Parsad

could this be a great company but a not so great investment? do we need to wait until Buffett adds or is it about time to slowly start buying? That's what I'm trying to figure out! ;D I never figured it out before, but I thought maybe this time it's different. Cheers!

Yup! As long as you are an accredited investor, email me at cornermarketcapital@gmail.com and we'll give you access. Cheers!

I take offense! ;D According to this article at CNBC, only Mohammed El-Erian and Richard Cochincos have been warning about stagflation. Rubbish! If you read our quarterly letters for the last two years, we warned about a short-term deflationary period and then a likely stagflationary environment. Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/41740766

Sorry Abyli, I think your number is correct. For some reason, my quote said $31 HKD, when it's at $30.10, which would be close to $8.7B. Cheers!

Thanks Abyli! I get $9.06B US. 2.275B shares multiplied by $31 HKD, equals $70.525B HKD. HKD/US exchange is 0.1284. Thus a $9.06B US market cap. Anyone know what the correct shares outstanding is at the moment? Cheers!

To our BYD experts out there: What is the correct market cap for BYD presently? Cheers!

I also have an iphone 4. Do you use any specific app to read this board or just Safari? No, I just use Safari. With the multi-touch, it's easy to zoom in and out, and the clarity of the iPhone screen is great. You wouldn't want to make any long posts on there, but you could do the occasional short post. The other problem is dismal battery life and from what I hear the iPhone and others are not much better. Most of these phones, the battery life isn't going to be as great as a device that is just a phone. On my iPhone: - I receive emails pretty much on and off through the day - Surf the net for a good two hours minimum each day - Receive may three-four calls a day...about 20-40 minutes altogether - Maybe make one or two calls...about 10-20 minutes altogether - Listent to music for at least an hour each day - Sync the phone once a day My iPhone's battery lasts about two full days with that type of use. If I don't use it at all, but leave it on, it lasts maybe four-five days. From what I understand the iPhone 4 battery lasts longer, and I would suspect the iPhone 5 battery is even better. Another negative I have not seen mentioned here is iPhone's poor reception (at least for those on the other end) - I have seen a lot of negative comments on this issue. No reception problems at all in Canada on Telus. When I travel in the U.S., it automatically uses the AT&T Network, where it usually drops 1 out of 8 calls or so. That is a network issue. I don't think you'll have as big a problem if you use the Verizon network for you iPhone. As far as your other issues. Technology changes so quickly, I have no idea what the environment will look like 3-5 years from now. All I know is that if the iPhone works the way it does in 3-5 years, and the competition is still where it is in relative terms, and the service, apps, etc environment remains the same, then there is no way in hell I would use anything other than the iPhone. Cheers!

Cardboard, it might worth the wait for the iPhone 5. Rumor has it that it will have a larger screen and better camera. The camera on the iPhone 4 isn't bad, but the new one is supposed to be 8 or 12 megapixels. By the way, I thought Facetime would be gimmicky, but it is actually pretty cool. I don't have it on my iPhone 3GS, but my Mom and brother use it all the time on their iPhone 4's. To give you some idea how useful I find the iPhone. As I mentioned in a past post, I started taking transit to and from work, Monday to Friday, about a year and a half ago. Email, news, stock market quotes and even this board are all read by me on my 35 minute ride each morning. No stress, I'm listening to music while doing all that, and the multi-touch screen on the iPhone works fantastic. When I arrive at the office, I'm actually an hour ahead of the game by the time I sit down. On the way back home, same thing...catch up on the evening news, etc. National Post, Globe & Mail (online), Financial Times, CNBC, Bloomberg and the message board all read on the way to work. New York Times, CNN, TSN, CNET, the message board and anything else read on the way home. No wasted time! Cheers!

I suspect both Fairfax and Berkshire will have some losses related to this. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-22/new-zealand-s-earthquake-may-become-costliest-insured-disaster-since-2008.html?cmpid=yhoo

Hi Nodnub, It's this one: http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/toshiba-toshiba-satellite-13-3-laptop-featuring-amd-athlon-ii-neo-k325-processor-t230d-00w-red-t230d-00w/10161728.aspx?path=f647523e4228ff55d8851aa6a49ede12en02 It's still pretty cheap at $499 CDN. I bought mine just after Boxing Day for $440. Sorry, that should have also said 2 kilograms, not 2 pounds! The keyboard is fantastic, and the laptop actually looks way better than in the pictures. I really like it alot! I looked around for a while, and for the money it's really a damn good laptop. Cheers!

