Parsad

The U.S.' 243rd birthday and my 50th birthday! Made it past my old man and my grandpa...just barely. Now have to make it another 50 years! Cheers!

Beef will be the better value until volumes pick up. I can tell you for a fact that Beyond Meat burgers are selling like hotcakes here in Vancouver. While I love burgers, I have switched over to the Beyond Meat burgers so that I can satisfy my burger cravings in a healthier way. I also buy them at the grocery store. Whether that makes Beyond Meat a good investment is anyone's guess, but they are selling and the demand is not decreasing any time soon. In fact, I would imagine the growth rate will be very healthy for the next 10-15 years as they develop other products like meatballs, sausages, ground meat, etc. Cheers! It's not healthier, it's processed crap. If you want healthier, then eat some grass-fed meat and avoid any sugary drinks and french fries. Eat meat for meat and unprocessed vegetables for vegetables. No one can see 10-15 years in this industry. With this pop and buzz, there will be 100 other options or more in the next 10 years, some will be far better. What moat do they have exactly to last them 10 years? This schtick is going to crash within a year. That's what they said about Soda Stream...which I thought like you would bust. I'm pretty sure we all thought the same about Whole Foods. There are a lot of things that succeed that I really thought would not...I thought rap music was a fad! Cheers!

Beef will be the better value until volumes pick up. I can tell you for a fact that Beyond Meat burgers are selling like hotcakes here in Vancouver. While I love burgers, I have switched over to the Beyond Meat burgers so that I can satisfy my burger cravings in a healthier way. I also buy them at the grocery store. Whether that makes Beyond Meat a good investment is anyone's guess, but they are selling and the demand is not decreasing any time soon. In fact, I would imagine the growth rate will be very healthy for the next 10-15 years as they develop other products like meatballs, sausages, ground meat, etc. Cheers!

It, along with the thread on Bitcoin, was merged into a new thread called "Cryptocurrencies" in the "General Discussion" area. The Investment Board section should only have essentially market-listed securities specifically in the format "Ticker - Company Name". Otherwise it reduces the ability to search through that board by ticker. Cheers!

Same thing when we looked at buying real estate in the U.S. back in 2008 after the financial crisis...essentially, when you ran the tax consequences on the gains upon a sale, you ended up paying tax twice. If you bought the property in your personal name or retained it all in a U.S. subsidiary, then you were only taxed once...but if you brought the funds up through the subsidiary to the parent company in Canada, it defeated the purpose as you ended up taxed twice again. I think the same issue also occurred if you set up an LP or LLC. That was 11 years ago, so maybe there are changes or loopholes that make it more viable. Cheers!

Sorry, but he does come across as arrogant/entitled. My perspective, living in the city where the Curry's are from is that Steph didn't used to be like that, not sure if it was that he got knocked down a couple of pegs after not getting any offers to play college basketball except at Davidson and maybe a few smaller schools around the area. That's what they said about MJ...about Kobe...LeBron. If they are good, then they must be assholes...granted, MJ was an asshole. Could be his actual personality is shining through now? Great article on Curry from a few years back...neither of us have ever met him, so I would put stock in the opinion of those that actually know him and coach him: https://nypost.com/2016/01/30/humility-brash-arrogance-inside-dual-mind-of-stephen-curry/ But let's not pretend he's some guy from humble roots: He's the child of a wealthy NBA player, he attended one of the best private schools in the city growing up, and he's grown up not really ever wanting for anything. That analogy would indicate that half of the people on this message board are assholes. My father's family was one of the wealthiest families in Fiji back in the 1930's and 1940's. My Dad grew up being able to walk into a department store and buy a shirt or anything he wanted, and simply put it on the family's credit...he never wanted for anything. Then he immigrated to Canada when he was 21 with his mother, father, sister who was 9 and a brother who was 3. His father died two years later and they had nothing...my Dad raised his brother and sister, worked three jobs as a new immigrant and kept the family intact. He was probably the most privileged of children growing up as a teenage, and then worked his arse off for the next 25 years in Canada. Anyone who knew him marveled at his humility, friendship, tenacity and love of family. So, you cannot judge someone simply by their family. Warren Buffett never wanted for anything either...except for a mother who gave a damn. But I think most people would agree that Buffett is very humble. But ultimately, we're all outsiders projecting our experience and bias on someone we've never met. You are correct...fans often do that. But, I'm basing my opinion on how: - He never denigrates his team mates, even when they make crucial mistakes. - He willingly took a back seat to KD if that means winning. - Draymond, Klay and Igoudala would die for the guy...in fact Igoudala said he would do anything and everything to maintain Curry's legacy...not KD, Curry. - When KD got hurt, Curry carried him to the dressing room with Igoudala. - Curry never takes cheap shots at his opponents. Cheers!

