Daily Journal Annual Meeting

[peter1234]

Yes, the 2 of them are super smart.

 

Maybe they have a really high yard stick of people that are (maybe) smarter than them (think Einstein, Newton).

 

But look at what happened to Newton in the South Sea bubble.

 

Compared to other investors, they are certainly at the very top.

 

They also live (fairly) normal lives, so they want to emphasize being one of 'us'.

 

I actually like this better than giving the impression that they are super smart, way above anyone else.

 

As a nice and profitable side effect, being humble also makes you less prone to hubris.

 

What's not to like about that?

 

:)

 

 

 

 

 

[merkhet]

I think Munger gives you the clue you need re IQ. He's afraid of the guy with a 190 who thinks he's a 250.

 

Say that you're probably not as smart as you think you are. It keeps you honest when you need it most -- when you're truly out of your depth.

 

So re Buffett, I don't think he's lying. You don't need to be brilliant but you do need to be clever.

[augustabound]

Yeah, I think it's been touched on a couple of times here. They're correct that you don't need a genius IQ to be a successful investor.

 

You do need a high IQ and the right temperament to build what they built. 

[Buffett_Groupie]

Temperament being equal, genius IQ is better than high IQ which is better than average IQ in investing!

 

One can decide for oneself which level of IQ Buffett/Munger duo possesses.  If you're an BRK shareholder, you're already convinced their IQ is higher than yours, which is what matters and everything else is irrelevant, right? :)  If you aren't one, then you can debate the IQ issue for decades while coming up with all kinds of reasons for not becoming one: size, succession, scarcity of elephants, the duo's health, age, diet, mental state...

[augustabound]

Ahh, sorry, I didn't mean to use genius and high interchangeably. They speak of high IQ not being necessary. 

[Guest wellmont]

you may not have to be a genius. but you do have to have "something" that most other people don't have...that something could be a combination of lots of different hard to come by attributes, including luck.

[premfan]

The genius vs willingness question:

 

Better yet the intellectuals vs willingness. The willing have worldly success in most areas of life. The intellectuals like to read the how to do books. After reading they are fulfilled. The intellectuals try to solve theoretical problems. The willing value experience over reading how to books. Experience greater than content.

 

 

Intellectuals ( genius's) value content over experience. They are content junkies. The willing are the truly successful people. Partner with the willing always over the intellectual. The willing are the ones that take action. 

 

Argument question : What about henry singleton and buffet they are genius's and they have immense success?

 

Answer= There success is due to the willingness to stick with a system. The patience and persistence to no matter what create and cultivate that habit. They are famous cause they are in the public forum. Many people in the private field have  created  returns in that range. The nothing to something crowd. The U.S. immigrants came here with nothing now have more than something. They are intellectual yes some. But its all work. Its all experience over content.

 

The intellectual reads a book about sex. Ah yes I know about sex! The willing have sex. Who gets more results? Which one would you rather partner with?

[bookie71]

I thought you might be interested in the comment on a CPA Ethics Board

https://www.linkedin.com/groupItem?view=&item=5916187648740851712&type=member&gid=4884038&trk=eml-b2_anet_digest_weekly-group_discussions-2-grouppost-disc-0&midToken=AQECfysrFrpu5g&fromEmail=fromEmail&ut=3BrEpYszZhNmo1

[augustabound]

Linkedin says you need to join the group to view.

You can't join then just leave after reading since the request is reviewed by the group admin before approval.

[bookie71]

"Thank you E&Y

 

George DuRant

Managing Member, DuRant, Schraibman & Lindsay, LLC

Taking Bloomberg’s report of Charles Munger comparing E&Y to a misguided physician for identifying accounting and internal control issues at Daily Journal Corp in the light most favorable to the profession, hats off to E&Y for exercising professional courage. This sort of news tends to restore the public trust in the profession. Thank you E&Y.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-10/munger-likens-auditor-to-doctor-prodding-groin-to-treat-nose.html

Munger Likens Auditor to Doctor Prodding Groin to Treat Nose bloomberg.com

Billionaire Charles Munger, who dismissed Ernst & Young LLP as auditor of his Daily Journal Corp., compared the accounting firm to a misguided physician."

[merkhet]

Infidels rarely think of themselves as infidels...

