giofranchi

The image in attachment is from "Onward". Do you think it is just rubbish or simply not true? Cheers, Gio SBUX_Coffee

"Soda and Junk Food" by Gary Shilling (in attachment). Do you think it is relevant for Starbucks as well? Cheers, Gio Soda_And_Junk_Food

You can also see that iPad sales are slowing or decreasing. Now is that because competitors have better products, people have left the fad of tablets or is the larger iPhone screen cannibalizing some of the market share? Maybe a combination of all three? Nonetheless, this beast keeps throwing off cash! Cheers! I know that in my home we used to have 2 iPads and now have none. When we got our larger screen iPhone 6S's my wife and I never used our iPads anymore so they went on ebay. I'm sure some people find them useful, (maybe for young kids or homes with no desktop computer), but I no longer see the usefulness of a tablet. If I need a bigger screen or a keyboard I turn on my iMac, which is much more functional than an IOS device. And if I need portability the iPhone is just fine. I have a 1st gen iPad Air 64gb that I use daily for reading K's, Q's, proxies & various magazines (I almost never use it for anything else.) That said; I see no need to upgrade & will use this one until it dies... I have an iPad Pro and find the Apple Pencil to be extremely useful: I almost don't use paper anymore! Cheers, Gio

Thank you marazul and Schwab711, therefore a combination of industry growth and pricing power, with maybe some business stolen from S&P given the fact investors appear to hold Moody's reputation in higher regard. Have I understood correctly? How long do you think this kind of growth could stay above GDP growth? Cheers, Gio

I have opened a position in The Travelers Companies (TRV): Average annual operating return on equity over the last 10 years: 13.8% CARG in BVPS over the last 10 years: 9.7% BVPS in 2008: +5% CAGR in dividends over the last 10 years: 10.1% Total return to shareholders for the last 10 years: 250% Dividend Yield: 2.2% Payout Ratio: 25% Debt/Equity: 0.26 Price/BVPS: 1.4 P/E: 12 This is imo an outstanding company selling at an attractive price. The change in management that occured last year might constitute a source of uncertainty. Anyway, Mr. Schnitzer already was CEO of Business and International Insurance, and seems to know the company very well and to be perfectly alligned with its culture. Cheers, Gio

I like MCO, but its growth prospects are not very clear to me. The industry it competes in has always been an oligopoly of very few players: is MCO going to steal business from its competitors (not easy imo), or does the industry as a whole enjoys good growth prospects? Can someone help me better understand this? Cheers, Gio

I agree with all you have said. And I have twitted many parts of this book because, besides the continuity of culture and the fact there is no replacement for Buffett, I have found it interesting and useful to know lots of businesses BRK has acquired through the years better. Cheers, Gio

+1 They have been harshly criticized for their investments in equities recently: well, it seems that at least some of them are turning out to be quite profitable! Cheers, Gio

That's true, but it also takes substantially less to shrink FCF with such a high leverage. VRX for example. :) Of course LMCA is better than VRX. But leveraged growth should be a concern to investors. The Malone's cos are the only ones I hold in my portfolio which operate with lots of debt. And the reason is Malone has a very long track record of using debt shrewdly and carefully. Let's hope he knows what he is doing this time too. Cheers, Gio

I have found this article about Bollore: Follow ‘Buffett of France’ for a Three-Year Double: http://www.barrons.com/articles/follow-buffett-of-france-for-a-three-year-double-1482491739 It looks interesting and still cheap at today's price of $3.90 per share. Cheers, Gio

I guess because I simply don't follow Bollore... Do they look for strategic deals like PSH does? Are there other similarities? Cheers, Gio

Does it make any sense for KHC to buy MDLZ? Does it make any sense for QSR to buy CMG? Which of the two has the highest chance to materialize? Cheers, Gio

+1 Cheers, Gio

Could you educate me? I missed this. Thanks! Well Prem runs Fairfax and will until he no longer can...be it physically or spiritually. But it looks pretty obvious who would run Fairfax if Prem could no longer do so. If you don't really know, time to do some legwork and figure it out. :) Incidentally, no one has ever said anything to me. But after watching it for all these years, I kind of have a pretty good idea of changes at Fairfax that may not seem like much, but are monumental shifts in planning or thinking. Cheers! Ha - OK! I also have a fair idea, although I am nowhere near as well informed as you. However I read your comment to mean that an announcement had been made, hence the question. Pete, It really is obvious! Sanjeev is going to merge FFH with PDH and he is the one who will be running the show!!? Cheers, Gio

Anyway, I want to be clear that I agree Ackman has a lot to prove. It is possible that nothing has really changed... If I see him betting too heavily on a single investment again, I will surely sell. Cheers, Gio