Absolutely agree thepupil! I think alot of the issues around Jefferies have been fixed, and Handler is now being given more free reign on the company. I've been a Leucadia holder in the past and it was a very different beast than Jefferies...the management style was completely different. I think everyone has come to realize that Handler has to make the company his own, and that's what we've seen happen over the last couple of years. We own alot of Jefferies and think it should be trading at a premium to tangible book. I think the earning power of the business will become more obvious, and we're already seeing that in the last 18-24 months. Cheers!

I have trouble sometimes separating myself from disliking someone because they're good and dislike someone for a valid reason. I've always disliked Curry because of how he carries himself on the court and the way he struts. But.....maybe that's just how he stays loose, in kind of a relaxed focus way. He's in the moment during the play but when the whistle stops the play he loosens up and relaxes. Klay is all business all the time, whistle or no whistle he's ready. One thing this series taught me is how much I do like and respect Curry and Klay and I must have only disliked them because they're good. Draymond is still a dick though. That won't ever change. Yeah, it's not a strut. He stays loose that way for shooting, and he plays like he's played since he was a young kid...just go out there and have fun. And in press conferences he likes to keep the discussions to the game or his team mates...he doesn't like talking about himself. So what people assume is arrogance or cockiness is just him trying not to denigrate his opponents, keep the limelight off himself, and focus on enjoying his career and games. He's won two MVP's and nearly beat the Raptors without his bash brother (Thompson) hurting badly, while Durant is out for the next 10 months at least...he didn't pout after the loss and walk off the court like we've seen many players do in the playoffs, but went around and congratulated all of his opponents and team-mates. His mentor and consultant is Steve Nash, while his coach is Steve Kerr...both great point guards of their generation...Curry is the heir to both. With Draymond, you just wish he would keep quiet and play, but it's the fire in him that makes him such a great defender and clutch player. There are no championships in Golden State without Curry, Thompson and Green...he's the type of player you need in the playoffs. Cheers!

Steph Curry is probably one of the most humble players in basketball. He puts all of his team-mates ahead of himself and all he cares about is winning rings. To characterize him as an arrogant POS is ridiculous! Cheers!

I'm a Warriors fan as well...but also Canadian...so it was win-win for me either way. The first evolution of basketball in Canada was after Steve Nash won two MVP's and changed what Canadian basketball looks like...why a number of the top draft picks are now Canadian. This will take it another step...probably bring a team back to Vancouver, continued development of Basketball Canada at the high school and college level. Cheers!

I agree with you, but the lack of visibility is a Leucadia trait, not Jefferies. Handler used to do quarterly calls before they were acquired. I suspect Joe Steinberg as Chair was dictating some of the public relations/visibility. In the last two years, I think they've loosened up and are now realizing that Handler can't do his job with his hands tied. The Investor Presentation day last year was a good start in helping the market understand the business and its valuation. Hasn't taken yet, but as intrinsic value widens from market price, they eventually will notice. Cheers!

Steinberg and Cumming picked Rich Handler as their successor. He did a fantastic job at Jefferies over the years. Problem was that Jefferies and Leucadia were two very different types of businesses...one was an investment bank, the other a merchant bank. It would seem like a no-brainer to combine the two and provide a worthy protege to take over as S&C got older, but it wasn't...markets had a hard enough time valuing Lecuadia...combine it with Jefferies and it became even more confusing for them. Where one business succeeded on conservative distressed investments, the other operated more conventionally based on leverage. Finally now, after nearly a decade, Jefferies is a Rich Handler vehicle and he's moved it back into more of the conventional investment banking business he built his reputation on. The good thing is that after the financial crisis, Jefferies finds itself one of the few mid-sized investment banks in the arena...everyone else is on the large size now merged into various large banks since 2008. Handler was always known for his innovative ability to target the mid-size and smaller market...go after business that the larger institutions didn't care as much for, and now there are even fewer competitors in that space in terms of smaller investment banks. I think the next decade will be much better for Jefferies than the past decade. Cheers!

