What differentiates us from other money managers with a similar style is that we’re comfortable with new lows.

I suspect that my thinking is an eclectic mix, not pure net-net because I couldn’t do it anyway so you have to have a new something to hang your hat on. But the framework stays the same.

To my knowledge there are no good records that have been built by institutions run by committee. In almost all cases the great records are the product of individuals, perhaps working together, but always within a clearly defined framework. Their names are on the door and they are quite visible to the investing public. In reality outstanding records are made by dictators, hopefully benevolent, but nonetheless dictators.

The company must be profitable. Preferably it will have increased its earnings for the past five years and there will have been no deficits over that period.

I try to keep in mind Oscar Wilde's comment that "saints always have a past and sinners always have a future," so no investment should be ruled out simply on the basis of past history. We focus on liquidation analysis and liquidation analysis alone.

We always look at the margin of safety in the balance sheet and then worry about the business.

The share price must be less than book value. Preferably it will be less than net working capital less long term debt.