The Abominable No-Man

647 posts

The Abominable No-Man banner
The Abominable No-Man

The Abominable No-Man

@TheAbomNoMan

A rational and simplistic take on investing and the markets. Not financial advice

Katılım Ocak 2026
313 Takip Edilen210 Takipçiler
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
The sooner you realize that DeepMind got snatched away from Elon Musk by Google, and that Elon Musk literally co-founded OpenAI to dislodge Google 10 years ago, the more you will understand how special it is that Google is doing what it is doing with Gemini and AI. $GOOG $GOOGL
Logan Kilpatrick@OfficialLoganK

Welcome to Gemini 3.5 Flash, our most powerful model to date. It pushes the frontier of intelligence, speed, and cost putting 3.5 Flash in a class of its own. We spent the last 6 months making sure Flash is great for real world use cases. It's available everywhere now!

English
0
0
0
122
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
@TihoBrkan Apple, which has been the biggest success in Berkshire’s entire portfolio history in terms of dollars, was literally the largest company by market cap at the time they purchased it
English
0
0
0
78
Tiho Brkan
Tiho Brkan@TihoBrkan·
Greg Abel (Berkshire) has traded cash for $GOOGL stock. Meanwhile, Bill Ackman (Perishing) has traded $GOOGL for $MSFT stock. Gun to head, I'd rather do the latter than the former, but that's just me. I wonder what Buffett thinks of buying into a nearly $5T market cap? He has famously stated that the highest market cap companies are a graveyard for future returns. In the 1999 Fortune magazine interview, he advised against buying into a "cheery consensus" and "peak popularity", both of which leave no room for upside. The mental model to remember here is that the "biggest companies" frequently suffer from the law of large numbers and they tend to disappoint in the subsequent decade.
English
18
1
64
14K
Just a Dude Who Invests
Just a Dude Who Invests@DudeWhoInvests·
Berkshire Hathaway $BRK.A decided to… - Sell UnitedHealth $UNH - Sell Amazon $AMZN - Sell Domino’s Pizza $DPZ For what?? - Buy Macy’s $M 🤔
English
65
13
387
43.8K
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
@qualtrim I kind of chuckled when I read that one is overvalued and one is undervalued and then looked at the 10Y average versus today. The difference in those numbers for each company and between companies are quite minimal.
English
0
0
1
791
Qualtrim
Qualtrim@qualtrim·
Bill Ackman just sold Google to buy Microsoft. His argument: One is too expensive. Google's Valuation: - 10Y Average: 27.4x - Today: 29.9x Microsoft Valuation: - 10Y Average: 31.2x - Today: 25.1x Would you have done the same? $GOOGL $GOOG $MSFT
Qualtrim tweet mediaQualtrim tweet mediaQualtrim tweet mediaQualtrim tweet media
Bill Ackman@BillAckman

To be clear, our sale of $GOOG was not a bet against the company. We are very bullish long term on Alphabet. But at current valuations and in light of our finite capital base, we used $GOOG as a source of funds for $MSFT.

English
57
21
423
80.1K
Mark Roussin, CPA 📈💰💵
Mark Roussin, CPA 📈💰💵@Dividend_Dollar·
And this means $BRK.B was OUT of their $AMZN by end of March The $BRK.B crew is losing their luster Exiting winners Buying losers Sitting on $400B in cash earning 4% PASS
The Kobeissi Letter@KobeissiLetter

BREAKING: Berkshire Hathaway discloses new purchases of Alphabet, $GOOGL, Macy's, $M, and Delta Airlines, $DAL. Berkshire Hathaway has also exited its entire position in Amazon, $AMZN, UnitedHealth, $UNH, and Dominos Pizza, $DPZ.

English
22
2
56
16.7K
Brandon Van Zee
Brandon Van Zee@BrandonVanZee·
Seth Klarman (author of Margin of Safety) bought $V last quarter
Brandon Van Zee tweet media
English
1
2
32
1.6K
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
@GuyTalksFinance Imagine taking stock advice from someone who doesn’t have the first clue of how to value a stock, and has repeatedly told people that index investing is way better than stock picking
English
0
0
1
1.3K
Finance Guy
Finance Guy@GuyTalksFinance·
Berkshire Hathaway is a $1,000 stock that’s selling for only $475/share. Buy the discount while you can $BRK.B
English
38
13
301
56K
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
A nice detailed explanation on the value of $MKL. I don’t do it quite the same as Gayner, but I have come to the same conclusion: $MKL is very undervalued relative to pretty conservative estimates
Greg Speicher@Greg_Speicher

