Parsad

Munger, if you plan on using my board, please have the courtesy to not butcher my name. I think a couple of people corrected you on this in the past. If you disagree with any comments I make...fine! But I operate using my real name and not behind some moniker, so I would hope that you have the decency to respect that.

Now let's see if you are honest -- you are basically asserting that if two assets are overvalued, one greater than the other -- buy the lower valued asset regardless of absolute value...no? This has nothing to do with Buffett style value investing -- period. Munger, you have a tendency to put words in people's mouthes. If you are talking about ABSOLUTE values Munger, then the assumption would be that you left the market somewhere in 1998, returned in 2003, left again in 2007 and returned in March of 2009...is that correct? Unfortunately, that's not how the world works. You have various degrees of overvaluation and undervaluation at any given point of time. Capital will always move to where it is utilized most efficiently. Thus capital moved from overvalued assets (fixed income instruments) to undervalued assets (equities) in the last two months. Institutions need to cover their cost structure, generate income and qualify their existence. The same institutions will move from asset class to asset class...bouts of rationality balanced with bouts of fear and panic. Did I ever say I was fully invested in the last three months? Did I say that I hold no cash? We have over 35%...almost 40% cash right now, and we were never less than 20% in the last 3 months. But you take one comment and assume I'm espousing investors go all in at any given moment. Perhaps, if you just calmed down and interacted with people on a more social level, you wouldn't have this desire to prove everyone wrong. Hussmann's math is incorrect...are you going to email him? Cheers!

Yes, Hussmann's math is incorrect: - 1% increase in S&P500 equals 0.042% change in GDP: Assuming a 1% change in total stock market valuation increases GDP by 0.042%, 0.042% of $14.7T would be $61.7B. Therefore, a 10% move would be $617B in the first year alone. Cheers!

Have you lived in a cave for the past two months -- I believe the Nasdaq is up close to 18% in two months simply because of speculation/mania around QE2. Did you not see the WSJ yesterday, which showed that investor bullishness on equities has gone parabolic? This will all end terribly for equity investors in general -- guaranteed..just a question of when not if... They haven't moved into equities because of QE2...the media loves to talk about that because they get their information directly from Wall Street traders. The truth is that institutions moved in because yields were so much lower elsewhere. I told you that over two months ago, and said it was a certainty that capital would eventually move in looking for higher yields...you disagreed vehemently...guess what? At some point in the near future, you will see a natural correction in equities. Further down the road, we may see a large scale correction. But there is little in the way of that happening in the near term. Some investors are overly optimistic, and many are overly pessimistic. The truth lies somewhere in between, which is a territory that few seem to inhabit these days. Cheers!

It's not too late to get into commodities, precious metals and other companies who's income can be measured in real things. Its not too late to get out of investments that pay off nothing but fiat currencies and its derivatives. It's not the real economy that's collapsing... it's the currency. Time to get real. I may be wrong, but this only drives the nail deeper into my skull telling me that this is a bubble. Every ounce of my sensibilities tell me that trying to monetize these things and make economic sense is the DUMBEST thing I could do...thus I will remain incorrect for the foreseeable future on gold. The funny thing is that I deal with mining companies every day through Quantum. Some are making money hand over fist, and their stock prices are following suit. Yet, I think it is fool's gold! The same thing happened in 1999 and early 2000...everyone was buying tech stocks. Today...they buy resource companies! And the more companies that pop up, the smaller that pie becomes. There is a limited aggregate demand and utility for gold. Presently, the demand is artificial...due to speculation, rather than utility. At some point in time, that will correct - quietly or perhaps violently! I will continue to own investments that I can buy at a discount to their intrinsic value. An intrinsic value that I can calculate by discounting the future cash flows, or at a discount to the liquidation value of the underlying assets. I'm ok with the rest of the world owning gold and giving up on equities. They did that a year and a half ago, and we had our best year thereafter. Cheers!

Mary Schapiro, SEC Chair, says they are working on preventing computerized trading platforms from destabilizing markets. Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/40072553

Here is Seeking Alpha's transcript of the Markel 3rd Q Conference Call. Cheers! http://seekingalpha.com/article/235584-markel-ceo-discusses-q3-2010-results-earnings-call-transcript?source=yahoo

Hi Bronco, No, not at the moment. We are currently in the midst of the proxy solicitation. Once this is all complete after the AGM is over in December, the board is welcome to discuss the company, but I would ask that members refrain until then. Thanks very much. Cheers!

Markel's 3rd Quarter report was released today. Cheers! http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1096343/000119312510250090/d10q.htm

According to the 3rd Quarter 10-Q, they are 91% hedged. Cheers!

No, it had more to do with the quarterly loss caused by transition expenses, asset impairments and higher operating and advertising costs. Same store sales showed some recovery, which is a good thing, and they continue to pay down some debt. Cheers!

We buy during recessions and we sell during recoveries! ;D No, on some things the margin has reduced, so we've raised some cash to add to our existing stockpile, but we still have a fair amount in the markets. Alot of things have moved up quickly, as if this whole process is done. We think the deleveraging will occur for some time for governments. Corporations are in great shape, so you are seeing cash move to higher yielding assets...we said that this was a certainty a couple of months ago, but people disagreed. You have investors seeking better returns, and in particular financial institutions, that need higher yields to justify their underwriting experience...be it through loans or insurance. They had to move from bonds to other assets, and that is what we are seeing now. Endowments, hedge funds, private equity, you name it...they need higher returns to justify their cost structure. We are slowly taking a more defensive stance. Any movements in interest rates and you will get some reaction. Any significant movement in interest rates, and there is the possibility of the recovery stopping in its tracks altogether. The system is still quite fragile, so any increase in interest rates, commodity prices, asset inflation, etc will reduce the progress of the recovery. I think we are sort of stuck in that middle ground where you can't move too far forward, because the brakes have to be applied. And the intervention on various levels, along with improved balance sheets, means that going backwards is also less probable. As the deleveraging continues, things overall will slowly get better. The wildcard is some six sigma event...loss of confidence in some important country, terrorist attack, war (trade or otherwise), etc. We are all investors, so our focus should be solely on buying investments with a large margin of safety. And then selling as that margin shrinks. Everything else is outside of our control. Cheers!

