Mephistopheles

So they've made it clear that they'll buy back at 1.2 or below. Now let's say they decide to repurchase at 1.5 last reported. You're saying that this doesn't risk any fiduciary violations? This is different than other companies who don't lay out a set metric for repurchases, whereas Buffett has made it very clear the price he's willing to pay. But I guess you're right that they can do whatever they want. Like when they changed the threshold from 1.1 to 1.2 while simultaneously buying out that estate for 1.2. Btw, I personally don't think it's wrong for them to do whatever they want - I think the best thing to do for shareholders is what creates the most value over time, and if that means unannounced change in threshold, so be it. I don't even think Buffett should have specified 1.2x.

Is the 1.2x buyback threshold based on last reported book value or based on real time/ most accurate measure of it? The latter obviously makes more sense but I don't know what they are legally obliged to do. Thanks

It's under my impression that the free file just links you to a bunch of commercial filers such as TurboTax. They all seem to be free if you only have basics, but I obviously also have investment income hence I'll be paying either way. Also, for many of them only the Federal filing is free, not state. I'll look into TaxAct; I googled it earlier and it has some awful reviews. I guess you get what you pay for.

Can anyone recommend a website or software for filing taxes that is both cheap and reliable? I know Turbo Tax and H&R Block are both very good, but they are also on the more expensive side compared to some others. Problem is that there are so many recommended on the IRS site, so I thought I'd ask here for recommendations. https://apps.irs.gov/app/freeFile/jsp/index.jsp?ck Thanks

I normally don't pay attention to the TH717 site, but if true, this seems significant: http://timhoward717.com/2016/01/22/breaking-news-co-conspirator-jim-parrot-takes-the-fifth-in-depositon/#comments I didn't know who this person was until I looked it up: "Jim Parrott is a senior fellow at the Urban Institute and owner of Falling Creek Advisors, which provides financial institutions with strategic advice on housing finance issues. Before joining Urban in 2013, Parrott served for several years in the White House as a senior advisor at the National Economic Council, where he led the team of advisors charged with counseling President Obama and the cabinet on housing issues. He was on point for developing the Obama administration’s major housing policy positions; articulating and defending those positions with Congress, the press, and the public; and counseling White House leadership on related communications and legislative strategy. He was previously counsel to Secretary Shaun Donovan at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, advising on a range of housing finance issues."

If we win, I'm throwing a huge party - everyone here is invited. Byob though, so plan ahead.

Incredibly low. It makes the whole thing fishy and makes me want to sell.

A lot of parties have lawyers who have access to the protected documents. The clients are still unable to access those documents. Big difference. That's true. But let's say the lawyers find nothing significant in the documents. All they have to do is somehow communicate that to the investor, and the investor can sell. Or, the lawyer himself can short. Is it considered inside information if you are selling or shorting based on lack of evidence against the government? Given the number of people now involved in this case, it wouldn't surprise me if someone somewhere is doing something wrong, which may not even be legally wrong, but just morally wrong.

A lot of people have access to protected information now. Hopefully it's not someone who is selling or shorting based on what they see there or what they don't see. Hopefully it's not Berkowitz or Perry liquidating.

Do you mean owning AND operating a private business, or only owning? If you're operating it, then you must deduct a manager's salary for yourself in order to make an apples to apples comparison with stocks. I think each has its advantages and disadvantages. Although I've never owned a private business, I try to keep my eyes and ears open for any potential opportunities that may emerge.

Been quiet around here. The next week should be very interesting! Discovery should (finally) be completed in the Fairholme case as of 12/31/15; we'll see what the deal is there soon enough.

I need to look into TWRR. I do IRR and also compare with an index IRR adjusted for my deposits. I assume I am buying or selling units in the S&P500 total return index based on the value of my deposits and withdrawals. Then I add up the net number of units bought and price them at the current index value to calculate the IRR. I think this is a good way to compare against the index.

