Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Yes, I understood from a tweet by Shane Parrish, that he felt honoured by being interviewed to, and thereby included in the book. [ : - ) ]
2
Fairfax Financial / Re: Value of FFH culture
« Last post by Value^2 on Today at 01:13:23 AM »
Value of the culture?  Zero.

What's the value of a culture that screws minority owners of ORH?  Seriously, Prem screwed us on taking it private.

What's the value of a culture that usurps minority owners' voting rights?  It took two votes to make it happen, presumably with some serious arm twisting of institutional holders.

What's the value of a culture where the chairman uses his multiple voting shares to appoint his son, who is still wet behind the ears, to the board of directors?  What a joke.

What's the value of a culture where the chairman channels $50m of shareholders' money to a firm that employs his son so that his son has a portfolio to manage?  Seriously?  I'd be embarrassed if I needed daddy to do that to ensure my success.

The culture is worth ZERO.  The collective brains are the only thing that has worth, but beware that those collective brains are not always focused on the interests of minority holders.
+1 Finally some common sense! 
3
To be released 20th April 2018 on Amazon in paperback.

Book about us?   Well then , a must-read for everyone else ;D
4
Fairfax Financial / Fairfax to buy 51% in Catholic Syrian Bank
« Last post by valueinvesting101 on February 17, 2018, 06:22:16 PM »
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/banking/finance/fairfax-to-buy-51-in-catholic-syrian-bank/articleshow/62964948.cms

IIFL's demerger makes more sense after this news.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/banking/finance/iifl-holdings-to-demerge-capital-wealth-finance-business-in-one-year/articleshow/62776055.cms

During IIFL conference call, they did mention one of the motivation was easier regulatory approval.

Could this be step along with demerger of IIFL to create bigger bank by merging Catholic Syrian Bank and IIFL?
5
General Discussion / Re: Help our country!
« Last post by Maximu$ on February 17, 2018, 06:21:19 PM »
Signed!  The descent of Western political systems into ideological vs. rational/ strategic postures is definitely a threat to our continued security and prosperity.  This issue is but one example, among many.

FWIW. I have no issue with the post staying where it is, as the issue is one of both political and investment significance.  Indeed, I may not have seen the petition in the Politics section as I do not go there regularly; however, the relevance of the post to my investments is significant. 
6
Investment Ideas / Re: CSU - Constellation Software
« Last post by FiveSigma on February 17, 2018, 04:47:16 PM »
Sadler doesn't just know Leonard, he was his mentor back in the day.
7
Investment Ideas / Re: CSU - Constellation Software
« Last post by Liberty on February 17, 2018, 04:36:39 PM »
A lot of the small VMS businesses are lifestyle businesses run by technical founders who have started the businesses decades ago, have known the employees for a long time, etc. The considerations and skills are different than for much bigger businesses, publicly traded, run by a bunch of MBA non-founders, etc.

OpenText is pretty different in model from CSU, in my opinion. Even Enghouse, which is run by someone who knows Mark Leonard, tends to integrate the businesses more and stick to fewer verticals.
8
Fairfax Financial / Re: Fairfax 2018
« Last post by Spekulatius on February 17, 2018, 03:59:21 PM »

The insurance business they have will create a Markel and Berkshire type outcome. But you get the shares now at the level where there is the doubt of that outcome.
They need to generate consistent results for a few years to get rerated. There are quite a few insurers trading around book valur and some have even decent results, more southern FFH.

That said, I am an opportunistic buyer of FFH, but I donít think, it deserves to trade much higher than it does right now.
9
General Discussion / Re: Pembina gets it
« Last post by Cardboard on February 17, 2018, 03:46:12 PM »
SD you make zero sense on this one.

There is no problem with the industry, pipeline companies or railroads. These is no funding issue and no need for the Alberta government to get involved.

The industry players are simply asking for the authorization to lay a pipeline and it has to go through another province. Others are asking for authorization to build LNG plants and a feeder pipeline on the West Coast.

And Newfoundland is sitting on the Ocean unless you missed it and they don't need to ask permission to another province.

Cardboard
10
General Discussion / Re: Pembina gets it
« Last post by StubbleJumper on February 17, 2018, 03:34:42 PM »
"How would provincially owned railcars help?  It is your viewpoint that GATX is not leasing out enough cars?"

Today you cant get a rail-car unless you commit to a long-term lease.
It's to the producer to lease it, they are reluctant to commit, and the oil stays in the ground instead. Can't take the risk.

Nothing prevents Alberta from entering into (permanent) long-term rail-car leases, in large quantity (potentially 50% of existing maximum pipeline capacity), and re-leasing them to producers on a short-term spot rate basis. There is now permanently more than enough take-away capacity to move oil by rail to anywhere where it may be sold profitably, producers receive WTI less transport cost, and can produce as much as they can profitably sell. Alberta has permanent incentive to go to pipelines as soon as practicable, but in the meantiime everyone's oil is getting to market. If total lease costs exceed revenue, the difference is simply charged back to industry.
It's not difficult, 3rd world countries manage to do it every day.

SD


Ahhh, so Albertans should absorb the financial risk of a long-term rail car lease with the goal of absolving the private sector of said risk.

I have a better idea.  How about governments act in citizens' interests in building pipelines?  How about governments spend one dollar on favourable propaganda for every dollar that foreigners spend on anti-pipeline fear mongering?  How about governments outlaw the use of foreign money for anti-pipeline crusades and when foreigners spend money to influence Canadian public policy, why don't we make them inadmissable to Canada for life?  Why don't we slap a prohibitive tax on foreign contributions to Canadian environmental lobby groups?

All of that strikes me as much better aligned with Canadian interests than having government absorb financial risk that should fall on industry.

Cheers

SJ
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10