Why $MKL looks cheap. Tom Gayner publishes his intrinsic value methodology right in the 10-K — Item 7, Capital Performance. Classic Buffett-Munger discipline: better to be roughly right than precisely wrong. The stickman: Start with the earnings side. Take adjusted operating income — $2.30B in 2025. Strip out dividends from the equity portfolio — $156M — and interest on cash — $228M. What's left is roughly adjusted earnings: $1.92B. He then takes a 3-year average — $1.60B — and applies a multiple. Then the balance sheet side. Add equity securities at fair value — $13.0B — and cash and short-term investments — $6.0B. Subtract debt, preferred, and noncontrolling interests — $4.8B. You get $14.2B. Divide by 12.59M shares. Tom shows three multiples — 8x, 12x, 16x: 8x → $2,143 12x → $2,651 16x → $3,158 Stock today: ~$1,779. Below his most conservative anchor. Where Tom is being conservative: Even Tom's own smoothed 3-year average earnings figure has compounded at 16.5% per year over the last five years — through COVID, through the 2023 reserve charge, through everything. Balance sheet value has compounded too — $9.0B in 2020 to $14.2B in 2025. That's a 9.5% CAGR, with faster growth over the last two years as the equity portfolio compounded and cash built. The math on multiples matters. A 12x multiple at a 12% required return only needs roughly 4% growth to be justified. Markel's actual growth has been multiples of that on both engines. Now invert it. At $1,779, the market is paying about 5x for the operating businesses after backing out the marked-to-market balance sheet. Five times. That is a very low look-through multiple for a business that just put up record earnings. There is one important caveat: Markel is not a simple industrial company with excess cash sitting on the balance sheet. Some of the investment portfolio supports the insurance business and its liabilities. So the balance-sheet value is not identical to excess cash at a software company. But that is also the point of the Markel model: insurance float, disciplined underwriting, public equities, and operating businesses all compound together. And it's not just the math. You get Tom Gayner running it. You get the Markel culture — nearly a hundred years of underwriting discipline and reserve conservatism. And you get optionality across three engines: insurance, public equities, and operating businesses, all feeding each other. Buffett taught us that this kind of optionality increases your chances of getting a date on Saturday night. Tom's putting his money where his mouth is — 223K shares bought at a $1,894 average in 2025. Bought another $134M in Q1 2026. The key underwriting question is whether recent operating performance is durable. The key valuation question is whether you are careful not to double count investment income that is already reflected in the investment portfolio. But even after making those adjustments conservatively, the setup looks unusually attractive. The 10-K shows you exactly how Gayner thinks. Do the math yourself. $MKL looks cheap. Not because the math is complicated — but because the market may be underpricing a boring, durable compounder hiding in plain sight. One specific item to flag from the Q1 2026 10-Q: Markel disclosed a collateral shortfall on a State National fronting relationship. Management has engaged outside actuaries and stated it is not material to capital position. Worth watching in subsequent filings, but not a thesis-breaker.