Yes, fully agree! I think they can do fine on their own, but everyone knows they want to do a deal and without too many strings. Don't waste our time! Cheers!

Official: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fca-withdraws-merger-proposal-groupe-230656522.html Cheers!

Agree! The deal sounded good until everyone started getting involved, Renault shareholders demanding a dividend as well and now Nissan. The fact that these guys were moving to a deal should wake up others to move swiftly. Elkann wants a deal to reduce their exposure...but he's not going to give it away, which is good for FCAU shareholders. That’s why I would have preferred Peugeot over Renault. Peugeot also has a family watching over, and I am sure they would have found common ground with Elkann. Sometimes a little jealousy makes the love-making better...I wouldn't be surprised if Peugeot waltzes back in and screws over Renault! Cheers!

Most brokerages settled on the 31st. Cheers!

For our tax specialist friends out there, if Biglari sells 400 restaurants for $10K each...which is only $4M...can he write off the $250M+ loss in Plant & Property against the gains in Cracker Barrel? If so, on paper BH takes a big loss on the sale of the stores, but they gain on the taxes they would have had to pay if they sold CRBL...and their income will increase dramatically from the new profit-sharing structure. Cheers!

Agree. For instance you can contribute bigger amount to tax deferred plans thus reduce your taxable income. Yes, in Canada too. Other benefits...very low tax rates for first $500K of business income each year or $150K in passive (investment) income...15% rate. Money can be sheltered in there at low rates for decades. Plus all allowable business exemptions can be written off against income. There are more esoteric borrowing strategies with corporations as well, but I avoid anything that starts to get too complicated. You just do the available simple things and you can reduce your tax burden considerably while paying your fair share. Cheers!

Everytime I try doing something like that, they think I'm money laundering ;D Definately not the time or place for those used hundreds! SD LOL. I suspect by cash he meant "bank draft." At least that's what I do... I wonder how a real estate conveyancing lawyer would react to a briefcase full of hundreds. I suspect if you filled out the correct paperwork it wouldn't be an issue, although he/she probably wouldn't appreciate the chance to deposit a few hundred k in cash into their trust account. They were doing it here in Vancouver, until they cracked down on the money laundering. Basically, it was the service providers (lawyers, accountants, consultants, etc) that would take a cut to deposit the money into their trust accounts. Then the money went into high-priced real estate, cars and luxury items. They would ship the cars and luxury items back to China and elsewhere, sell them and cash out with clean money. Vancouver has more luxury cars per capita than anywhere else in the world. No one blinks twice when they see a Bugatti or McLaren driving down the road. Range Rovers are like sushi restaurants here...every corner has one. Housing is getting hit in a big way since the crackdown...high end houses are selling for 50-70% of previous highs. They just began cracking down on car dealers, and now there is talk they will be going after the luxury goods category. The first place they tackled were casinos...high rollers would come in with $1-2M in a briefcase, buy chips or play high stakes Baccarat, lose 5-10% and then cash out in clean money. The maximum is $10K in cash now, and one of the newest, most posh casinos (the Parq), nearly went bankrupt after just 3 years because gaming revenues dropped off so much. They just received a lifeline in financing about a month ago. Cheers!

