Parsad

I think it was from Dale Carnegie that he learned to criticize generally and praise specifically. This is kind of an extension of that, it seems. No, I understand that and why he does what he does. He had no choice but to fire Sokol. I just believe he did so much for the company and Berkshire, that you don't simply heave it all away. Buffett should have made mention of what happened, why he made his (or the board`s) decision, and that they obviously had little choice in the decision. As well as indicate that the company still appreciated the years of service Sokol showed. This guy, for all intents and purpose, was the one who was going to run Berkshire when Buffett was gone. You can't just bury him! ``Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless``, just doesn`t cut it here. Cheers!

For those that may have not read the letter, and would like a little bit of a summary: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-25/berkshire-says-board-has-decided-on-buffett-s-successor-as-chief-executive.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-25/berkshire-profit-declines-30-as-gains-narrow-on-derivatives.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-25/buffett-says-he-s-on-the-prowl-for-large-acquisitions-to-build-berkshire.html http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sometimes-even-warren-buffett-gets-wrong-220255890.html http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2012/02/25/brian-moynihan-earns-warren-buffett-seal-of-approval/?mod=yahoo_hs Cheers!

The title of the thead says "Fairfax's action on Fibrek - is it fair to the minor shareholders?". Who else are you talking about? Cheers!

Good letter! It was more of primer than anything particularly new. I'm sure there have been alot of new shareholders added with the BNSF deal and the eventual split of the "B" shares, so he's trying to make the letter as clear as possible for ALL investors. No mention at all of Sokol or what happened. He's made it pretty clear that he's completely excluding Sokol from Berkshire, as he credits Greg Abel for the efforts at Mid-American and Jordan Hansell at Netjets. No mention of the turnaround that Sokol actually did at Netjets and the culture he built at Mid-American that now allows those two managers to receive these accolades. Cheers!

Are you guys retarded, or have you been smoking something? Let me ask you a few questions: Have you guys heard Prem say anything really on this? Do you really think Prem is going to ruin all the goodwill he's created over his working life over a $250M investment in Abitibi? Did Prem make the tender offer? Did Fairfax make the tender offer? Do you know if Prem prefers Fibrek's management or Abitibi's management? And if he does have a preference for management, could it be because he plans on holding the shares in that company for the long-term? Do any of you even know this? Do you think that Prem felt the warrants in the Mercer offer would have been dilutive to long-term shareholders? Do you think Prem thinks Fibrek will do significantly better long-term under Abitibi, rather than Mercer? Do you think that both Abitibi and Fibrek may have better access to capital if they were together, than if they were alone or if Fibrek was within Mercer? How come none of you are asking what Mohnish is up to and how he is screwing you guys? He coughed up his shares just like Prem! I know some of you are pissed because your $1.30 offer is up in the air, but you could have easily sold your shares at that price or better last week in the open market, as millions of shares traded at $1.30 or better. But I guess it's much easier to bitch about how someone else is screwing you over, when your own greed is actually the root of the problem. Is Prem really screwing the minority shareholders over, or are you guys whining because he's looking after his shareholder's interests, instead of only yours? Cheers!

The annual letters are on their site, but for those years you have to go to the annual report which has them. For the early years, I really recommend you read the entire annual report, because the business was simpler and it really is neat to see how they built it over the next decade. Cheers!

You misunderstood the press release. The warrants are redeemable by FBK if it receives a superior proposal and therefore ABH is not at all prevented from submitting a superior proposal. This isn't shark repellent - in fact its the opposite. The warrants are meant to dilute the hostile $1.00 bid so ABH can't get control of FBK through abusive actions to the minority shareholders. If ABH reduces their minimum tender from 66 2/3 to 50% and takes up the current 52% tendered, MERC will exercise the warrants and dilute ABH to 42%. ABH knows this and therefore will not take up shares now. All they can do is withdraw or bump their bid. I think we'll see the latter. Also, there's another valid reason for the warrants - FBK burned through cash defending itself against ABH. A financing makes sense. Go back to the Perpetual / Profound deal, you'll see a precedent for this: http://www.bennettjones.com/BennettJones/images/Guides/external7446.pdf Hey Jetsfan, Do you still think I misunderstood the press release? Yes I do. The warrants were meant to neutralize the oppressive lock-ups, not thwart a take-over. The BDR made an enormous error. I don't see how FBK's appeal cannot be successful. I'll admit you got lucky on your call. It was definitely a 100:1 shot. Ppphhhtt! Yeah right. The warrants were not to thwart a take-over. And the executives at FBK aren't worried about their jobs. Cheers!

