Mephistopheles

Good point. On the other hand, a drop in the stock market and BV means increased opportunities to put that $100 billion to use, thus increasing overall IV.

My suspicion is that Buffett has no real objection to buying Microsoft, as his ambitious and opportunistic self would never avoid a great investment. Instead, I bet that he either doesn't understand or doesn't think there is a durable competitive advantage in MSFT, but feels awkward admitting this because of his relationship with Gates.

Anyone have a link to the full interview?

+1 on Coca-Cola I bet they do a deal with 3G to take the company out, maybe as a direct takeover or maybe under Kraft, or maybe with Inbev

Can anyone PM it to me? Thanks

Hi all, I am giving an investing presentation to coworkers in a couple of days and panicking. I have a pretty good slideshow set up but am afraid it won't be interesting. My goal is to introduce 1) valuation 2) psychology. These are a group of doctors who you can imagine get pitched from financial advisors all the time. People with money who know nothing about how to manage it. I kinda want to blow everyones mind in a way with to them would be very foreign ideas - like "volatility is not risk" for instance, or "buy when there is blood on the streets". Stuff like that. Anyway, hope is to keep it maybe 15-30 min tops, with a ample time for Q&A. But mainly I want to catch their attention and get them hooked. For instance, I plan on showing a 200 year chart of stocks showing the power of compound interest. Any ideas or suggestions? Thanks

Hey man I live in the area and also would like a buddy - PM me or I'll try to message you later

https://www.wsj.com/articles/government-shifts-gears-on-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-1513515600 shhh... http://archive.is/QdGy8 "The companies would remain under government control until privately backed competitors emerge and gain market share, a process that could take years, the people said. " Well that doesn't sound too good

Successor is Ted Weschler, I just found out through my psychic reading abilities. Jk. This focus on Jain/Abel is silly. There are like 80 execs at Berkshire. And he won't pick someone in their 60s to be CEO; it will be someone much younger.

-Mall REITs -Consumer products Would like to expand quite a bit

Bitcoin cannot be a store of value. Valuation - by definition - requires some kind of cash flow. You need earnings, dividends, interest, etc. Valuation of a commodity can be based on its use in an industrial context. Even fiat currencies can be valued, based on the underlying tax levying authority of a government. The governments of countries have value based on the taxes they can generate each year for the foreseeable future. Bitcoin has no cash flows whatsoever. It is solely valuable for transactions, yet this is a trivial function. Many virtual currencies exist and can be used for transactions. There is no sense in which a currency must have a store of value to be useful for transactions. Therefore any attempt to value Bitcoin is ultimately just tulip mania. A price of $0, $10, $100, $1000, $10K, $100K, and $1M per Bitcoin are equally valid valuations. Because ultimately 95% of the use of Bitcoin is speculators who buy Bitcoin on the erroneous belief that it is a store of value and must increase in value. Gold doesn't produce cash flow, is a store of value, and has a market capitalization of $7tn. Most of your points are made irrelevant when compared to gold as a store of value. Fiat currencies do not produce cash flow (holding fiat is effectively negative cash flow). Your argument regarding governments controlling/backing fiat as a source of value/valuation point may be seen as a strength of bitcoin by some. The fact that a store of value, such as gold or bitcoin, is not valued based on cash flow earnings is precisely why this is not a bubble. It may not work out, and it is absolutely still speculative, but it cannot be a bubble if there is valuation anchor for fundamental analysis. Those focusing on prior % gains and shouting bubble will continue to be stunned as the price of bitcoin continues to rise. Those who focus on bitcoin's current capitalization as a % of the capitalization of one very real potential outcome recognize a bet that is highly asymmetric and almost definitely +expected value. As each day passes, the perceived safety (value) of bitcoin increases. As bitcoin rises in popularity and acceptance, the perceived safety (value) of bitcoin increases. And every rule has an exception and gold is the exception. The only major store of value that has survived generations without producing cash flow. You're saying bitcoin is also an exception but the burden of proof is on you, not us. Gold has thousands of years of history as store of value to earn its status today. To compare the two is just silly. No, fiat currencies do not produce cash flow; also fiat currencies depreciate over time. The U.S. dollar FYI is not a good store of value. What? Even if bitcoin goes to $100,000 or $1 million, nobody here has made a case as to why it's a buy at this price. It'll go up there and you all will claim victory but will just get lucky.

Only a few bucks above current price is the rumor? Really hope GGP says no to that

Do you mind running me through how you came up with a 7.2% cap rate. I estimated this based on $2.365B of NOI and ~$33B in EV (the stock was a bit higher when I did the math). I think this number is incorrect, however, because it neglects unconsolidstrd debt . the $2.365B in NOI given in the annual report put seems to be about correct, but also seems to contain some gains from sales of apartment in mixed used project. There are 960M shares outstanding, but GGP will get some cash from warrants they are exercised. U think they will get $500M roughly. mortgage and ST debt is $11.7B, but they is only the consolidated number. I do not know how much debt is unconsolidstrd. This is important because their NOI contains the earnings from all source (including unconsolidstrd), the GHp shares of the debt in those needs to be added too, to make it consistent. In the 2016 annual report the EV is given at $40.3B and the stock was then at $25. I assume this EV contains the GGP share of debt from minority JV as well, since it is higher then the EV from the consolidated balance sheet. If we now correct for the decrease in share price from $25 to now $20, the correct EV from the Y2016 year end would be $35.5B. ($40.3B-0.96x$5) with the 2.365B in NOI, the cap rate would be ~6.66%. My math may not be totally precise, but I think it is approximately correct. I believe with the in consolidated debt cap rate is ~6.5%, but that's going off the top of my head, will post numbers later. But I agree with your sentiment. The best mall properties transact for like 3.5-4%. If you put a 5% cap rate on ggp stock is worth significantly higher. And noi has been climbing every year. To me these malls are no brainer investments at current levels.