Sanj, a money market first broke the buck in 1994. While you were more right than Biglari, it had already happened not too long before. Let me clarify...the 1st retail money market fund to break the buck. The 1994 break was institutional. And when I was talking to Sardar, I wasn't talking about one money market fund...but half the market. It just didn't happen because the Fed stepped in, in a big way, otherwise it would have been hell. Klarman talked quite a bit about how index funds were a fad back in...1991! Will markets (and indices) have a large drawdown sometime in the future? Yes. I'm not saying they are a fad. I'm saying it can create a systemic issue, and when you have that type of problem, it creates a panic. Systemic issues by their very nature take a long-time to fester and appear. Look, we still aren't sure why the Nasdaq drops a 1000 points in a day...accidental trade, derivatives, algorithmic trading...we still don't know. Will active managers, as a group, do better during that downturn or subsequent upturn? Highly unlikely. Agree. Will a few do a lot better during the downturn? Highly likely. Agree. Will those few who did well during the downturn do better than an unmanaged index over, say, 20 years? Pretty unlikely. Will there be a few (some lucky, some truly skilled) that beat an unmanaged index over that same time? Pretty likely. This is where I disagree. Good, active managers don't suddenly become idiots. For example, Francis is not an idiot...Buffett over the last five years is not an idiot. The number of diminishing brain cells in their head didn't suddenly start compounding at an increasing rate. If I had to guess, active managers will continue to struggle. That is what one would expect as markets get more mature and more efficient. The average investment manager should be paid less than a teacher since the teacher actually adds value. Agree on active managers struggling. Are markets getting more mature and efficient, or are we creating systemic anomalies over long periods? I hate that Buffett and Munger quote on teachers being paid more than money managers. It's amazing that they keep throwing it out there, since it is so hypocritical. Their legacy is built on money management...that is what they are known for. Not teaching, not engineering, not innovation...you can't be the Pope and then tell all the Catholics of the world that practicing your religion was ok for you, but not any of them. I'm not saying John Bogle wasn't Jesus and brought investors into the light. I'm just saying that too many practicing that religion could create problems in the system...not permanent, but a problem. Cheers!

Personally I wanted to start with a clean slate. I will probably adopt an approach similar to what Greg previously said now that I'm comfortable with my debt/liquidity and debt/income rations. However, moving forward I won't ever take out another car loan. Mortgage I'll probably opt for a 15 year and aggressively pay it off balanced against investing (depends on rate, term, and total). Do whatever lets you sleep at night! There is no one way to behave with your money, nor is there just one way to make money. You also have a life to live and other responsibilities...so each person should do what they feel is right for them and doesn't stress them the hell out! Some people can continue to function without a worry even if they are in debt to their eyeballs, while many consider bankruptcy or suicide when they get deeply in debt or over their heads. It's not a fun thing when you are afraid of tomorrow. So do what is right for you and your mental well-being! Cheers!

Now is the $2.5B Euro dividend in the deal on top of the $2B Euro dividend being paid out this week? Plus the Comau shares on top of that. Cheers! So it looks like we get our: - $2B Euro (1.46 USD/share) special dividend (from Magnetti deal) this week - plus another $2.5B Euro (approx $1.75 USD) equalization dividend through the merger - plus another $0.18 USD /share dividend in cash or Comau spinoff shares - plus the $3.55 Euro / 5.328 merger exchange or $0.74 USD / FCAU share Renault annual dividend on June 19th! Cheers! I'm running a pro-forma basic post-deal analysis. I do not doubt the industrial logic of this deal. I would have to defer to Sergio's Capital Junkie/Elkann/FCA mgmt analysis on the logic of this deal but it makes sense. However, with the caveat that I do not know Renault very well, I don't think this is a better economic deal taking into account FCA's original 2022 plan for FCA shareholders. Basically, it seems like we are effectively (though I know its a merger of equals) giving up half our ownership in an extraordinarily cheap stock with lots of potential to purchase a less extraordinary investment (though apparently still well run) concentrated in somewhat rocky markets such as Russia/Iran and a business unfriendly European union. Additionally, the $5B of projected run-rate synergies don't seem to make up for the economics that would flow to current FCA shareholders from the original plan. Look at how much money GM threw out the door trying to get Opel to profitability in Europe finally relegating it to Peugot. Eur 5B is incredibly optimistic in my view. That is 50% higher than Adj. EBIT of the two companies together currently. I don't know enough about Renault and what they are hoping to accomplish in terms of headcount and revenue synergies (cross-distribution) and I wish these European companies were better about talking it through on a call, but I'm not thrilled about it based on my initial analysis. Would love to hear some different thoughts from anyone who has run their own analysis. Thank you. I originally felt the same way until I looked at Renault's finances: - Renault does half as much in revenues, but both gross and net margins are higher than FCAU - Net income for both companies is about $3-3.5B Euro a year each - Renault's balance sheet is slightly better than FCAU when you back out the finance division...and both companies have an equal amount of cash available. - Renault has a successful finance division, which could easily be adaptable to FCAU. - Renault at the time of the deal was a $51 stock after their dividend...trading at $64 right now which bodes well for FCAU stock moving up based on the ratio - FCAU price to book at time of deal was about 0.7...Renault was at 0.4 - Price to cash flow for both businesses was about the same at 2.2-2.3 - Market cap of 43% of Nissan owned by Renault alone, was nearly equal to Renault's entire market cap. So we merged with a company on equal terms or better than ours to make us 3rd largest in the world, received 21.5% of Nissan for free, plus will receive nearly $3 USD per share in cash. On top of that, we would become a global auto company with electric technology that could easily be adaptable to our vehicles. Cheers!

