Fairfax stock positions

[Hoodlum]

Moody's upgraded Eurobank and their debt to Positive, which suggests an upgrade will be coming in 2026.

 

https://fastforward.com.cy/business/moodys-upgrades-outlook-bank-cyprus-eurobank

 

Moody’s Ratings reaffirmed its confidence in the Cypriot banking sector, confirming all ratings for Bank of Cyprus and Eurobank Limited (Eurobank Cyprus / now also Hellenic Bank), while upgrading the outlook on their long-term deposits and senior unsecured debt from stable to positive.

 

Moody’s decision is a strong indication of its recognition of the progress achieved in risk management and the strengthening of the financial fundamentals of the two systemic banks.

The assessment of the banks was supported by the parallel upgrade of Cyprus’ macroeconomic profile to “Moderate+” from “Moderate”.

 

Upgrade trigger: The successful and smooth completion of the integration, as well as clarity regarding new strategic and funding plans expected in 2026.

 

 

Edited December 17, 2025 by Hoodlum

[Hoodlum]

Fairfax has reported a 9% ownership of Under Armour (UAA) 
 

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915191/000094787125001086/xslSCHEDULE_13G_X01/primary_doc.xml

 

 
 

 

[villainx]

Feel like I want to bottle everyone's UA take for 5 years later.  Seems unusual use of capital but I don't know.  

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Yea. Feels like the UA ship has sailed. I was on board, in like 2016, that they could parse some of the market share from Nike. But neither has done enviably since - just a tough industry. 

 

But for $100MM, who really cares. Is tiny for now. 

Edited December 19, 2025 by TwoCitiesCapital

[Hoodlum]

5 hours ago, Haryana said:

How does it work, why only 9?

Total of all the reporting is >95.

 

They are showing the breakdown at different levels of the corporate structure, including how much is owned by each insurance sub.  All of the investments at Fairfax work this way as the insurance companies (not the Fairfax holding company) own the investments.

 

 

Edited December 19, 2025 by Hoodlum

[TwoCitiesCapital]

8 hours ago, Haryana said:

Were you a Director on Board? 

 

No. Just the figure of speech of "being on board" with the stock and had owned it for a bit. 

[Malmqky]

Strongly dislike the UA investment, so it’ll probably work out well

[Hoodlum]

17 minutes ago, Haryana said:

That was my point, the % of all the subsidiaries to be added to get the total for Fairfax except for Prem reporting in individual and his Sixty Two corporation. 

I guess Prem and Sixty Two have to report as key stakeholders in Fairfax. 

[Hoodlum]

59 minutes ago, Haryana said:

Does this mean that the Fairfax overall including at the Holdco and subsidiary levels reported only 9% of all class A shares? 

 

That is my understanding.

[dochood]

15 hours ago, Hoodlum said:

Fairfax has reported a 9% ownership of Under Armour (UAA) 
 

I think it's 9% of the "A" shares, around 4% overall.  

 

It's also interesting that BDT owns 65 million "C" shares (non-voting) since 2023.  Roughly 15% economic interest.  Perhaps BDT shared some insights about UAA with Fairfax.

[Hoodlum]

34 minutes ago, dochood said:

I think it's 9% of the "A" shares, around 4% overall.  

 

It's also interesting that BDT owns 65 million "C" shares (non-voting) since 2023.  Roughly 15% economic interest.  Perhaps BDT shared some insights about UAA with Fairfax.

I didn’t realize there were different share types. 

[Haryana]

I was thinking they might be interested in taking the whole company private by increasing control from the voting class A.

[Txvestor]

16 hours ago, villainx said:

Feel like I want to bottle everyone's UA take for 5 years later.  Seems unusual use of capital but I don't know.  

BlackBerry redux 

[Jaygo]

2 minutes ago, Haryana said:

Were way out of competence circle with BB, got let down by relying reverent on John Chen.

 

However, they have amazing network in sports and retail. 

 

I mentioned visiting Team Town Sports that's owned by Sporting life group and they had a large area of clothing that was mostly Nike and UA with some other stuff, Adidas, Puma, etc sprinkled in. 

 

It is very possible that Fairfax see a resurgence in UA. Personally I'm not so sure about the investment but different demographics may favor it over my little place in the world and it could be regaining popularity. 

 

[Thrifty3000]

7 hours ago, Haryana said:

Were way out of competence circle with BB, got let down by relying reverent on John Chen.

 

However, they have amazing network in sports and retail. 