Unfortunately, we still use paper for subscription documents and deposit slips that require signatures...so, I still need my laptop. I can do pretty much everything else from my iPhone. Although I prefer reading long documents on the laptop. The iPhone is best for news, quotes, etc. I've got a brand-new super light notebook...less than two pounds and a 13.3" screen...just bought it a couple of months ago for $440! Apple can't beat that! Just an awesome chiclet keyboard. Does a heck of a lot more than those netbook things. Cheers!

I had an HTC Touch, which was garbage, and before that a Blackberry. I've tested a bunch of other phones, and I don't like the user interface for any of them as much as I like the iPhone. I also find it is a heck of alot more useful than an iPad. Even if they add phone/cellular service to it and a camera, I'm not sure I would get much utility out of it. But the iPhone is as useful to me as my laptop. With those two items, I can work from anywhere. Cheers!

I know it is not an investment related topic or maybe it will turn into a nice discussion and show Apple's competitive advantage or not. I still would like if possible to tap into this board's knowledge and experience on the topic. The phone will be used mainly for phone calls, surfing investment sites (getting quotes/news), search on Google, e-mail. Hi Cardboard, That's exactly what I use my phone for and also listening to music. Without a hesitation, I would recommend the iPhone. It was way ahead of the competition when it first came out, and the user interface is still light years ahead of everyone. I don't know why I was using anything else before. It is very intuitive, which is what the best of the Smartphones out there still can't accomplish. Web pages show up properly, there are tons of useful apps available at no cost or little cost, and I haven't had a single problem in almost a year of constant use. The iPhone5 should be coming out in the next few months, so I would wait for that. My entire family has switched to the iPhone in the last year. Alnesh who has always used a Blackberry is also considering switching, since there is an app where you can utilize Blackberry messenger through your iPhone. I love it and will not use anything else. Cheers!

I've got a question for everyone: Was there ever a time in history, when neither Congress, nor the government had to be fixed? Yes, I'm being facetious. My point being, if everyone knows what's wrong with it, then why is it never fixed? I was watching Letterman tonight, and Letterman asked Rumsfeld, who was his guest, how has Obama done so far? He sat there for a good 20 seconds without saying anything, and then said..."Well, I'm truly concerned with what is happening. This budget that has just been approved...somebody has to have the courage to do what is right." The audience clapped. My question is, how come no one in the last 35 years has had the courage to do the right thing? I mean Bush was in government for eight years and Greenspan was on guard for like 20 years before Bernanke, but both Obama and Bernanke are the ones driving the country into the ground. And no, I'm not picking on the Republicans, since Clinton encouraged much of the friviolity with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as helping create the Tech Bubble in the first place. People believe that confirmation bias is prevalent in investing...well the truth is confirmation bias is simply anyone confirming their own theories by picking and choosing bits and pieces of history. Perhaps Congress isn't actually broken. Maybe the United States succeeds simply because it's citizens always think that everything their government does is wrong, and they have the right to be able to say so whenvever they want. ;D Cheers!

Nierenberg runs D3 Family Funds in Camus, Washington, not far from Portland, Oregon. They focus on microcaps and smallcap stocks, with a slight activist bent by joining boards of the companies they invest in. They had a good record from what I remember before the credit crunch. Not sure after. http://d3familyfund.com/bios.aspx I also heard that their third partner, Cara Denver, was pretty hot! ;D Too bad guys, she's married now. Cheers!

Philip Fine wrote a fantastic obituary for Peter Cundill that was published in the Globe & Mail on Saturday. Thanks to Mark for sending it to me! Cheers! http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/peter-cundill-found-wealth-where-others-feared-to-tread/article1912452/print/

Thanks everyone...much appreciated! I'm glad the board is useful to you all and has made some impact. It's definitely influenced me. Cheers!

Hi Paul, What you really should be looking at is growth in book value per share between 1996 and 2010. Fairfax's book value per share in 1996 was $63.31, whereas book value per share at the end of 2010 is $379.46. That's an increase of 12.7% annualized. I believe the S&P Midcap 400 TR did a little better than 9% annualized over the same period. Market prices can be significantly overvalued and undervalued at various times, but ultimately market prices track increases in book value per share. In Fairfax's case, the market assumed ridiculous views on the stock back during 1996-1998. It would have been very silly for anyone to hold on to Fairfax stock back in 1998 when it hit $600 per share, while book value was only $112. If you go to the second to last page of Fairfax's 2009 annual report, you get the best view of the company's progress over the years. http://www.fairfax.ca/Assets/Downloads/AR2009.pdf Cheers!

