zarley

LOL . . . Oh the umbrage!! ;) Listen, this is your board and you can do what you want. But save the outrage when you get called on being misleading. How the hell do you call any of this misleading? I told the board right from the beginning that we will eventually use some ads to offset costs. Zarley, you don't pay a dime to post here, yet I'm stuck with an annual $500 US bill for your pleasure. Yet, you feel completely fine telling me that I'm feeding you bull. To date for the two weeks we've had the ads, we've made a grand sum of $4.28 US. I have no problem with a boardmember telling me that they don't like the ads or the placement of an ad, but you've got to be kidding me when you decide to throw crap in my face for something that you get completely for free. Are you really that ignorant, or are you just being a wise-ass? I can only imagine how you actually treat a service provider that charges you for something. This'll be my last post on this, but I think it's necessary to sum up what I've posted regarding ads. 1. I recognized the need for ads. 2. I indicated that I thought the in-thread ads were overly intrusive. 3. I noted that Sajeev's initial characterization of the in-thread ads was misleading (ads at the end of long threads <> ads in all threads). 4. Sanjeev got upset with me for observing that distinction, and seems to have extended my comments to include the use of ads at all (which was not my point). Frankly, I'm surprised at the response to this; it seems out of proportion to my comments about the in-thread ads. Finally, Sanjeev, you should probably work on the relevance of the ads if you want them to get any traction. Right now I'm looking at ads for realtors in Fairfax, VA -- those aren't going to generate many clicks regardless of their placement.

LOL . . . Oh the umbrage!! ;) Listen, this is your board and you can do what you want. But save the outrage when you get called on being misleading.

Sanjeev, please stop calling the in-thread ads as something that gets added to "long threads of posts." One is inserted into every thread regardless of length, and I agree with Ben that those are tough to stomach. I appreciate the need to have ads to support the board, but don't BS us about their nature.

I'm now seeing ads at the top and bottom of threads. I'm pretty sure the ads at the bottom of the threads masquerade as a post. How many more ad locations should we expect to see going forward? I reserve judgement until I see where this goes, and because Sanjeev has been a very good host for such a long time. But, what is the limit?

Patience and discipline Indeed. For me, the last year or so has been a good lesson in what patience and discipline really mean. It's very easy to say "only swing at fat pitches; there are no called strikes . . ." But, the reality is if you feel like you've missed a fat pitch, you might be tempted to swing at the next decent pitch, not wait for another juicy one, just because you feel you missed a great opportunity. I'm feeling a little of that myself right now. But, I'm close to fully invested and am largely content with my holdings, so the temptation to chase pitches is in check, for now.

Hmmmm . . . I'll take a closer look at that. What I read about those issues described the preferreds as convertable, not having extra warrants included. My review wasn't very thorough, so I may have misread, or caught some bad reporting. If all of those preferred purchases included the warrant kickers, a la GS and GE, then . . . damn that's great. Edit -- After a little looking, you seem to be treating the convertable preferreds the same as the GS and GE preferreds with the bonus warrants. While I think your estimate of the Swiss Re gains are right, there is a difference between the warrants and simply a convertable preferred. With the warrants, Berkshire gets the upside potential of the common appreciation without having to trade in the preferred shares. So, they get their 10% dividend on top of the other equity gains. With the convertables, it's more of an either/or proposition. For that reason, the GE and GS investments look to have better terms for BRK than the others. With that said, I should add a note to the original post indicating that most of those positions are convertable in one way or another. For simplicity's sake, I don't think I want to add the details.

Thanks Pof, I'll add that information.