Berkshire doesn't sit on money as a market timing tool. They always have tons of cash looking to deploy. Also they are going to use $20B+ for the precision castparts merger.... In my opinion Berkshire does use cash as a market timing tool. Sure they might not take a top down macro approach, but they are constantly looking to do deals. If they can't find enough attractive deals to put the cash to work, it builds up on the balance sheet. Same net result. If the market dropped 50% tomorrow you would expect Buffett to put most of the cash into the market. Likewise, if the general market doubled tomorrow he might sell some stock positions and would be unlikely to find many deals so cash would increase. To me, that is market timing. That's not market timing. That's waiting to find the right pitch. Nobody is suggesting that one should stay fully invested at all times. If you can't find anything to buy then you should be in cash. For a company the size of Berkshire, they are very limited in the number of stocks or businesses they can buy, hence they have a lot of cash waiting for the right deal the come along. None of this has to do with timing the market.

From what I've heard, Steve made sure to have one or more persons between himself and the inside info to keep looking clean. At least a number of the crooks who were stupid enough to do his dirty work have been prosecuted and went to jail.

Scott, you're a high school drop out right? What do you do currently? How did you get to where you are in your career from such a disadvantaged point (in the view of recruiters)?

This is a two part question: 1. Do you generally add liquidity or remove it when you trade? I just found out what these terms mean today, so for those who don't know: "add liquidity" means to put in a buy order below the ask or sell order above the bid, and "remove liquidity" means to do the opposite. I assume that a healthy number of people here add liquidity given this is a value investing forum. I generally remove it given I am usually trading in very liquid large caps and tend to buy when a stock is collapsing; so I usually just take whatever the market is giving me in a hurry before the deals disappear. 2. For those who trade with IB, do you use a tiered or fixed cost commission structure? They say tiered is beneficial for very high volumes (millions of shares per month), or if you're generally adding liquidity depending on the exchange, because this latter method will earn you rebates. My volumes won't be anywhere near the volume necessary for tiered to be cheaper than fixed, but I am trying to figure out whether it's worth trading by "adding liquidity" to save on commissions vs. the fixed cost. I haven't done the math, mainly bc there are a handful of different fees for tiered, and fees vary for each exchange. But my question for those who know is - a) do you receive rebates for all NYSE and NASDAQ trades if you add liquidity, and do these rebates make the tiered structure worth it? b) Is avoiding "removing liquidity" worth the savings in fees?

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how this changes the odds. Sweeney can still rule this as a takings without violating this new law - Treasury would simply keep their senior pref position at $187 billion. A 3rd amendment reversal would mean a return of the funds taken, instead of being used to pay down the preferred (so it wouldn't be a liquidation). With regards to your other point. I have believed from the beginning that Congress is never going to act to recap, release from conservatorship, or kill the GSE's. Why change the status quo when it is giving you a free piggy bank? I'd be surprised if they didn't acquiesce. Why should they mind? It's free money.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/fannie-and-freddies-propaganda-war-1449876249 Fannie and Freddie's propoganda war

Look at the history of E. coli and salmonella outbreaks at fast food restaurant. Within a few months it will all be forgetten. Chipotle will survive and thrive. Idk whether the stock is good value or not.

I'm getting antsy! Things seem to be looking good but it's taking forever!

Valeant :D

Hold on to your hats! Merk, anything we dont already know in the article? It's this article in print http://fortune.com/2015/11/13/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-nationalize-housing-finance/ ahh its that article....l. This will be in every newsstand and every book store at every commuter station and airport in america....people will notice the headline when they get bored waiting for their departure. Yea, and for those who care, probably the Govt will gain their support vs. the hedge funds.

LOL

Thanks for the reply. A couple of things; aside from tax reasons, isn't the true test of whether or not to hold - that whether or not you're willing to buy at the current price? I know this question is unrelated to the mechanics of SMA vs. hedge fund, but imo this would be a good test of whether I'm willing to hold something (whether or not I am willing to put a new client's money into it). :) On the other hand, if it's for tax reasons that you may not be selling something, I agree with you that one click can be a hassle. I don't know that much about the tax structure of funds, but I'm guessing that taxes are pooled rather than individualized? Meaning if a new client comes in after hefty gains, they will owe a lot in taxes even though the gains didn't accrue to them?

Curious, why do you hate it? And what broker do you use? I know you can use 1 click trading through Interactive Brokers, so that eliminates the complication of having to make trades in multiple accounts. I suppose the other big negative of separate accounts is that your clients have access to real time trades - which means they can coat tail with a minimal investment and/or breathe down your neck. I'm asking because I was thinking of starting off with the separate accounts route with $1-2 million in AUM, only because it's cheaper and therefore less riskier for me.