awindenberger

I'm very happy to see him buying up more shares here. With things improving across all the businesses, BH is incredibly cheap even with the runup, and Sardar has created a lot of value for shareholders with the buybacks he's made over the last year. I know its sacrilege to be positive here regarding Sardar's actions, but I would be willing to bet that the mood will be very different among investors regarding his decision making in 5 years.

I've been watching MN for 5-6 years now and it has been nothing but a melting ice cube. Thankfully I never put any money in. New CEO could be helpful, but they are also playing against the trend.

Safety, Any reason Gran Columbia hasn't moved the new highs over the past couple months with gold prices breaking out? This looks like a comparative buy opportunity but I want to make sure I'm not missing something.

Much better to just take everything that is said by someone and twist it to make it sound terrible, isn't it. If I was actually Sardar I can't imagine why I would spend my time responding on this forum, LOL.

I love this bit. First he said he wouldn't take a proper salary Then he awarded himself a large salary Then he award himself the bumper incentive plan Then he stuffed the payroll with family stooges The latest move to re-write the incentive plan is hilarious. NBL, your notetaker seems to have been pretty lax with his notes on this question. Sardar was asked: You are set up with the 6% performance fee that doesn’t kick until the high water mark. If there was a clone of BH that started today, would you still use that threshold given high equity prices and low interest rates, or would you still think that was the best set up if starting a firm today? This was my brother's notes from his response: Hurdle rate is tough. It should cover covered interest rates at least. Hurdle to overcome would cover the risk-free rate, + a % paid. There could be some reasonable arguments to lower hurdle rate if starting over, or take the Charlie Munger route (33%, no hurdle). That said, if I did change it, I wouldn’t change it much. I liked the 5% used with the Lion Fund. I was paid for performance - $500m of returns generated created $83m incentive comp for me. I’m in it for the long-run and won’t make those modifications just because there have been some down years. So lets unpack this: Sardar was asked a hypothetical question, and he answered it hypothetically, but concluded by noting that he likely wouldn't change it much were he to be starting from scratch. He also noted he had no plans to change anything now.

Where did you see the updated cash position at end of March? Not seeing it in the press release. Update: NM, I found it in their annual numbers release in mid-April

Solar investments on the whole are generally extremely low risk once construction has been completed. Getting caught up in a massive ponzi scheme that netted Berkshire Hathaway as well seems like bad luck rather than a series of poorly evaluated solar investments.

Only question is when something will be done to close the gap between value and stock price.

Nah.. they have debt, but, being the lowest cost producer, too many will go bankrupt before them. Unless there’s enough associated gas at zero cost... There isn't, particularly not up in Alberta.

This post on SGI did not age well. That being said, gold is up a lot over the last year and the stock is still 75 cents. I see it about 1x 2021E EV/EBITDA based on guidance. I expect this year and especially the first half to be messy but they should be free cash flow positive this year too. If there was a development play in Australia that was fully funded and guiding to 100k oz and AISC of $1100 with gold over $1600, I think it would have a market cap bigger than US$55m. Obviously, there is a credibility issue and you can see it in street estimates which are way lower. Even they will have to up estimates based on the gold price alone. I was expecting it to be down 30-50% after your initial ageing comment SIN. This does look like another interesting play particularly with gold continuing to move up.

Man I was thinking it had dropped under $50 the way you were talking. At $56 the price is no lower than a year ago, and only a couple bucks lower than during the summer. I tend to agree with your thesis but doesn't scream cheap to me.

Tesla very well could have gone bankrupt over the last couple years, but at this point I don't see that potential anymore, as the business looks to have tailwinds across the board: 1. Cars: Their rolling out the Model Y sooner than expected. I agree with Elon that it will likely outsell all the other models combined. 2. Cybertruck: I hated the look, but the more I think about it, the more I agree that it will be an amazing work truck for all types of construction jobs 3. Battery storage: They continue to increase sales in this area and margins have improved. I develop solar+ battery projects and so far I haven't found better pricing than Tesla's batteries. 4. Solar Glass (roof) is finally turning into more than vaporware this year. Elon's 1000 roofs per week goal is high as usual, but the roofs are being installed, and they are actually quite price competitive with traditional solar + a regular roof. Does all this make it worth $900/share today? I'd say hell no, but I wouldn't try to short either given all the tailwinds.

No posts on Gran Columbia for awhile. I've been looking back at gold stocks I was following previously and see this ran very well into the end of the year. Safety what did you think of the Marmato spinoff plan? Also, any idea why they took Eric Sprott's money? Finally, even with the runup, this is still looking cheap. By my math the fully diluted market cap would be about $322M USD, and 4x their Q3 AdjEBITDA of $37.5M is $150M, so about 2.1-2.2x EBIDTA. I haven't followed closely recently, so anything big I'm missing right now?

Agreed I would love to hear from a bear. I think the debt is much less of a danger now declines are in the low 20's (meaning less capex needed for maintenance and more FCF) than it was when declines were 35%. The bear scenario is that current prices continue forever, or even decline more due to lower demand. My day job is in the solar industry, and I fully expect renewables such as solar and wind to replace fossil fuels at a much faster rate than most think over over the next couple decades. Oil will feel the largest brunt as EVs replace combustion engines, but significantly higher secular long term prices on fossil fuels are very unlikely in my mind (cyclical price increases will still occur and could be strong over the next 2-5 years). Natural gas will be the last fossil fuel to be hurt, as it is cleanest burning and higher electric demand will be good for its growth until renewable costs decline enough to fully overtake it. Thats why I like Peyto as the lowest cost producer in one of the most depressed markets. They will be last man standing if bear market in gas continues another couple years.

I am quite confident that in 2-3 years people will be shocked that PEYTO ever got this low.