Muddy Waters is short

[backtothebeach]

10 hours ago, Luca said:

This is the recording of MWs question and watsas reply for the ones who didnt listen to the call  

Audio quality is much better here, starting at 52:50

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4671013-fairfax-financial-holdings-frfhf-q4-2023-earnings-call-transcript

[Luke]

Time to go short Muddy Waters? XD

[MMM20]

3 hours ago, Luca said:

Time to go short Muddy Waters? XD

 

The opposite of respect is not really disrespect but indifference.

 

Probably time for him to fade into irrelevance.

[gfp]

7 minutes ago, MMM20 said:

 

The opposite of respect is not really disrespect but indifference.

 

Probably time for him to fade into irrelevance.

 

Let's let him cover first

[MMM20]

54 minutes ago, gfp said:

 

Let's let him cover first

 

Any reason to believe he didn't cover almost the entire thing the day of the campaign, as he often does?

 

If there is, I haven't seen it.

 

Edited February 26 by MMM20

[dartmonkey]

Is there any compelling reason to believe he didn't cover almost the entire thing the day of the campaign, as he often does?

 

Do we know for sure that they tend to cover quickly, or is this just a suspicion?

 

As for Fairfax, before the conference call, on Feb 15 to be exact, they said they remained short, for what that's worth. 

[cwericb]

Alright, I know most of you guys are probably way too polite to point this out but I’m not, so here goes....

 

I am sure that some here noticed a sudden influx of new posters on this board immediately after Carson Block came out with his ill-informed garbage about Fairfax.

 

Seemed like these new posters just couldn’t restrain themselves in pointing out that Muddy Waters / Carson Block had confirmed and exposed their ‘suspicions’ that obviously there was something shifty about Fairfax. Carson Block was beyond reproach and a force to be reckoned with. Some suggested that the $160 share price drop was only just the beginning. One even suggested he wanted nothing to do with FFH as the price drop had a ways to go yet.

 

Well, if their appearance was driven by jealousy from not buying FFH sooner, it seems their error was compounded by not taking advantage of that substantial and very temporary dip.

 

Unfortunately, as Fairfax once again set new highs, the rest of us will just have to bite the bullet and put up with the fact that ... well ... we will have to pay more income tax on our Fairfax profits.

 

Meanwhile Mr. Block's insights remain ... let's say, Muddy.

[SafetyinNumbers]

They might still be short a few shares and probably had some poorly run long/short funds follow them in but I think the strategy is about the Day 1 decline. That’s why they can charge such high performance fees. The post Day 1 theatre is for the regulators.

[Buckeye]

35 minutes ago, cwericb said:

I am sure that some here noticed a sudden influx of new posters on this board immediately after Carson Block came out with his ill-informed garbage about Fairfax.

 

Seemed like these new posters just couldn’t restrain themselves in pointing out that Muddy Waters / Carson Block had confirmed and exposed their ‘suspicions’ that obviously there was something shifty about Fairfax.

[gfp]

I didn't notice any new posters - at least not on this thread?  Seems like the usual suspects.

 

[Luke]

Haha, i still remember getting the message by Interactive Brokers FFH -10% and then saw the news about the short report, not gonna lie, it made me quite uneasy BUT there are undeniable fundamentals even if book value has some distortions (obviously the distortions pointed out by MW were misleading). BUT on first glance it induced some stress, especially considering it was 72 pages and a lot of mumbo jumbo too. 

 

Then on top came the change in margin requirements for FFH positions by IB so yeah, MW hoped there is some panic selling which created a -12% drop. 

 

I hope for him he sold immediately after that.

[Luke]

On 2/8/2024 at 2:10 PM, buball said:

Fairfax-Financial_FFH_MW_20240208.pdf 3.52 MB · 123 downloads

This one is also suspicious, account created in 2009, 0 posts before the MW short report and then he is the first one to open a thread about it and post the short report....

 

Hello MW?

[SafetyinNumbers]

26 minutes ago, Luca said:

This one is also suspicious, account created in 2009, 0 posts before the MW short report and then he is the first one to open a thread about it and post the short report....

 

Hello MW?

Does that mean they paid back in 2009 or just before they made the first post?

[gfp]

I don't think anybody had to pay back in 2009.  It was free to join this forum for many years.  But how do you remember a username and password from 2009....

Edited February 26 by gfp

[Luke]

31 minutes ago, gfp said:

I don't think anybody had to pay back in 2009.  It was free to join this forum for many years.  But how do you remember a username and password from 2009....

Yeeeeppp, it is very suspicious  Not a single post in 15 years and then when MW is short a thread gets created in Fairfaxes biggest online board?  

[MMM20]

4 hours ago, dartmonkey said:

Do we know for sure that they tend to cover quickly, or is this just a suspicion?

He’s said so himself and it’s the source of blowback from Marc Cohodes and others who think it’s unethical. 

[Parsad]

3 hours ago, Luca said:

Yeeeeppp, it is very suspicious  Not a single post in 15 years and then when MW is short a thread gets created in Fairfaxes biggest online board?  

 

Hi Luca,

 

There were suspicious posters when the report came out, but you are incorrect about this one.  The individual works for a large asset manager and I've seen their public portfolio holdings...and they are very long Fairfax...not short.  Cheers!

[Xerxes]

3 hours ago, Luca said:

Yeeeeppp, it is very suspicious  Not a single post in 15 years and then when MW is short a thread gets created in Fairfaxes biggest online board?  

2009 !?

That is one year before Satoshi Nakamoto posted his/her/their last post on Bitcointalk Forum. 
 

and then poooof disappeared … just like that 

plot thickens !!

[StubbleJumper]

What can I say.  Okay, let's get down to it.  Who fucking cares about Muddy Waters?  Either you made money from their folly or you didn't.  In my case, every dollar that I will spend in 2024 has already been made from our good friend, and it's only February!  No need to belly-ache about somebody who helps you.

 

Time to move on to something more interesting.

 

 

SJ

[cwericb]

Bottom line here, right after the MW report was released there were several posters who did not regularly post on this board, if ever, and who crawled out of the woodwork who argued that MW was a very reputable firm and were legitimately exposing the shady practices of Fairfax.

One could go back and supply quotes, but why bother.

Edited February 27 by cwericb

[Dinar]

1 hour ago, Xerxes said:

2009 !?

That is one year before Satoshi Nakamoto posted his/her/their last post on Bitcointalk Forum. 
 

and then poooof disappeared … just like that 

plot thickens !!

Keyzer soze says hello

[ValueMaven]

I actually owe MW a thank you.  I was able to add materially to my position the day the short report came out.  

Talk about short and distort!  Up about 20% in a month!

[Xerxes]

Masterclass on shorting by MuddyWaters …. Making excuses (not mentioning FFH by name)

 

Looks like he is shorting BXMT. 

 

 

Edited March 21 by Xerxes

[Tommm50]

I wonder if they're back at it. A week straight of declines on no news...

 

That's pretty unusual. If so, it seems like they could pick a much easier target, or maybe sheer vindictiveness over Fairfax shining a light on the nest of vipers back in the day?

[hardcorevalue]

I still don’t get how a stock going down a little bit in a week is an indication of a bunch of short sellers?

Edited March 28 by hardcorevalue