Yes, I own all of the above except TCO yet. The internet and Amazon are a tremendous boon for class A properties. B and C malls closing down mean that the strong will get stronger. Class A rents per sqft, leasing spreads continue to grow year after year. I'm trying to do an in-depth study of the industry, posted a thread few weeks ago as I'd like to find a good source of data that is free, but nobody replied. Lmk if you have good recommendations,

Bump, anyone ?

I'm trying to form an expertise in the Retail REIT space, and would like to find free or cheap sources for industry statistics. Can anyone recommend some good ones? The only one I have thus far is the annual retail sales from the U.S. Census Bureau. Other ones I would like include the following, all pertaining to total U.S. Retail RE: 1. Total Square Footage by year 2. Vacancy Rate by year 3. Average Sales per sq foot by year 4. Average Rent per sq foot by year 5. Annual breakdown between A/B/C class malls 6. Annual breakdown of Shopping Center total sqft vs. Regional Mall total sqft I know I can pay for a Green Street Advisor membership, but as I said would prefer to exhaust free sources first. Some of these figures I see mentioned in places such as GGP investor conference calls, but would be great to have an organized table showing the numbers TIA for all help

I know why - he doesn't know about it. Doubt it. Mnuchin has stated publicly that GSE reform is one of his top priorities. Trump Jr. has tweeted about it. I doubt that Trump doesn't know about it if it's a priority for his Secretary of the Treasury, his son knows about it, and the RNC has commented on it. He might not care, but he most surely knows. Sorry, I should have been more clear that I meant that facetiously. What I really think is that he doesn't know or care for any specific details, probably has an overview. And if his circle or Fox News start hammering it into him maybe he'll start thinking about it.

I know why - he doesn't know about it.

I completely agree. And you know, IIRC the reason Buffett chose a 6% hurdle was because that was the average 30? year treasury rate at the time. What are your thoughts on that? Or even a floating annual hurdle rate that mimics the 30 year? We've used 6%...Mohnish has used 6%...it certainly hasn't hurt either of us. What do you use now? And what made you change?

Two days until the deadline for Treasury and FHFA to respond to Senate Democrats letter. This has been way too long. Please just release them or kill them already!

Eddie Lampert

I don't have a source but in the summer of 2008 when Wells dropped below $20 I can remember word for word him saying "I couldn't help but buy Wells Fargo (in my personal account) below $20" It was reported on CNBC

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/carl-icahns-failed-raid-on-washington This stood out to me: “Icahn is very sophisticated,” Brooke Coleman said. “But maybe not about Washington.” Senator Chuck Grassley not only represents corn growers; he also chairs the Judiciary Committee, which helps confirm Trump’s appointments of judges. This is the reason that traditional policy negotiations are so overcrowded. Washington is a city of vying constituencies, many of which happen to be very powerful. Coleman believes that “someone probably walked into Trump’s office and said, ‘Here’s why you need Chuck Grassley more than you need Carl Icahn.’ ” Very relevant to those of us who feel that Paulson and Berkowitz influence is a slam dunk. The *minor* difference is that Icahn's RINs fight was for his own benefit. Revaluing preferred shares could make many, many rich. Including lots of representatives and senators. Not to mention funding many political campaigns. Just speculation, of course. Well if the reps and senators could own FNMA FMCC prefs, I don't see why they wouldn't want to own shares in that Ichan company. And of course Icahn can also fund campaigns. The bigger takeaway for me was that money and loyalty talk, especially with Donald Trump. But still even his very rich and very loyal friend couldn't win Trump in this matter against the influence of Republican legislatures whose support he desperately needs. Oh and let's not forget the quarterly earnings sweep going to govt purse strings (more spending money) and you can see how maybe Paulson may fail too. The major difference and why we still have hope imo is that very soon we will have a capital issue which will need to be solved. Even then, we can lose, for example in a scenario in which they decide to recap with a minimum amount, and continue to sweep everything above into perpetuity.

First off, he owns WFC in his personal account too, not just JPM. He bought some WFC I think in the 90s and then during the GFC. He said he bought JPM in his personal account and not WFC for the conflict of interest, but he already has WFC so I don't get it. Maybe he wanted to avoid buying even more WFC and keep what he has. My guess is that he doesn't buy JPM for Berkshire because it already has what, like close to $40 billion in WFC/BAC? That and I also think he likes the deposit bases of WFC and BAC and their larger focus on bread and butter banking. JPM's investment bank is bigger portion of its assets than BAC's I believe, and also a bigger derivative book. Yea BAC has Merrill but he also got a steal with the warrant/pfd deal. Having said that, JPM it's still well run and he loves Jamie Dimon as a leader, so he bought in his personal account. Just my opinions.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/08/28/carl-icahns-failed-raid-on-washington This stood out to me: “Icahn is very sophisticated,” Brooke Coleman said. “But maybe not about Washington.” Senator Chuck Grassley not only represents corn growers; he also chairs the Judiciary Committee, which helps confirm Trump’s appointments of judges. This is the reason that traditional policy negotiations are so overcrowded. Washington is a city of vying constituencies, many of which happen to be very powerful. Coleman believes that “someone probably walked into Trump’s office and said, ‘Here’s why you need Chuck Grassley more than you need Carl Icahn.’ ” Very relevant to those of us who feel that Paulson and Berkowitz influence is a slam dunk.