Nah, we’d all feel very differently about the BlackBerry bet if that pesky Steve Jobs hadn’t come along and:

 

1) pushed for an incredibly innovative touchscreen-only device. 
 

2) recognized the power of the App Store. 
 

Prem’s bet on BlackBerry was done for pretty much exactly the same reasons Buffett later bet on Apple.

 

(Prem was addicted to his Blackberry and saw he wasn’t alone. That’s indicative of a very strong franchise. Buffett recognized that his grandkids - and practically everyone else around him - if forced to choose between having a car or an iPhone - but not both - would choose the iPhone without hesitation.)

[Viking]

Blackberry is a great example of an investment that sucked for shareholders who owned Fairfax pre-2017. But Blackberry is benefitting shareholders who have owned Fairfax since about 2018. 
 

One of Fairfax’s demonstrated strengths is its ability to learn from its mistakes. 
 

Blackberry is a great example of this. Blackberry taught Fairfax the importance of partnering with strong management/entrepreneurs. Lazaridis and Balsillie were great at startup/early years and terrible at operating a mature business being disrupted by Apple, Android/Samsung. 
 

Fairfax slowly learned the hard lesson over the subsequent years that they are not resourced at head office to be a turn-around shop. That is even more true today - given their much larger size. 
 

Since 2018, look at the major purchases they have made. Almost every one had a strong/exceptional leader. Look at the legacy equity holdings they added to (the keepers) since 2018 - most are run by strong/exceptional leaders. 
 

Look at all the legacy businesses they exited/restructured/shrunk (poor leadership).

 

Capital is leaving under performers and it and new capital is going to the best opportunities. Music to an investors ears. 
 

Is their record perfect since 2018? No, of course not. Is it very good? Yes, I think it is. 
 

What is important for an investor today is the proven fact that Fairfax is a learning organization. And I think it is addressing issues quicker today than in the past - it appears to be course correcting more quickly. And not just with investments - also with insurance (with Brit and their cat exposure being a good recent example).
 

The trend is super important. As an organization, Fairfax is moving in the right direction (partnering with strong people). And addressing issues more quickly. Just another couple - in the long list - of reasons why an investor would want to own Fairfax today. 
 

When people discuss Blackberry today, it should be in this context: Learn. And flush. And move on. 

Edited December 20, 2025 by Viking

[TwoCitiesCapital]

10 hours ago, Viking said:

Blackberry is a great example of an investment that sucked for shareholders who owned Fairfax pre-2017. But Blackberry is benefitting shareholders who have owned Fairfax since about 2018. 
 

 

I think the primary benefit for holders post 2018 is that it had soured, somewhat, their history as stock-pickers with exceptional returns....because Blackberry itself hasn't done great over that time. 

 

And the convertibles did alright, but there were other comparable credit opportunities over the life of ownership so those weren't even much more than a signle or double. 

[Viking]

2 hours ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

 

I think the primary benefit for holders post 2018 is that it had soured, somewhat, their history as stock-pickers with exceptional returns....because Blackberry itself hasn't done great over that time. 

 

And the convertibles did alright, but there were other comparable credit opportunities over the life of ownership so those weren't even much more than a signle or double. 

From my perspective, Blackberry stopped mattering as an investment when Fairfax exited the debentures and Prem stepped down from the board. In terms of size, it is immaterial to Fairfax.

 

But Blackberry delivered significant value to current shareholders - it, along with a couple of other terrible investments, forced Fairfax to improve its investment framework. Which it did. This also tells us that Fairfax is a learning organization - able to learn from its mistakes. And that might be the best way to describe the kind of company Fairfax is/has been over the past 40 years. What they do well, they get better at. When they stumble, they learn and improve. ‘A little better everyday.’ That approach (culture) is going to serve them and shareholders very well over the next 40 years.

Edited December 20, 2025 by Viking

[Marco Van Basten]

So how is investment in UA demonstrates this learning?  Isn't it another turnaround?

[dartmonkey]

48 minutes ago, Marco Van Basten said:

So how is investment in UA demonstrates this learning?  Isn't it another turnaround?

I’ve got to vote for the ‘old habits die hard’ side, as opposed to the ‘have learned from their mistakes’ side. I don’t see a lot of evidence of recent investments that are aiming for Mungerian quality as opposed to Buffettian value plays.

 

And I’m not sure I want them to - why change a formula that works for them? There will be mistakes like Blackberry, and maybe Under Armour will be one of them, but no one bats 100%, and they don’t have to. And on the bright side, the occasional Blackberry will keep Fairfax’s share price from getting too high. 

