goldfinger Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 At 1.3 x book while Biglari is improving free cash flow dramatically, where is the overvaluation for this type of business ? I bought at much lower prices, but I don't get the argument, especially that Biglari has the ability to put his cash and equity to good use over time in good value investing fashion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballinvarosig Investors Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 At 1.3 x book while Biglari is improving free cash flow dramatically, where is the overvaluation for this type of business ? From what I can see, it's down to low capex for the year (is this sustainable going forward?) and the sale/closing down of poorly performing restaurants (one-time gains?). I'm no expert on SNS compared to you lot, so if anyone wants to step in and correct me I'd appreciate the education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bookie71 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I worry about his patience -BRK compounded from a very low number (around 4 if I remember correctly)- no reverse split. I hope he's not reading his clippings and getting ahead of himself. I was very comfortable with my shares until this , I will be watching very closely. jmho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrofan Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Sanj, Discussion of SNS on the Yahoo board. All I can say is you're famous! http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?m=tm&bn=22205&tid=10315&mid=10315&tof=1&rt=2&frt=2&off=1 cheers Zorro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 The compounding will remain the same...nothing changes. If Biglari's average cost to buy was $11/share, then his average cost jumps to $220/share. Instead of SNS starting at say $3/share, it starts at $60/share. You get several things happening by the reverse split...increase in long-term investors, free advertising (how many stocks are in the three digits, articles), lower listing fees and custodial transaction costs. It's also cheaper for shareholders to buy shares. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Hey Zorro, What are they talking about folding up my fund into Berkshire? If I were them, I wouldn't put much stock in anything I say! ;D There seems to be some other stuff they're writing in past threads...some really negative stuff by Randy Foo and Art Vandelay. Randy is Tiddman or Randall Tidd from www.tiddcapital.com, if you guys didn't know already. Not sure why he's dissing Sardar or me, but to each his own...although I think people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones! At least he was smart enough to eventually buy Fairfax, Western Sizzlin and Steak'n Shake. No mention of how our bet from the Motley Fool on "Fairfax or LVLT" is doing after all these years. Or the 51% of investment capital he lost in his fund in 2007 and 2008! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmitz Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I worry about his patience -BRK compounded from a very low number (around 4 if I remember correctly)- no reverse split. I hope he's not reading his clippings and getting ahead of himself. I was very comfortable with my shares until this , I will be watching very closely. jmho Although the number of 1.4 million shares brings the total share count down to something similar to Berkshire's. Not that I think that's a really interesting reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts