like when a rich person tells a poor person that money really doesn't matter to them. Or for you baseball fans out there it would be like Mike Trout telling everyone that he really isn't that good yet and doesn't know what he's doing, but he keeps trying and maybe someday he'll know how to play baseball.

I am told by a well informed source that gazillion jillion is a number, so my question is how long until an A share is a gazillion jillion?

The correct answer is that it doesn't matter. It's priceless and should never be sold at any price. The goal of every real Berkshire investor should be to convert their shares to certificated form 1 minute before their death and be buried with them.

Topics like who's the best investor between Buffett and Greenblatt are really interesting. I bet if it's discussed over a few dozen more posts a clear winner will emerge. More importantly though, who's the best lead singer, guitarist, bassist and drummer of all time?

I don't think this is correct. Joel Greenblatt's public track record for the 10 years he had his hedge fund, which did exactly the type of investing he describes in You Can Be a Stock Market Genius, was 50.0% per year gross/40% net of incentive fees. I don't think that Buffett beats this in any 10 year period. Buffett's track record is very long and he is one of the richest people in the world. I don't see Greenblatt putting up a similar performance when he hits Buffett's age. Guys, what is your point? Nobody disputes that Buffett is a great investor. I don't dispute that he may be a better investor than Greenblatt and I know that Greenblatt talks about being Buffettized. And achieving high returns on billions instead of millions is simply another league – it's incomparable. What you can't say, though, is that Buffett has the better track record, when there is no ten year period in which Buffett had better returns than Greenblatt managing similar amounts of money. Saying "spin-offs are bad investments because Buffett is the better investor" just doesn't make any sense. This is especially the case, because Greenblatt's 10 year track record is simply insane – and he achieved it by investing in special situations, of which he says spin-offs are his favorite. We're talking about the attractiveness of investing in spin-offs after all, aren't we? I think the point is that some investors equate Buffett's wealth with god-like status. If he's so rich then he must be the smartest person in the world, and if we must mimic his actions we'll all be as smart/wealthy/good looking as he will be too. For my money I'd say Greenblatt is the authority here. He literally wrote the book on this stuff, he generated incredible returns then got out at the top and shifted his style. Yes Buffett is richer, but I don't consider riches to equal authority, although most of America disagrees. There are a LOT of little market niches, many of them will have insane profits laying in the bottom for those who choose to specialize. I think the key is finding the niches and exploiting them, it worked well for Greenblatt. A last thought, not everyone has this weird drive to have the most money in the world and work their entire life. Some are happy with 'enough' and getting out of the game. In some past interviews I read of Greenblatt that seemed to be the case with him, he had enough money and was tired of running a fund, dealing with investors. +1 I would add something, if there was something to add.

Very sad. Nanoo nanoo indeed. I remember as a kid there was the original must see tv with Happy Days, Laverne and Shirley, Mork and Mindy, etc. He was only 63. RIP.

Grain deflation shouldn't be a worry for the Fed -- I would think they would rather have deflation than inflation, when it comes to food staples. People don't defer their meals to next year, expecting the prices of bread to be better in the future. Higher food prices may leave them with less purchasing power at Toys'R'Us though. And the Fed does care about that. Okay, pork belly prices have been dropping all morning, which means that everybody is waiting for it to hit rock bottom, so they can buy low. Which means that the people who own the pork belly contracts are saying, "Hey, we're losing all our damn money, and Christmas is around the corner, and I ain't gonna have no money to buy my son the G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip! And my wife ain't gonna f... my wife ain't gonna make love to me if I got no money!" So they're panicking right now, they're screaming "SELL! SELL!" to get out before the price keeps dropping. They're panicking out there right now, I can feel it. I love that movie. Me too. They don't make them like that anymore.

Grain deflation shouldn't be a worry for the Fed -- I would think they would rather have deflation than inflation, when it comes to food staples. People don't defer their meals to next year, expecting the prices of bread to be better in the future. Higher food prices may leave them with less purchasing power at Toys'R'Us though. And the Fed does care about that. Okay, pork belly prices have been dropping all morning, which means that everybody is waiting for it to hit rock bottom, so they can buy low. Which means that the people who own the pork belly contracts are saying, "Hey, we're losing all our damn money, and Christmas is around the corner, and I ain't gonna have no money to buy my son the G.I. Joe with the kung-fu grip! And my wife ain't gonna f... my wife ain't gonna make love to me if I got no money!" So they're panicking right now, they're screaming "SELL! SELL!" to get out before the price keeps dropping. They're panicking out there right now, I can feel it.