I started the old MSN Berkshire Hathaway Shareholder's Board on February 19, 2002. Nine years ago today! That board was meant for just me and a few friends to talk about Berkshire Hathaway and other investments. I never imagined meeting Prem, Francis or anyone else from Fairfax. I had just met Mohnish in Omaha, and had no inkling that we would eventually become good friends. I never imagined I would be running my own funds a few years later. Working on a daily basis with my cousin, who grew up with me like my brother. The fantastic partners that trust and support us. Our director Andrew Cooke, who has become such a great friend! As Buffett says, I tap dance to work every morning. This afternoon I just had lunch with "Triedtestedandffh" here in Vancouver...first time I met him. In a couple of months, 70 of you will be joining me for dinner in Toronto...70 people I never knew before...and we'll be raising money for a worthy cause. Cheers and happy anniversary to you all!

Not this year though, I'm having surgery to fix my foot on April 4th (won't be walking for six weeks). Look forward to you coming to Toronto. What happened to your foot Eric? Cheers!

No offense Sanjeev, but I think Mohnish is not being truthful to you. The way you frame that statement is he didn't add to the account. If you plug those numbers in over an 11 year time frame 99-10, the average annualized return is 75.93% AFTER tax! Do you really believe Mohnish? If you can provide audited numbers, I stand corrected and I apologize for doubting him. Of course he added to the account! Almost all of his incentive fees were put back in. My point was that regardless of macroeconomic factors, a good business is a good business. At best, Mohnish was worth $10M after the sale of Transtech, so where did the rest of the money come from? Macroeconomic factors did not affect Mohnish's ability to create wealth, did it? Not for his partners, nor for himself. Cheers!

To ignore macro trends and their extrapolations is madness! Individual investments do not exist in a bubble, no matter how we try to rationalize them. Case in point.. for the last 20 years stock market investors have hung on the every word of the Maestro and his successor, knowing that the growth profile of their investments will be affected by the setting of the interest rate and the flood of liquidity engendered by lower rates. They have blinded themselves to the consequences of cheap money (monetary inflation) and indulged the wishful thinking of something for nothing. As the ponzi unwinds through runaway inflation (it cannot be a deflationary end, as long as the Fed can and will print unlimited money) every paper asset and mispriced risk asset will be toast. Macro will trump micro in the end. Please take this in the nicest way possible...rubbish! ;D We bought ITEX four years ago and our average cost is $3.31. Today it's $4.55 and undervalued, pays a 3% dividend and continues to generate steady free cash flow. Did the macro affect this business or ITEX in any measurable way? No, their balance sheet is stronger, their cash flows are the same and the business is completely intact. I bought Fairfax 7 years ago at $180, then during the same year I bought more stock at $65. Today the stock is at $380. Their balance sheet is stronger than ever and the business is bigger than ever. Did the macro affect them in any measurable way? If you bought Berkshire back in 1999/2000, the A shares were trading between $45,000 and $75,000. Today, they are at $130,000 and the business is bigger and as good as it ever was. Did the macro affect Berkshire in any measurable way? I'm sure you can come up with numerous rebuttals to this, or even show me how certain stocks are the same price or at even much lower prices. But the truth is that any investor could have found quality investments and done reasonably well by buying at a discount to the intrinsic value of those investments. The biggest argument I can give you to why macro is irrelevant...Mohnish put in $100K into PIF I in 1999, and today his stake is worth $50M...that's after losing 70% in 2008 and 2009, and then rebounding from the lows in 2010. Macro doesn't matter to the degree many people are speculating. Find good businesses, invest in them at great prices and build them for the long-term. Cheers!

It seems to me that when you - Buy when things are cheap, sell when they are dear. - Look for things that are distressed and that no one else is buying. You are predicting the future ! i.e. things will get better and people will start buying them Yes, to a certain degree. What you are doing is buying something worth more than it's selling for...and that price will rationalize itself over time. You are not speculating on the direction of the economy, metrics or interest rates. Cheers!

hey.. Prem predicts macro too. The world is too intertwined these days to be blind to macro issues. Buffett and Prem don't know either. As much as all of us try, none of us will get it completely right. What they try to do is protect to the downside because of the risks to their insurance business. Last time I checked, none of us ran an insurance business. ;D Cheers!

Will you guys shut up with your predictions and macro-views! ;D It's driving me bonkers. - Buy when things are cheap, sell when they are dear. - Look for things that are distressed and that no one else is buying. - Don't try and predict the future. - Always keep some dry powder lying around. Other than that, go read some 10-Q's, 10-K's or a good book! Cheers!