Jurgis

Thank you.

Perhaps OT: can you elaborate on how the fraud happens? My simplistic understanding is that buyer pays by Paypal, then you ship the item. How does the fraud occur? Does Paypal tell you that the payment was fraudulent and buyer did not actually have money (used stolen account)? Does the buyer try to revert transaction by saying that they did not receive item or the item was broken? Can you provide some more details? Thanks

You think so? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090685/?ref_=nv_sr_1 8)

There are a lot of people for whom "enough experience" leads to being less certain about investing choices rather than more. The more you know, the more you know that you really don't know anything. In the opposite edge case you have young smart guys with no experience, small portfolios and long career/job runways putting everything into 2-4 ideas and succeeding for a while (sometimes quite spectacularly). And they wonder why would anyone hold a diversified portfolio... Of course there is always also Munger (66% of DJCO portfolio in WFC - that's balls of steel, though perhaps DJCO shareholders don't care?). BTW, Buffett is not concentrated for a long time now, especially considering the op businesses. Though even with that, IBM is just balls of steel IMO. Even more than Munger's WFC in some ways. Ultimately concentration vs. diversification one of the perennial topics that pops up periodically and never gets resolved, since there is no resolution. Same as small caps vs. large caps.

Edit: I am proud about the success of capitalism where such outstanding company as Sprout is recognized and acquired by such outstanding company as Valeant. Carry on.

Right, that's what I meant "a private placement will be done or whether Ascend will accept a lower amount in the trust account versus the original deal". Sorry for shorthand "deal" that was not clear.

Some people may regard this as an option with time value: the longer the deal is not announced (before Oct 26) the lower time value. Not sure it's a good way to look, but could be one way...

BTW, for lolz Fido equity summary score for BRK is 1 (Very Bearish), which is I think close to the lowest it can get. There are 2 sell ratings and zero buy ratings. ;)

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-01/old-money-s-7-essential-ways-to-stay-rich

It's so nice not to use FB or any other social networking crap *. Now, get off my lawn! :P * Yes, I am aware of the irony of posting this on CoBF.

That's funny. It does seem that prices in restaurants are going up pretty much.

Right. That's what I included in "In general though, the biggest risk is always human: leadership/management/operations."

20 year risks to BRK? - Clearly Buffett dying. Some people think it's not a big deal for BRK. I think it is. This been discussed to death (pun intended :P ). - I won't mention operational/leadership/management risks per business. See bullet above. - Reinsurance. What 20 year risks? Buffett says that already right now reinsurance is crap. It's not for nothing Ajit Jain spends more time on specialty insurance rather than on re. Might be better or worse in the future. I think it's cyclical. I think that modeling will improve in the future, but greed/fear cycles might not disappear while humans are in the loop. - BNSF. This one has fewer risks. Longer term (> 20 years?): hyperloop, self driving trucks, 3D printed objects (no need to transport stuff?) - Geico. Self driving cars - probably will change the face of auto insurance totally. - Berkshire Energy. I think this one has fewer risks too. People mention off-grid-solar, but that's possibly far. Yet, 20 years... hmm. What businesses did I miss? In general though, the biggest risk is always human: leadership/management/operations. Anyway, as I said above "I would not be comfortable to buy anything for 20 years, except perhaps market weighted index." Others might think differently. We can't test these beliefs though, since nobody is forced to hold their purchases 20 years with key thrown away. ;)

Now you do. ;D

I agree with Grey512 that looking at 20 year horizon, BRK has risks as does his other picks. I would not be comfortable to buy anything for 20 years, except perhaps market weighted index. Regarding Grey512's picks, I think this is not the place to discuss them. I asked him the question because I was interested in the context/comparison of what he considered more attractive than BRK. Thanks

OT. If you are talking about Washington Post when Buffett bought it, it could have gone bust during the strike. It was just a step away from biting it. Looking back people think that WP was a no brainer investment for Buffett, but I don't think that was really the case. Perhaps you are talking about something else though. :) I don't think the facts support this. The company was still very profitable in 1975. Revenues still grew. The paper was only one of three major business lines - broadcasting and magazine publishing being the other two. Here is the 1975 annual report http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/IROL/62/62487/AR/Annual%20Report%201975.pdf OK, thanks. I guess the risk was just paper going under then. This was way overdramatized in Snowball then. I tried to look up other sources, but can't find them on short notice. :)

You realize that you are actively killing your Brier score? ;) http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/mauboussin-sharpening-your-forecasting-skills/

I believe he continued buying. I don't remember if WP was buying back at the time. In any case, it coulda been bust in 75 buyback or not. Yes, if management is good/great in allocating capital. :) Take care.

OT. If you are talking about Washington Post when Buffett bought it, it could have gone bust during the strike. It was just a step away from biting it. Looking back people think that WP was a no brainer investment for Buffett, but I don't think that was really the case. Perhaps you are talking about something else though. :)

it's money ROFL. 8)

In the spirit of Mauboussin forecaster thread, I'll go with the following predictions: - 10% chance of regime change in Saudi Arabia by the end of 2016. - 5% chance of civil war inside Saudi Arabia by the end of 2016. - 80% chance of oil price over $60 by the end of 2016. - 30% chance of oil price over $70 by the end of 2016. - 10% chance of oil price over $80 by the end of 2016.

Elizabeth Holmes seems to have the smarts, the ambition, the work ethics.. Time will tell if she succeeds in making a mark on her industry, but at least she's working on a big problem that could help humanity, and for that I wish her the best. Elon is 44 and she's 31, so she has about a little over a decade to show her stuff. Right, I know about her and wish her the best too. We will see how her company works out. :)

I own a tiny position in TSLA to support Musk. We need Elon clone in biotech/drugs/medical devices. That's a sector that needs serious cleaning up.

Interesting paper. Some good things to keep in mind when forecasting investing results. I'll throw out some issues that the paper does not address. - Paper suggests that short term predictions are easier to make or train to make. Couple questions based on this: - is this true in investing? - is this true for interesting questions in investing? (Not interesting question might be "Will stock price of A be within 10% of current price after six months?") - how does this reconcile with long term views (and long term questions). Clearly a lot of Buffett disciples would rather take a long view. But are long forecasts possible and trainable as short forecasts are? (Clearly if you make 5 year forecasts, you will only know results in 5 years, so your training feedback loop will be very slow). - Predicting for GJP is quite different from predicting in investing: - you can pick your own questions. Which may be positive or negative. - you can pick easy questions sometimes (Buffett's one foot hurdle) - you may be forced to answer difficult questions if you want to outperform an absolute (10% year) or relative (index) hurdle. - Measurement and evaluation - Measurement is needed for feedback loop and evaluation of your skillz. Is it an issue that you measure yourself (unlike GJP where someone else measured you and classified you as superforecaster, forecaster or a loafer. What is a good measurement for investor forecaster? - Assuming you measure, when do you evaluate yourself as superforecaster, forecaster or a loafer. What do you do if your evaluation shows that you're not a superforecaster (yes, training is possible, but some of the qualities mentioned in the paper are nature and not nurture). Anyway, these are the things that come to my mind now. I should read the book for some answers perhaps. ;)

I find websites that present you with a wall of text of legalese that you have to "agree to" before seeing the content highly annoying.