giofranchi

+1! :) Gio

Yes! That should be the reason why PSH is practically unchanged today. Gio

We will see what NAV per share PSH posts at the end of the week! ;) Gio

I am going to buy this company in a few days: you could have been skeptical about Jarden Corp. and you could have been skeptical about Platform Speciality Products… To be skeptical about NHL would be imo a serious mistake of omission! ;) Cheers, Gio

NHL has started trading again on the LSE today. Cheers, Gio Nomad_Investor_Presentation_6-5-15.pdf

giofranchi: absolutely no idea! While hoping this stock tank again right after the tender! ;) Cheers, Gio

Another fact: anyone who is invested in FIH (Fairfax India Holdings) knows very well our capital is still parked in bonds and cash. Evidently, Watsa & Co. are encountering some difficulties in deploying it through the Indian stock market, because prices have recently gone up so much… By the end of the year we should see the first investment, or at least that’s what Watsa has said, but FIH is looking for at least 6-7 businesses in which to invest. At the rate of one idea per year, it will take 6-7 years before we are fully invested… Except, of course, a market correction comes sooner! ;) In other words, how you can be invested in FIH, without hoping for a market correction and without relying on Watsa’s ability to take advantage of that correction, is beyond me. Cheers, Gio

Thank you for posting! ;) Cheers, Gio

I agree! What I liked right away about Leonard is his very clear way of talking about existing businesses, and therefore his focus on organic growth results. I think an easy and clear view on organic growth is simply essential to make an investment in any business which makes lots of acquisitions. Actually, I have often said the lack of an easy way to judge organic growth has been the reason I decided to watch VRX from the sidelines for a while. With CSU I have never had this problem! ;) In 10 days more cash comes in, and I am buying more CSU. Cheers, Gio

I think there is something else to be said about this: I concentrate my investments in only a few companies because I want to have great conviction in any business that I own. And the reason I want to have great conviction is precisely because I want to be able to average down as stock prices decrease. In other words, I seek to replace, in part at least, the temperament needed to buy when others are selling with a strong conviction about what I am buying. Until now I have been successful in doing so… This of course is not to say I will be successful in the future too… I hope so, but we will see! ;) Cheers, Gio

You should always draw a line between investable funds and funds hold for living. Those who don’t lack the basics of investing, and I seriously doubt they get to know a manager like Patient Capital well enough… But who knows? You might be right! A person who has diligently set aside enough cash to live (cash I never even think of investing! And therefore I would never entrust even to a manager like Patient Capital!), and enjoys the ability to generate substantially more free cash to invest (like I luckily do!), might lack the temperament to invest after a 50% correction. There is no doubt this is true. Like there is no doubt what Packer said is also true: to outperform, you must have such a temperament! ;) Well, that would be hypothesis a), wouldn't it? Cheers, Gio

Of course I have said stock prices may go down by a lot! In fact hypothesis b) could not be possible otherwise! For what I know in 2008-2009 Buffett, Watsa, Malone, Biglari, and others behaved very opportunistically. Though I agree I could be tempted to consider selling and not buying in a market crash, I hope those people might instead behave differently. Like they have already done in the past. Because, if they don’t, the problem won’t be a market crash, the problem will be I have chosen the wrong entrepreneurs and the wrong businesses. Therefore, I agree we all are on our own: choose the businesses you own wisely! ;) Cheers, Gio

What I am not sure I understand well about these funds which hold lots of cash and justify their decision by saying their main objective is “to protect capital” is the following: With the exception of a new Great Depression, I am quite positive all investments of mine would grow much faster in a volatile environment than in a muddle through scenario… I actually think a 30%-40% market crash would make the companies I own stronger… not weaker! Of course, in a market crash, as the fundamentals of those business improve, their stock prices might probably go down with the overall market… and would probably go down a lot! But, if the fundamentals of those businesses improve, how can my capital not be sufficiently protected? Even if stock prices go down? Therefore, imo it could be either a) They truly fear a new Great Depression or b) Their true aim is not “to protect capital”, but “to buy assets very cheaply, when they become available”. Cheers, Gio

oddballstocks, Liberty, thank you! :) Cheers, Gio

So, have you a negative view on businesses that offer SaaS solutions? CSU owns lots of them, if I am not mistaken. Gio

Well, imo the performance has been good. I might agree with what Packer has said, but I also think the performance has been satisfactory enough. And to go from 0 to 1 billion is no small feat at all! ;) Gio

Yeah! Mine was just a comment based on the fact the frothiness we see in tech today might be closer to what it was in 1999-2000 than in 2006-2007… Anyway, thank you! :) Cheers, Gio

Selling a bad product/service over the course of 15 years... I cannot imagine a hardest thing to do! ;) Gio

Constellation Software’s Harris Division completes the acquisition of Picis http://www.csisoftware.com/2015/06/constellation-softwares-harris-division-completes-the-acquisition-of-picis/ Gio

Generally I agree. But how then has Maida succeeded in going from ??? Gio

Good to know! :) Thank you, Gio

Pete, I understand… Yet, I have repeatedly witnessed that in business, if you rely on the legal method for things to work out well… well, things simply will not work out well! There is no substitute for carefully judging and knowing whom you are partnering with. And basically what you want to see is a deeply rational human being. Everything else imo follows. Gio

Pete, As I have said in my previous post, imo that’s only theory. In practice, instead, I don’t care how they maintain control over their companies… as long as they do what’s necessary to maintain it! In practice, instead, what I would like to see is they maintain a large percentage of their wealth invested in their companies (for Watsa it is more than 85%!). In practice, instead, what I would like to see is they maintain the desire to run their companies as effectively as they have done in the past. And I am getting less and less interested in theory, while more and more interested in practice. Cheers, Gio

Amen globalfinancepartners This is too naive… The companies I am interested and I invest in are founded, managed, and made to grow by one person. To think otherwise is imo a mistake. The fact those people are able to surround themselves with very capable managers does not change that reality at all. Consequently, they are the ones who take all major decisions. No one can do anything they do not want nor agree to. Period. If something like that should happen, I would cease to be interested in those companies, and I would sell. If they exercise such a control by ownership, by a double class share, or by other means specifically devised for such a purpose (a la Biglari), is nothing but theory. Practice is always the same: all other shareholders are spectators (albeit ones who become richer and richer in time!). And the choice they have is simple: to hold or to sell their shares. You might like it or not. Personally, I like it very much: I am a liberal who loves dictatorship in business! (And my company works exactly this way!) But whether you like it or not doesn’t change how things actually are: no one has ever chosen nor done anything against Buffett’s will at Berkshire, no one will ever choose nor do anything against Buffett’s will at Berkshire as long as he is alive. Imo the sooner we accept this, the better! ;) Cheers, Gio

By now you all know very well what I think about the subject... Nothing else to add really! ;) Cheers, Gio