Wait a sec! First it isn't Prem making the tender. Second, the bid by Resolute is there on the table. Mercer's bid is a dilutive bid, even though it looks good solely based on market price. So for any short-term shareholder who simply wants to profit from the acqusition, the Mercer bid is what appeals to you because you are squeezing the most pennies you can in the transaction...but you don't care one iota for the actual business, employees, customers, etc. For any long-term shareholder of the business, who wants to see long-term shareholder value increased while maintaining their percentage ownership, how can the Mercer bid be the one you would want to support. Everyone puts their own interests first...be it the short-term and long-term shareholders of Fibrek & Resolute, or the executives of both companies. The correct decision seems to rest solely on what your own considerations are. Cheers!

Bloomberg article on the upcoming annual letter. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-24/buffett-warts-revealed-as-billionaire-prepares-his-annual-letter.html

Actually after reading the press release, I don't feel so bad. Almost $17B was the tax asset release, so while it can be used to offset future income and adds to book, it isn't an actual profit. The actual operations had a pretty decent quarter...a little better than I was expecting. Cheers!

F**k me! Pardon my french, but I thought they were going to have an average quarter, and I sold some of our AIG warrants because all of the financials have been going up over the last month and I've been cutting back on the exposure a bit. I wanted to keep our BAC and our WFC, so LUK and AIG have been going. Gad almighty! ::) Cheers!

Well this is the thing. For the things Sardar did that I did not like, he did plenty of things that I really did like and that Lampert could have actually learned from. You have to move incredibly fast if you want to save a sinking ship, especially a big ship! Think about what Moynihan is doing at BAC, and you'll see the difference with which Lampert is operating relative to others. Moynihan is not spending a single second hesitating to sell assets and strengthen the core business. Sardar did the same thing at Steak'n Shake but on a much smaller scale. I think Eddie thought that the brand was strong enough to right itself with some tinkering, and that the depth of the economic problems wouldn't be quite as bad as they turned out. You combine those two misjudgements with the sheer speed that their competition, and the emergence of online shopping, and you have a perfect storm for Sears to battle through. It can be saved, but they have to move at warp speed, not tip-toeing into this thing. They are getting killed, not simply beaten! Cheers!

Both could use some lessons! But at least Overstock's revenues are still somewhat headed in the right direction. Cheers!

Bill Gates said many years ago, that they should also charge a fraction of a penny for emails. So as to truly quantify the cost of spam and probably significantly reduce the amount sent. I agree with both ideas! Cheers!

He's going to be using those assets to keep this thing afloat. Unless they control the quarterly losses at the domestic stores, all he'll be doing is eating up those assets. Cheers!

Jeremy Lin has trademarked "Linsanity" and is putting his degree to work. Good for him! Cheers! http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/23/news/companies/jeremy_lin_trademark/index.htm?source=cnn_bin

Contrary to what the market would have you believe from the recent run up in price, including today, Sears 4th quarter was absolutely atrocious! Eddie's been far too slow in making changes, and now they are quickly trying to make amends with the rights offering and sale of 11 stores. They need to close hundreds of Sears domestic stores and sell them. Kmart and Sears Canada aren't the problem...the U.S. Sears stores are the problem. Just a terrible quarter with tax asset and goodwill impairments, huge operating loss in domestic stores, and they look like they are still going to be burning cash for the next 2-3 quarters until they start to stabilize this thing. Book is nearly a third of what it was four years ago, so any of you still holding on...be careful! Cheers! http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1310067/000119312512073963/d304294dex991.htm

