coc

Winners curse?

I agree, the aggregator model is a terrible one that induces a tragedy of the commons type effect where all have to play the game and no one wins.

For a growing retailer that’s going to tend to understate the real ROIC because the newest part of the store base hasn’t matured yet.

Thanks for posting this, and thanks to the interviewer - appreciate it.

Can I ask what makes you say that? Not disagreeing - I am just beginning to study DPZ. Thanks.

Let me get this straight. If Prem & Co do a terrible job managing float (half of the insurance business), aren't very candid about it, make promises year after year that go unfulfilled (we'll stop losing money on shorts, we'll start investing in quality companies, we'll grow BV at 15% over the "long term" etc etc.), continue with this year after year including the current one, and board members have the temerity to point all that out and perhaps even indicate that this means the business isn't worth a premium to book, their "opinion means nothing"? We're only here to talk up the business?

Why would anybody “hate” Cathy? Nobody feels that strongly. They plain and simple think she is selling BS and will blow herself and clients up if this stuff returns to earth. They may be wrong, misguided, shortsighted whatever. But that’s all it is.

Berkshire wrote down a bolt on acquisition Lubrizol added later.

Alice Schroeder claims Buffett couldn’t recall what color her hair was if she covered it up.

Above all, Buffett hit the g*d damn genetic lottery! If I ate like that it would not be a pretty sight... Funny stuff though thank you.

In a Platonic ideal sense, they are the same. The concept of IV being a very "pure" idyllic concept. (Since no one can predict the next 70 years of any business, I don't care what it is and who you are.) In reality -- in practice -- I have made a useful, non-blurry distinction. Growth focused investors are primarily looking to benefit from the growth in the intrinsic economic value of the company over time, as measured by whatever KPIs you'd choose - cash flow, earnings, revenue, margins etc. Value focused investors, from the early days, focused a great deal more on determining today's fair economic value and trying to buy the stock at much lower than that number, and sell it when it got close to that number. The way the style indexes do it is pretty much nonsense - low P/B ratios and that kind of thing. But I think there is a real difference between the two above and my experience lately has been that many have soured on the discount-from-value approach (as I've described it) and many more have chosen the ride-the-economic-growth approach. You can, of course, find a hybrid strategy - but acknowledging that pretty much confirms that there are two (or more) things to hybridize.

On the contrary, I've yet to see a single valuation on here that actually capitalized, then deducted the corporate expenses. I have heard vague references to "corporate governance" meaning they don't like Biglari's policies, personality, capital allocation, etc. I agree that it is not "uninvestable" or whatever that means, nor have I argued it. I'm saying in at least one way, you can replace a vague notion about governance with some actual numbers. Then, if you think he's going to destroy further value (or create it), you can go on with your guessing. Thanks.

Let me just emphasize one thing. Your interpretation of Sardar’s motive, intention, and skills are up you. What you cannot argue is that the huge expenses he’s running through the holding company are irrelevant to valuing the business. You can’t just add up the insurance companies, the restaurants, and the stocks and divide by shares outstanding. You have to capitalize and subtract the corporate costs. I think it’s fine to analyze BH optimistically, pessimistically, or in between.

One thing I also regularly see missed in valuing BH are the massive corporate G&A expenses. $12M last year which was more than they earned on underwriting from all of the insurance companies. Don't forget to pay the piper when you value this thing. It's not going to be split up any time soon.

I’m quite sure the Robinhood people don’t know the difference between investment and gambling speculation, and don’t care. So of course Charlie sounds “elitist” to their ear.