English
1
0
3
374
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
@HatedMoats Hindsight is always 20/20. At the time I was acquiring it, I knew it was screaming at me and I still only put 20% into it. Obviously now I wish it had been 50%+. But that’s how investing goes.
English
1
0
2
438
Hated Moats Investor
Hated Moats Investor@HatedMoats·
At this point, it feels stupid to have ~32% in portfolio in $GOOGL and $GOOG. It's not enough. I should be all in, have zero worries and regrets in life, without wasting my time with inferior stocks.
Hated Moats Investor tweet media
English
13
3
235
12.4K
Andrew O'Connell, CFA, FRM
Andrew O'Connell, CFA, FRM@realpristinecap·
The biggest signal of low IQ is someone who criticizes Warren Buffett’s investment decisions
English
30
3
77
8K
Lee Roach
Lee Roach@leevalueroach·
The Warren Buffett who built the foundation of every dollar he is worth today was not the Buffett of the cardigan and the Coca-Cola and the moats-and-brands sermons that fill the annual letters of his later years. The Buffett who actually compounded at 50% a year in the partnership era of the 1950s and 1960s was a 26-year-old in Omaha reading the Moody’s manuals page by page, looking for tiny, illiquid, ignored, unloved, unfashionable companies trading below net current asset value, and buying small positions in dozens of them at the same time, holding them in a partnership structure that almost nobody outside Nebraska knew existed, and waiting for the math to do what the math always does. He bought a windmill company. He bought a streetcar company. He bought a coal company in Philadelphia. He bought a map company. He bought a New England textile mill that turned out to be the worst investment of his career and that, against all his original intentions, became the holding company that bears its name today. He bought net-nets. He bought nanocaps. He bought companies with $4 million market caps and balance sheets full of cash that nobody on Wall Street had bothered to look at since the war. He did not love the businesses. He loved the math. The math was that he was paying 50 to 60 cents on the dollar for liquid assets, and the dollar would, over some unknowable but finite period of time, find its way back to 100 cents, and the difference, compounded across a portfolio of 30 to 40 names, was the entire engine of the early returns that made everything that came later possible. He himself has said, repeatedly, in interviews and in old letters that almost nobody bothers to read, that if he were running small money today he would do the same thing again, in whatever market still offered the same opportunity. The market that offers it today is OTC pink sheets, and the people who are running the original Buffett playbook in those markets in 2026 are, in a precise structural sense, doing the closest thing in modern finance to actually being him in 1956, and almost nobody else is paying attention, because the late Buffett of the cardigan has been so thoroughly canonized that the early Buffett of the manuals has been almost entirely forgotten, which is, as it has always been, the entire reason the opportunity is still there.
English
27
46
561
120.2K
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
@Schornack An interesting comparison, but by no means meaningful: Berkshire’s total return from 1965-1975 (Buffett’s first 11 years) was about 100%. There was a 49% decline in 1974. GHC’s return (ex-div) so far in O’Shaughnessy’s first 10 yrs: about 100%. There was a ~50% decline in 2020.
English
0
0
1
52
Andy Schornack
Andy Schornack@Schornack·
@TheAbomNoMan Good track record there and also a Minnesota kid, growing up not far from me. Cheering him on for sure.
English
1
0
1
91
Andy Schornack
Andy Schornack@Schornack·
So if the Abel Berkshire event is a bust, where is the next pilgrimage too? Who’s the up and coming all star to follow? I am thinking 30s to early 40s who’s willing to speak freely to their shareholders.
English
21
0
67
25.9K
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
@ADHD_Capital @Gubben89 Ok, how about what Gubben said but the insurance company also has a 93% combined ratio, 1.2 P/B, 100% increase in float over last 10 years, and trading at 8x owner earnings (2025) which have a 10-year CAGR of 17%
English
1
0
0
48
Gubben
Gubben@Gubben89·
Markel portfolio is north of 12B, Cash 4B, Mcap 22B.. its not rocket $MKL
English
3
1
18
4.2K
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
I wouldn’t sigh. As long as Prem Watsa stays alive, I think there is a good chance Fairfax will likely outperform Berkshire. I will still own BRK until the results of Abel are realized. But at some point, $400 billion in cash (and growing) becomes an immovable object to deploy into anything other than buybacks or dividends.
English
0
0
1
34
Russell Crouch
Russell Crouch@Tennee989999·
@TheAbomNoMan Gotcha. I bought a little a few months ago, will add more tomorrow. I do not own BRK. Sigh.
English
1
0
0
26
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
While I’m here tonight, here’s my informal 13F for Q1: Q4 2025 -> Q1 2026 $MKL 23% -> 20% $GHC 21% -> 22% $GOOG 19% -> 20% $JPM 14% -> 5% $BRK.B 12% -> 11% $CVS 7% -> 6% $GOOGL 3% -> 3% $HHH 1% -> 9% $V 0% -> 4% $V Visa was my only new position, $HHH was a notable increase, and $JPM was a notable reduction.
English
1
0
1
414
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
I really like FFH and Prem Watsa. They have significantly outperformed MKL and BRK over the last 5+ years. And their financials are stellar. I still don’t like some of the macro investments they make, even though it has paid off for them in the past. And I kind of fear Prem is to FFH what Buffett is to BRK (what happens when he’s gone?). But their current valuation looks really attractive relative to past performance. It’s hard for me to justify overexposure to insurance holding MKL, BRK, and FFH, so I would probably have to replace one of them with FFH if I wanted to start a position. The recent drawdown has me considering it, though.
English
1
0
0
39
Russell Crouch
Russell Crouch@Tennee989999·
@TheAbomNoMan Thoughts on Fairfax Financial? I have looked at HHH several times, do not own.
English
1
0
0
35
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
I know they added $GOOGL in the second half of 2025, but it had already bounced some by that point. And they only allocated 2% of their portfolio to it.
English
1
0
1
55
The Abominable No-Man
The Abominable No-Man@TheAbomNoMan·
After watching the $BRK.A $BRK.B Berkshire annual meeting yesterday, I thought of this WSJ article on their investment into Apple $AAPL. Assuming the criteria is true, how did they not start loading up on $GOOGL early 2025 when the forward PE was 17? I know 17 is not 15, but…
The Abominable No-Man tweet media
English
1
0
1
177