HFT are under watch. I like Mary Schapiro. I think she's one of the few people who actually knows what she's doing. Cheers! http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-may-ticket-speeding-traders.html;_ylt=Am2UqJgK5YUzSfd1ua5sdiKiuYdG;_ylu=X3oDMTQ0bWIwb2cwBG1pdANGaW5hbmNlIEZQIFRvcCBTdG9yeSBSaWdodARwa2cDZGM5YjUyMjctZjc0MS0zN2JjLTk2OTMtYTMwYTBkODdmYzIxBHBvcwMyBHNlYwN0b3Bfc3RvcnkEdmVyA2M4Y2ZlMzgxLTVlNDQtMTFlMS1hY2I3LWI1NzI3OGY4YWFlMQ--;_ylg=X3oDMTFvdnRqYzJoBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

Yankee only post on political threads which is unlike any other poster here. Even Ben Graham and that other guy post about LVLT..." Ben Graham has been banned to the abyss! The other guy knows he will get hit on the nose with a rolled up newspaper when he gets out of line. ;D I didn't realize until I attempted to ban Ben Graham, but when I looked on the "ban" administrative panel, he had some 20 IP addresses he was using to post from. I've banned them all, and will try to feret him out if he attempts to re-register. Cheers!

A pretty good read here if you have the time (I'm hoping it changes your tone): http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp87.pdf quote: On spending, both parties have blended together to form one giant Republocrat party. exactly anybody who believes the repubicans are any better at spending then demos just isn't paying attention. Yup! They all cater to their constituency and their lobbyists. Once they are out of office, who the hell is going to hire them...their constituency and their lobbyists! It's rare for a politician to actually stand up and do the right thing, rather than for those that pay or support their campaign. For example, 5 Super PAC's account for 85% of the money raised so far for the Republican party. Whose interests are these candidates representing? It's no different for the Democrats. The politician's nose is led by a fish hook! Cheers!

Article about Berkshire entering the Thai reinsurance market led by Ajit Jain. Also a small blurb near the end about Fairfax's announcement in January. Cheers! http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/23/berkshire-thailand-idUSL2E8D60WN20120223?type=companyNews&feedType=RSS&feedName=companyNews&rpc=43

Alice Schroeder had a column on Schloss. Cheers! http://www.aliceschroeder.com/blog/walter-schloss-what-guy

Here's why I brought it up. 1) Christie is a New Jersey official expressing displeasure with Buffett because Buffett wants to raise the Federal tax burden on the rich 2) Christie practices tax cutting that disproportionally favors the rich in New Jersey. I'm just trying to better understand the animal. I conclude that what bothers him is not just spending as you suggest, but rather he wants the rich to keep more of their winnings (which puts him at odds with Buffett). I established his desire to benefit the rich by introducing his New Jersey income tax cut (other tax cut options were available to him). Yup! Who's yer daddy? Cheers!

Because it's dumb and hypocritical. I don't support spending as much on the military than the next 6 countries combined. Does that mean I can just tell Christie to write a check out of his account for the next F-16 or nuclear submarine and shut up? +1! Cheers!

I guess remembering the obvious is hard, then, because so many people seem to forget it... Your trivial point was consistent with my argument. I was just being charitable. Are you going to offer an argument for why Christie was wrong for what he said, or why on this issue Buffett isn't more of a demagogue than Christie? What if Christie said "Buffett should shut up about corporate governance!" Or how about "Buffett should shut up about executive compensation!" Better yet, "Buffett should shut up about politics!" Christie by saying what he is saying is simply choosing to ignore the debate or dicussion. He's saying that Buffett, as a citizen of the country, should not be allowed to voice his opinion about what changes should be made to how the country is governed. He has that right, as does Christie. Whether you agree or disagree with Buffett...Christie's comment was just ridiculously stupid for someone of his position. Cheers!