[Viking]

1 hour ago, Marco Van Basten said:

So how is investment in UA demonstrates this learning?  Isn't it another turnaround?

@Marco Van Basten, sorry, I know nothing about UA. Is it a material position for Fairfax? As a reminder, Fairfax has an investment portfolio of $75 billion, and an equity portfolio of about $26 billion. My focus is on the big holdings… Eurobank, Poseidon, BIAL etc. If you compare Fairfax today to Fairfax of 10 years ago I think my point holds. The direction of travel is what is important to me.

 

Fairfax owns lots of different holdings. They have lots of equity analysts. They are going to make mistakes.

Edited December 21, 2025 by Viking

[TwoCitiesCapital]

23 hours ago, Viking said:

From my perspective, Blackberry stopped mattering as an investment when Fairfax exited the debentures and Prem stepped down from the board. In terms of size, it is immaterial to Fairfax.

 

But Blackberry delivered significant value to current shareholders - it, along with a couple of other terrible investments, forced Fairfax to improve its investment framework. Which it did. This also tells us that Fairfax is a learning organization - able to learn from its mistakes. And that might be the best way to describe the kind of company Fairfax is/has been over the past 40 years. What they do well, they get better at. When they stumble, they learn and improve. ‘A little better everyday.’ That approach (culture) is going to serve them and shareholders very well over the next 40 years.

 

We don't have to rehash old debates, but I disagree that anything with Fairfax's investing style has changed. It's just in vogue at this time. They did really well in the 90s through the 2000s. The 2010s were rough, but I don't think they said "let's change everything about our investment style that worked for 20 of the last 30 years". 

 

They buy the same stuff. They're just not shorting at the moment and the style is in vogue. Commodities have done well since 2021. Emerging markets, particularly value style, as a whole have been a good place to be for the last 5-years and Fairfax has a ton of exposure to India. 

 

They've worked to "fix", or move on, from prior mistakes - sure.  But the main thing that changed for them is that the flood of liquidity and bouts of inflation did wonders for their commodity driven investments while Eurobank turned a corner after ~6-years of being a dog.

 

They didn't just magically become better investors - it's just after a decade or so of the style not working and being dominated by BlackBerry's impact on the portfolio, it's working again and being dominated by Eurobank and StelCo successes. 

Edited December 21, 2025 by TwoCitiesCapital

[Viking]

1 hour ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

 

We don't have to rehash old debates, but I disagree that anything with Fairfax's investing style has changed. It's just in vogue at this time. They did really well in the 90s through the 2000s. The 2010s were rough, but I don't think they said "let's change everything about our investment style that worked for 20 of the last 30 years". 

 

They buy the same stuff. They're just not shorting at the moment and the style is in vogue. Commodities have done well since 2021. Emerging markets, particularly value style, as a whole have been a good place to be for the last 5-years and Fairfax has a ton of exposure to India. 

 

They've worked to "fix", or move on, from prior mistakes - sure.  But the main thing that changed for them is that the flood of liquidity and bouts of inflation did wonders for their commodity driven investments while Eurobank turned a corner after ~6-years of being a dog.

 

They didn't just magically become better investors - it's just after a decade or so of the style not working and being dominated by BlackBerry's impact on the portfolio, it's working again and being dominated by Eurobank and StelCo successes. 

 

@TwoCitiesCapital , difference of opinion is what makes a market. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. That is the value of this board.

[UK]

2 hours ago, TwoCitiesCapital said:

It's just in vogue at this time.

 

I had to check translation for this:). Or how could this be considered in vogue in times of AI and robots? Perhaps you have meant that it works for them despite all the stuff going on?

 

[TwoCitiesCapital]

30 minutes ago, UK said:

 

I had to check translation for this:). Or how could this be considered in vogue in times of AI and robots? Perhaps you have meant that it works for them despite all the stuff going on?

 

 

Check the charts.

Commodity companies? have been doing well. European banks? Have been doing well. 

Emerging markets/India? Have been doing well. 

 

For years none of those things were true. It wasn't just companies Fairfax picked - it was the every company in those spaces. 

 

Fairfax didn't just magically get bad at investing and 7-years later get good at it. They made one large mistake that overshadowed a portfolio of other names that were all in hated parts of the market. And now those names are no longer overshadowed and those parts of the market aren't doing poorly. Wasn't a change in style