How much of Ackman's cumulative return in Pershing Squared is from GGP? ASs to learning his lesson, Gotham Golf and Target didn't teach him a lesson, I don't see why Valeant will. Read Confidence Game to get a better view of his blinding hubris. +1. Also let's not forget JC Penney. This imo is not completely true. What I like about Ackman is his entrepreneurial bent: he tries to add something useful to the companies he invest in and to create value. In business not everything you try turns out right. You might even have good ideas and yet fail to achieve good results. That's imo just an unavoidable part of the game. Target and JC Penney have taught Ackman that retail is very hard and therefore to stay away from it, even if you think you might be able to come up and implement good strategies... Much more than Lampert has learnt, it seems... What matters the most imo is that he never lost a large % until VRX: precisely because in business you never can be sure, you should not be too confident to bet the future of your company on a single endeavor. Ackman instead has acted too sure of himself with Valeant (bet too much at a price that clearly was too high), probably because the Allergan trade had turned so spectacularly well for him the year before. Something bad happened with VRX (as we all know), and he was severely punished for his arrogance. With this lesson, I hope, Ackman might be a humbler and more prudent investor going forward. Cheers, Gio

I am not sure. But, if you take a look at Personal Assets Trust latest Quarterly Report (in attachment), you see their share price is sligthly higher than NAV. (And they do not enjoy Ackman's track record, which even after the VRX debacle is still a 15% compounded annual for the last 13 years, a cumulative 500%). Cheers, Gio I think any assessment of Ackman's track record should include Gotham. Any info available on the combined returns of both funds? Wouldn't be surprised if it trails the market after fees. True. But I didn't mention Ackman's track record as a reason why I think an investment in PSH today might turn out better than my previous investment a couple of years ago. Basically, I think then was a time of great optimism (therefore a smaller discount share price to NAV) and Ackman was too self confident (therefore more risk), now instead is a period of great pessimism (therefore a larger discount share price to NAV) and (I hope) Ackman might be more prudent (therefore less risk). If this is not the case, as I have said, I am wrong and I'll sell again. Cheers, Gio

True. But investors won't pay incentive fees until NAV exceeds $26.37 per share. Cheers, Gio

Thank you Pete, actually you can see on their site how share price has compared to NAV until the first half of 2015, when sentiment was not so negative yet: the average discount had been around 7-8%, with some weeks in which the disocunt had shrank to 3-4%. Anyway, I agree: it is not really the discount to NAV that matters. Cheers, Gio

I am not sure. But, if you take a look at Personal Assets Trust latest Quarterly Report (in attachment), you see their share price is sligthly higher than NAV. (And they do not enjoy Ackman's track record, which even after the VRX debacle is still a 15% compounded annual for the last 13 years, a cumulative 500%). Cheers, Gio 82.pdf

I have opened a new position in PSH. I think there are two differences from the time I first opened (and later closed at a small loss) a position in the company: 1) First of all, and most important, Bill Ackman has just suffered his worst performance in 13 years. And he should be a much humbler investor than he was a couple of years ago. If it is not so, my thesis is wrong and I'll sell again. 2) Discount to NAV is meaningful (15%), while NAV has increased for the last 3 quarters: it seems that bad performance has ended. If truly so, it should be just a matter of time before the gap between share price and NAV gets closed. We will see! Cheers, Gio

Thank you Liberty! I have opened a position today (LSXMA). And I would like to buy more in the future. Cheers, Gio

Have you thought about reasons why no one seems to want to own it? Would like to know your point of view about this. Cheers, Gio

So SIRI is currently trading at approximately 14.5x next year’s FCF guidance. LSXMA has a further discount to that. They believe enabled vehicles might double by 2025. If true, anyone has an idea of what cagr in fcf should they be able to sustain? I mean: is revenue directly proportional to enabled vehicles? If so, have they means to grow fcf more rapidly than sales? Cheers, Gio

It is exactly what I asked Picasso for... And of course I don't think it would be a bad idea! I try to stick to "great businesses, with great management, at fair prices" because the time I devote to investing in the stock market is limited: I run a business which provides useful services and products and which has given me great satisfaction (until now at least!). And the endeavor to make it grow consumes the majority of my working time. But I recognize the fact that other investing strategies (micro-caps, restructurings and special situations) might uncover much more value and therefore yield much better results. Like the FELP thread has demonstrated or like the results posted by writser and Hielko demonstrate. I wouldn't mind investing with a manager who has a good track record in finding special situations that have been rewarding, who takes the time to explain in great detail what he is doing (like Picasso has done with FELP), and whose fees are reasonable. Cheers, Gio