crastogi

To add to that, the core of his strategy is to invest in "high quality" companies, at a reasonable price. He defines high quality specifically in a value of ROCE (Return On Capital Employed), which is (almost) net profits divided by total assets. This shows the return the company is generating on capital employed (not taking into account long term debt) - i.e. how valuable will the company become if it is not saddled with any debt. He chooses companies with ROCE around 25% or higher. Assuming a company reinvests its profits internally, then he argues that its intrinsic value also increases by 25% each year. Two points he does not answer in his presentations that I have seen, are the effect of debt servicing on this process, and why doesn't the efficient market theory discount this effect (by making the shares correspondingly expensive at the outset). The implicit answers to these two questions are that compounding by 25% per year will deal with the debt problem over the longer term, and that other investors don't understand the long term uplift of this kind of compounding, leading them to value the business in aggregate higher than, but not sufficiently higher enough, than other businesses with a lower ROCE. Edit: Just to say that in the video of the 2020 meeting posted tonight, he explains this strategy at time 16:48 I've been looking into this tonight. Watching the two annual shareholder meetings for FEET (Fundsmith Emerging Equities Trust), for 2017 and 2019, he says that the fund underperformance of net asset value was caused by outflows of money from far east actively managed funds, into far east index funds (ETFs), resulting from general investor sentiment in favour of passive investing, and regional investing. He says that the sectors of the companies he is invested in are under-represented in the main indexes, hence demand for his companies dropped in aggregate, along with the price). It sounds plausible, but might be an excuse of course. time: 50:50 time: 20:00 I think the key is to only invest in companies where you are fairly certain that the returns on capital are not going to trend down to the mean and the revenues will keep growing. That is the only way this works.

But you have to know when the bottom is in :)

I would negotiate commish...after getting a good offer. of course if I get an offer at full asking price I dont negotiate the commish but I haven't seen a full price or bidding war in a couple of decades personally, but one way getting an improved result after the offeror stands pat and the net is lower than you would like is to then simply ask broker to move a bit...and he/she likely will and happily will to cement sale...but dont piss off your broker before getting the listing by trying to discount commish. A little unethical, no?

I am sorry, but that link is not working for me

I wonder if anyone watched the investor day webcast (as i did) Couple of points came across to me and a fair bit to like. - Accounting seems conservative - They seem to have found ways to extract cash from their investees, even though FCAU, Partner RE, RACE and CNHI are bulk of their portfolio For instance, they will be getting a substantial dividend when the FCA PSA merger takes place. Looks like CNHI is being split to prepare for a sale of the truck business, though they did not confirm. Which may lead to more funds. I like the dividend and buyback policy. One question asked was will they buy high quality businesses, or take controlling stakes in fair companies and work with them to improve their performance. Essentially, they said that they find better companies too expensive right now. Given their track record of good exits, and their domain expertise in industrials, buying fixers may a good approach. (Keep in mind they are usually the largest investors). Also, i like that there is no sense of urgency to buy something, and they are thoughtful and calculated about it. Overall, i felt good about the webcast. Of course, everybody can talk like Buffett ;) , but at the end of the day it is the execution that matters. Any other thoughts?

I would take those returns any day ;)

Thanks!

Is Susan Gayner related to Tom Gayner?

That would be a nice list :)

Please post some highlights. Thanks!

My question too.. I missed that in the release And how much we re purposing cost?

It's shocking and sad. RIP Sergio. I wonder how deep the bench is.

I wonder if SRG selling this because they are cash constrained when it comes to developing this, or it was a strategic move. Regardless looks like the book is understated significantly. Anybody who live s in the area - is/Was this is a nice mall/ premium area?

So, FWIW some time back I had done a spreadsheet for net returns to investor with SP500 historical returns under different fee scenarios. It is attached below. Maybe some will find it useful. The big takeway is that the Buffett model only pays for the manager when you are generating serious alpha. Of course, the traditional hedge fund structure is egregiously expensive for the investor.

Surprising. I thought it was 0/6/25. But the interview states it differently. Thanks for sharing