Overstock's trial is next September, so I think Fairfax's is sometime next year as well...probably not too far off from Overstock's date. Cheers!

Numbers continue to improve! North America - formidable! (French for "terrific") http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-04/north-american-rail-freight-carloads-for-oct-30-table-.html?cmpid=yhoo Canada - pretty good http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-04/canada-rail-freight-carloads-for-week-ended-oct-30-table-.html?cmpid=yhoo Mexico - some slowing in certain sectors, but ok http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-04/mexico-rail-freight-carloads-for-week-ended-oct-30-table-.html?cmpid=yhoo Recovery is for real in the U.S. Weaker dollar will help. But me thinks there are problems down the road...stagflation! Cheers!

Swiss Re has repaid Berkshire early. Cheers! http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-04/swiss-re-agrees-to-repay-buffett-s-berkshire-hathaway-capital-injection.html?cmpid=yhoo

Don't know what will happen. It's kind of like a call option on Overstock and Fairfax. If they win, shareholders will probably get some sort of settlement, or it will be dragged through Appeals court for years. With all the stuff regarding naked short selling, hedge funds, brokerages, etc, public sentiment is favorable. We'll see. Cheers!

The webcast replay should be available in a while, but you've got to listen to this thing...in particular the Q&A period. You have to wonder if analysts actually do any work, or do they want management to do it for them? I cannot comprehend why any rational company would go through the whole rigamarole of dealing with these guys...especially if you don't need financing in the public markets. This one Bank of America analyst...he pretty much wants them to pinpoint exactly what their margins will be and their cost structure going forward. Geez! On another note, Jonathan Johnson and Steven Chidester both did a good job! Incidentally, the broker/dealer trial is scheduled for September 2011. Cheers!

SEC has clamped down on brokerages that provide "naked" access to clients on their trading platforms. Cheers! http://www.cnbc.com/id/39988437

Sounds like a friend that says "I can set you up with this girl, she's really nice". "I wouldn't date her, but she's got a great personality". I don't want this person as my matchmaker. That's pretty damn funny! Although, I think Mpauls is at least paying for the dinner. Cheers!

Article by Ben Stein after having dinner with Buffett. Cheers! http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/18/pf/investing/buffett_ben_stein.fortune/index.htm

That's why Yahoo and Goog/Tube and the rest of the www-guys do not actively police their content (only promise to remove infringing content upon duly made requests) Great! I just made even more work for myself now. ;D Cheers!

Al, It's about scale. Not an easy business when you've got Amazon already doing the same thing, and guys like Walmart and Costco online competing with just as slim margins. Byrne is crazy and loves a challenge...win or lose! He picked one of the hardest businesses to try and build a foothold in. The easiest way to explain is below: http://financials.morningstar.com/ratios/r.html?t=AMZN&region=USA&culture=en-US http://financials.morningstar.com/ratios/r.html?t=OSTK - Overstock is now profitable on a 12-month basis on less than a third of the revenue it took Amazon to do it in - Both companies had negative book until they hit a critical mass - Overstock has reached that critical mass faster than Amazon - Overstock's customer service numbers are on par with the best online providers in North America - Incremental improvements in margin will now have a full impact on net profits - Overstock has reduced their senior notes to $34M, while maintaining $76M in cash after leasing back their IT equipment - Cash should exceed $140-150M at the end of the 4th Q, before current liabilities are paid - Share count in the last three years reduced, whereas AMZN was still issuing stock - Byrne will grow Overstock while undercutting everyone else's margins...dangerous, but the only way to build a moat...think Costco or McLanes! The wildcard is can Byrne remained focused? I think with Byrne Sr. and Sam there, it will definitely help. This isn't like LVLT. Alot of investors hoped LVLT would also hit a critical mass, but their debt servicing costs are too high and they will probably run into serious problems before that...unless their benefactors can continue to refinance them, and receive insane interest rates on that debt from cash flows...but it's just not sustainable with their debt load as is. Overstock no longer has that problem. Cheers!

I think there's a difference between a "repost" and a "quote". Anyways, Sanjeev, you are taking some personal legal risk by exercising active censor control (instead of letting the owner request the removal of a piece). Just my 2c... You're kidding me right? I own the site, and therefore have the option of removing any post that I feel would be an infringement of someone else's copyright. Cheers!

Sanjeev, do you still have a position? If I answer that I'll have to kill you. ;D Or at least the partners in our funds may. Cheers!

Let's give the lady a chance with open minds and lack of "censorship," in order for this liberating medium called "the internet" to reach its maximum potential. I believe we're going to be surprised! imo Umm, the board wasn't censoring what you said. You quoted a copyrighted interview, the title of which specifically says by the interviewer and interviewee: "Please do not repost without asking for permission". I'm guessing Alice and Miguel didn't give you permission Carl! ;D Thus the edit. Cheers!