Liberty

Have you been to the meeting, and if so, have you or have you heard someone ask him directly about this (investing in unrelated businesses). If so, what was his answer?

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/sears-ceo-lampert-s-battle-to-turn-sears-around-HL7Ea_yXQsyzrCRaSOwQMA.html The author of the businessweek article was on bloomberg. Nothing new was said, but if someone wants the soundbite.. Here it is

Thanks for posting. They sure do a good job of making it seem like everybody in the company disagrees/disagreed with Lampert's way of doing thing (which doesn't mean that he's wrong, but it's also different from Buffett's approach of flattering its managers and employees and making them want to work extra hard and do him favors). Update:

But I, somehow, some way, keep comin up with funky investment widsom like every single day... (that's Eric's line, not mine obviously)

You guys broke Eric, now he speaks in koans ;)

Anyone know off the top of their head what's the most recent interview in which Berkowitz talks about SHLD?

Thank you for your thoughtful perspective, Sanjeev!

That's a good point. I've read the early letters, but it's easy to forget how much time passed between each of them... By that count, I suppose that Eddie's strategy might not be as slow to unfold as it might seem when looking at it in real-time. It'll definitely be interesting to see where he goes.

Lots of interesting views on Fairfax. I'd be curious to hear what is Sanjeev's current thinking on FFH?

I think IV is going to be different things depending on how you define it (I know, that's a tautology). By that I mean: If for you IV is the intrinsic value that a being with perfect knowledge of the future would assign to a security, then it is fixed. If for you IV is the value that someone with imperfect knowledge would assign at a particular point in time, then it'll vary as new information is known and events change the business. Maybe there should be two names for these two things, but lots of people seem to be using IV to mean both.

That sounds great, but unlike Buffett, ESL doesn't seem to be very good at communicating his intentions to his partners. Do you believe that's because he first wants to gain control, and then he'll be more open, or just because it's in his nature to be more opaque? In your opinion, his plan is to eventually close his funds, redistribute SHLD shares to his hedge fund investors, and keep his own personal stake to control SHLD and just use that as his permanent capital vehicle?

The past few posts have been excellent, thanks everybody.

Did you move the price up 10% all by yourself? :)

I don't own any SND, but I like to keep an eye on it. This is from a message board, someone called the company's IR guy:

Looks like it. Since the coal deals went south, it seems like almost none of the stream deals have stayed what they originally were supposed to be. I understand that the flexibility is part of what attracts deals vs borrowing from banks or equity, and that there's no much benefit for SND in squeezing and bankrupting its partners... But at the same time, if the stream deals don't actually provide any real predictability and SND's only practical protection ends up being when things go all the way to a bankruptcy, this makes the model less attractive IMO.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthof/2013/07/07/has-the-smartphone-boom-peaked-ominous-signs-pile-up/ Has The Smartphone Boom Peaked?

Happy birthday Sanjeev 8)

Thanks.

Google Flights: https://www.google.com/flights/

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-02/tarullo-says-fed-very-close-to-leverage-ratio-proposal.html

iirc, they received advice from Ernst & Young and BDO on their tax structure. Doesn't mean there can't be something wrong with it, but it's probably not something too unsophisticated...

Isn't it weird to begin paying dividends, then raise those dividends repeatedly, right after buying back about 10% of the float in a year, if cash is so tight and such a problem?

Battery swapping has actually been hinted at for years, so not a big surprise for those who follow tesla closely. But there always seemed to be the possibility that they wouldn't push for the feature unless there was external pressure for it, keeping it as an option. Guess they decided it was worth it, even if the vast majority of charges are done at home and at superchargers, it can make sense it if it convinces enough fence-sitters to buy Teslas... Musk said that Shai Agassi of Better Place actually got the idea from a visit at Tesla.

Thanks for posting.

Their customers are many of the biggest banks and insurance companies. Before they let a company run a money-making part of their back-office, I'm pretty sure they make them jump through all kinds of hoops and dig pretty deep.