Not a problem for those companies not in the index, other than undervaluation for long periods...I'm buying those like hamburgers at half price. It will be a problem for the broad market included in the indices at some point, and could create a panic. Cheers! I must be missing something, but I don’t see a lot of stock being 50% off, just because they are not in an index. Besides, isn’t almost any stock in some kind of passive index, like the various Russel indexes? The only inefficiency I can see is that with the float being weighed rather than market cap, owner operators are systematically underrepresented. In todays world we have derivatives, and 'aligned' incentives Much of the loss on the underlying shares in the index would be offset by index gains on leveraged index puts. There might be a modest index net loss, but there isn't going to be anything major. 'Cause if a material portion of your firms revenue is from index investors ... you will see to it that they do not experience any major loss. SD I remember how in 1999 people used to say that markets wouldn't drop that dramatically or derivatives were not the ticking timebomb that they were...but Buffett, Prem and others did. I remember having a conversation back in 2001 with Sardar and Phil Cooley in Omaha about how I thought money market funds could drop in value and break the $1.00 mark. It wasn't an original idea by me, but one that made sense to me after listening to Larry Sarbit talk about it could happen. Sardar went on some long tangent about how the amount of money market redemptions on a daily basis were far below what the daily trading volume of treasury bills were, so it would be unlikely that it could happen. I remember having conversations with people about how the U.S. housing market was not going to go bust in 2007, and mortgaged backed securities were not the issue that a handful of people thought they were. I remember people talking about Vancouver's real estate market like it would go up forever and they could not remember what happened back in 1981 when prices fell 30-40% as interest rates rose. The one thing I know for sure...when you have large amounts of capital drifting into a specific strategy, and that capital starts to make up a fairly significant percentage of available capital, you start to create bubbles where panic will surely arrive at some point in time. Seth Klarman sees it...I see it happening...a handful of others see it happening. But it could go on for a long time before a panic happens. All I know is that value investing works and capital should always go to where the greatest values are relative to intrinsic value. I cannot believe that the optimum utilization of capital is in indices when half the world is going there. Cheers! I

Not a problem for those companies not in the index, other than undervaluation for long periods...I'm buying those like hamburgers at half price. It will be a problem for the broad market included in the indices at some point, and could create a panic. Cheers!

I'm ok with you minimizing your tax burden, but I always say that everyone should pay their fair share. After that, if you want to use legal means and tools to reduce your taxes, that's perfectly fine. How do I do it? - Max out RRSP - Max out TFSA - Reinvest RRSP refund - Donate through personal contributions so I get tax credits to reduce personal income. - Created a personal corporation for my personal business (COBF) by transferring assets into it...pay corporate tax rate in Canada for small business...15% on first $500,000 of business income each year or first $150,000 of passive income - Run COBF related deductible expenses through personal corporation - Non-deductible expenses through personal income - 95% of my investments are in RRSP, TFSA, personal corporation, Corner Market Capital (and it's entities)...so I do not take money out in additional salary and simply keep compounding it - I live on $50-70K a year from my personal income like I could go broke tomorrow! Cheers!