I noticed that Goldman Sachs is trading around $140 these days, which is a good thing for BRK due to the warrants that were attached to the preferred purchase late last year. That got me to thinking about all of the various debt and preferred deals Buffett has done in the last 6-9 months. I've tried to put together a summary of the investments, their interest rates, and the overall income they'll be generating. Here's what I came up with: Preferreds ($ in millions) GS* -- $5,000 at 10% = $500 GE* -- $3,000 at 10% = $300 Wrigley -- $2,100 at 5% = $105 (convertable to Wrigley common at undisclosed terms) Swiss Re -- $2,700 at 12% = $327 (convertable to Swiss Re common at $22.72, current price ~$32) Dow -- $3,000 at 8.5% = $255 (convertable to Dow common at $41.30, current price ~$17) Total Preferreds = $15,800 invested with annual dividends of ~$1,500 Debt ($ in millions) Wrigley -- $4,400 at 11.5% = $504 Harley -- $300 at 15% = $45 USG -- $300 at 10% = $30 (convertable to USG common at $11.44, current price ~$12.23) Tiffany -- $250 at 10% = $25 Sealed Air -- $150 at 12% = $18 Vulcan -- $400 at ~10.3% = $38.1 (approximate avg. of two notes with different interest and duration) Total Debt = $5,800 invested with annual interest of ~$663 * GS and GE warrants GS -- $5,000 of warrants with strike at $115 -- current gain ~$1,300 GE -- $3,000 of warrants with strike at $22.25 -- current gain = 0 So, BRK put a little over $21,500 million to work which will generate $2,150 million in interest and dividends per year for at least the foreseeable future. The GE warrants may turn out worthless, but the GS warrants look like they may add a billion or two in realized profits at some point down the road. Additions and corrections welcomed. zarley Edit 1: added $400 vulcan debt Edit 2: added clarification regarding convertable nature of some issues

Complete with a nice mention of Prem Watsa. Thanks for sharing.

Hold. My avg. cost is around $17.75, and the yield is still 10%. I might get tempted to sell some if it got over $23 (or if something crazy happened with the common or FFH), but at the moment, I plan on holding indefinitely.

Another note about applaud/smite . . . you can do each repeatedly to the same poster; it simply tracks the net +/- for the poster. Overall, I'm ambivalent about a rating system, but this particular one seems to have some issues.

Great notes Grenville. Thanks for sharing.

LOL. Indeed. The upside to Tilson is that he does, generally, provide good meeting notes.

I was hoping to attend, but I've been sick all week. So, I'll miss it. Hopefully we'll get a good set of notes. I'm bummed that I won't be able to make it. >:(

Yeah, i saw that too. Incredible that he'd come out that explicitly.

The Omaha.com live feed is very good. Better than the tweets I think.

For those who don't subscribe to the WSJ, google links to the full story: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124113732066375503.html?mod=googlenews_wsj This struck me . . .

That link rogermunibond posted looks like it will be as close to a running transcript as we'll likely get. It would be so easy to stream the festivities online and/or host a stream/transcript in an archive. I wonder why companies don't bother. Hell, you could pay an intern $15/hour to just type the Q&A into a live chat stream (or, dare I say twitter). For those of us who aren't attending that would be the next best thing.

Not sure if the link in the OP was deleted for some reason, but here's a link to the collection of videos they have posted: http://www.bengrahaminvesting.ca/Resources/videos.htm Very good list of speakers.

Aside from Whitney . . . Hehe. I rememeber watching the video from Charlie's appearance at Cal Tech last year and some guy got up with a long and winding dissertation of a question. It was Whitney, and Charlie could barely hide his annoyance. I have another meeting that afternoon, but I'm inclined to skip/change it so I can head to Pasadena.

Anybody have the information (when/where) for the WSC annual meeting? I'm considering attending, but haven't seen any information on it. Thanks in advance for any help. zarley Edit: With slightly better google-fu, I found it here: http://www.wescofinancial.com/page7.html Wesco's 2009 Annual Meeting of Shareholders will be held in Ballroom "D" of the Exhibit Hall & Ballroom Building of The Pasadena Center, 300 East Green Street, Pasadena, California, on Wednesday, May 6, 2009 at 2:00 p.m.

I don't think there's a lot of correlation between the moves in the common and the preferreds. ORH.A only traded a few thousand shares this week, and nearly all of that volume was on Tuesday. The big jump for ORH.A was on Wednesday on less than 1,000 shares. I own a little ORH.A and don't think about the price much at all. I'll just take the 11% yield and wait for them to get called, or bought back. It's kind of like a bond I fully expect to hold to maturity.

Posted at Seeking Alpha: http://seekingalpha.com/article/130961-odyssey-re-still-selling-at-a-discount?source=yahoo Much of it should be familiar to readers of this board. ;D

"The Massachusetts state pension system fired Jeremy Grantham’s firm as manager of $230 million in emerging-markets debt after losses from asset-backed securities dragged down returns." PLUS "GMO’s emerging-markets debt strategy is overseen by William Nemerever and Thomas Cooper." EQUALS HEADLINE: "Grantham Fired by Massachusetts Pension After Losses" God, I hate headline writers.

I hadn't seen that before, so thanks for posting it. I really like Klarman's writing style. It's engaging while being very direct, factual, and unpretentious.