[LongHaul]

I totally agree with Liberty on this.  The U.S. rate might be the highest in the world and at the end of the day it is a cost of doing business for companies.  Relative to the rest of the world the U.S. is uncompetitive.  Funny how the US prides itself on capitalistic traditions but taxes the hell out of corporations - much more than the socialist countries. 

 

If the tax rate is reduced it is likely that almost all will just be passed on to the consumer anyway. 

 

I don’t really disagree, but the problem is that to be competitive with *all* of the rest of the world, you basically have to eliminate corporate taxes.

 

To be clear, that's not what I was saying. I didn't mean that it's literally impossible to find a country anywhere that has a lower tax rate than you do. Just to be competitive with most of the countries that are comparable.

 

Territorial rather than worldwide taxes, fewer loopholes/exemptions (more of a flat tax rate, in other words), and a rate that is closer to Canada, the UK, the Netherlands, etc, would be a good start.

 

I bet that if you do that, any money you lose from the companies that are currently paying the full rate would be more than offset from all those who won't redomicile elsewhere, from trillions in cash that would come back to the US and be invested there (which are now kept away to avoid double-taxation), and from corps paying very low rates being brought up to the new statutory rate.

 

Right now the system has incentives for companies to create jobs and invest elsewhere, domicile elsewhere, and lobby for exemptions/loopholes. Not exactly a fair or effective system.

 

This has nothing to do with paying for infrastructure or whatever. A better system could probably gross money tax revenue and boost overall economic health.

[wisdom]

DJCO notes

 

http://www.gurufocus.com/news/278773/notes-from-charlie-mungers-djco-2014-shareholder-meeting

[james22]

$120k from some retirement floated into his account yesterday – didn't know what to do with it – had no "no-brainer" to buy in today's market – hard in the big securities now

 

Interesting.

[biaggio]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/phildemuth/2014/09/19/charlie-munger-and-the-2014-daily-journal-annual-meeting-a-fans-notes/?partner=yahootix

 

 

[Guest longinvestor]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/phildemuth/2014/10/01/charlie-munger-and-the-2014-daily-journal-annual-meeting-part-three/?partner=yahootix

 

Munger's comment talking up the upcoming 2014 letter by Buffett is interesting and perhaps unusual, no? Made me sit up and re-read that comment that if you are smart, you should read that letter!

 

Over the past few years, Munger has been rather bullish over BRK's future. At the 2013 meeting, he even made a comment "If there are any Mungers listening, I hope they are not foolish to sell their BRK shares".

 

[Charlie]

"Over the past few years, Munger has been rather bullish over BRK's future."

 

I like this quote:

 

"Part of what we did should be done by others, but it isn’t. There are vast institutional pressures on people to do it differently.  Will it continue?  I think Berkshire’s going to continue way better than most people think. Way better." 

 

:)

[jay21]

"Over the past few years, Munger has been rather bullish over BRK's future."

 

I like this quote:

 

"Part of what we did should be done by others, but it isn’t. There are vast institutional pressures on people to do it differently.  Will it continue?  I think Berkshire’s going to continue way better than most people think. Way better." 

 

:)

 

I agree.

 

I see a lot of people thinking their reinvestment RoE is sub 10%. I disagree.

[VersaillesinNY]

Charlie Munger and the 2014 Daily Journal Annual Meeting - Part Four

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/phildemuth/2014/10/08/charlie-munger-and-the-2014-daily-journal-annual-meeting-part-four/

 

I don’t think you can get to be a really good investor over a broad range without doing a massive amount of reading.

Charles Munger

[AJDelphi]

So does anybody want to start taking bets for what month the DJCO Annual meeting will be in 2015?

 

Had a great time at it last year and will be going again in 2015 if it doesn't conflict with anything major in my schedule.

 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/783412/000143774914022115/djco20141215_nt10k.htm

[merkhet]

It's March 25, 2015 @ 10am.

 

Best,

Rob

[Jurgis]

How big was the meeting last year?

 

Do they require shareholder certs to get in? (I assume it's too late to buy 1 share ;)).

 

 

[OracleofCarolina]

How big was the meeting last year?

 

Do they require shareholder certs to get in? (I assume it's too late to buy 1 share ;)).

 

Probably a 150 people there and no ownership was required last year

[JBird]

Thanks Rob! Much appreciated.

[fareastwarriors]

So I just show up and walk in? It's that simple?

Sorry, newbie here!