Chris Blumas

Pretty positive quarterly results, as people were expecting. Three clouds overhanging: safety, CEO still be be named, Fort Hills cost profile. It's one of the 3 energy names he'd use. He follows SU, CNQ, and EOG quite closely. These energy companies are gushing cashflow now. 

Agrees that it will come down steadily in the next while. In the second half of this year, the comps YOY get tougher. So if the price level remains relatively flat, you'll see inflation come down from about 6% to about 3%, just where prices are maintained at a reasonable level. We're not seeing the price level continue to go up. He's not in the camp of rate cuts this year. The Fed is so data dependent, if you don't see inflation come down below 2%, which it doesn't look like it's going to, it's going to stay north of 3%. Great steady progress since it peaked last June, but it's not going to hit their target range. Interest rate cuts will be pushed out into 2024.

Dramatically lower valuation than peers. Likely to benefit from Rogers-Shaw merger, as it'll pick up assets at a pretty good price. Short term positives. But long term, just doesn't have the scale, or ambition, to compete nationally.

There's the parent, and 4 subsidiaries. It depends on what you're looking for. For income, BIP.UN. For growth, BN. Those are the 2 he uses. Longer term, a lot to like in terms of what it's doing to maximize value of assets. By investing in BN at the top of the pyramid, it has some unique arbitrage opportunities among the different assets. BN also has strategic capital allocation benefits. The subsidiaries pay out most of their income as dividends to shareholders and to the parent company. Because BN has more of a growth orientation, it retains that capital, with a yield of only 0.8%. 

For growth. A lot to like in terms of maximizing value of assets. BN at the top of the pyramid has some unique arbitrage opportunities among the different assets. Strategic capital allocation benefits. More of a growth orientation, so it retains capital, with a yield of only 0.8%. Shareholder focused. He's quite positive on them.

Likes it for income. The subsidiaries pay out most of their income as dividends to shareholders and to the parent company. 

Wonderful company. Mega-conglomerate. All insurance businesses have performed well as the economy's weakened. Very defensive names. Multiple has been bid up. Has become more of a wealth preservation vehicle. He'd prefer BAM or KKR, these are the new Berkshires with a better succession plan.

Prefers it to BRK.B. One of the new Berkshire Hathaways, with a better succession plan.

Prefers it to BRK.B. One of the new Berkshire Hathaways, with a better succession plan.

Well run. If you're looking for gold exposure, a reasonable company to consider. You could also consider FNV or ABX. ABX results did not impress, and the stock's down. AEM will trade down on similar news. Watch and wait, as the sector's been strong. Interest rate cuts would be negative catalysts for gold names. Enter on a pullback.

If you're looking for gold exposure, worth considering. Watch and wait, as the sector's been strong. Interest rate cuts would be negative catalysts for gold names. Enter on a pullback.

If you're looking for gold exposure, a reasonable name to consider. ABX results did not impress, and the stock's down. Watch and wait, as the sector's been strong. Interest rate cuts would be negative catalysts for gold names. Enter on a pullback.

Just unfortunate timing. An enduring business. Big fan. Regulatory overhang for years, but no matter how this plays out, value will be unlocked over time. Digital advertising will improve as the economy does. Debt free, tons of excess cash, trades at 16-17x earnings. Incubating investments. Sentiment will change, the multiple will expand, earnings will move higher. Consider adding while down, but definitely sit tight.

Just unfortunate timing. An enduring business. Crown jewel is AWS. Though AMZN retail gets all the headlines, that part's not as profitable. Sit tight.

Absolutely. Search has been an ambition of MSFT for quite some time, it just hasn't been very good at it. If MSFT hadn't gone through its anti-trust problems all those years ago, there might not have been a GOOG. It could spark an arms race in AI between the 2 companies. MSFT didn't develop these capabilities internally. It partnered with another company that was emerging on that front. GOOG has become dominant in Search because of all the money they've spent on it. Difficult to unseat them from that spot. Important to watch market share and see how things change over time.