[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

View post   
File: 12 KB, 300x300, buffett.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
407057 No.407057[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Is there any sense owning Berkshire shares?

I mean, Warren Buffet seems to know what he's doing. But he's also 200 years old. Is the firm going to go ass over head when he dies?

>> No.407058

fuck that old cunt, he said bitcoin would crash and here it is worth $650

>> No.407060

>>407058
Did he actually give a specific time frame for when he believed it would crash? Because it still very well could.

>> No.407062

>>407060
he didn't say anything of the sort, he just said it wasn't a prudent investment vehicle

>> No.407071

yeah

>> No.407072

Considering BRK.B has been on a pretty steady increase since it was issued, I'd say so. BRK.A shares having going up $80k since 2009 and I don't see any reason why it wouldn't continue you to do so.

>> No.407094

>>407060
Yes, he did. he said bitcoin won't be around in 10 years. His exact words

>> No.407116

>>407062

>he just said it wasn't a prudent investment vehicle

And he's right.

>> No.407139

>>407057
Yes. He's surrounded himself with smart people, and they'll continue the company after he's gone.

A succession is already planned.

Me, I'm waiting until he dies, and hopefully the stock sells off pretty decently, to enter into a position. In the meantime, I have other stocks that I understand the risk/rewards of a lot better.

>> No.407142

>>407094
He's right. It won't be.

>> No.407158

>>407142
screencaped

>> No.407171

>>407158
>be 2024
>Bitcoin is down to <1 USD/coin
>S-S-See guys, it's still around!

>> No.407199

>>407057
Munger is the man behind the curtain, run when he dies. Buffet is just a public figure.

>> No.407209
File: 243 KB, 477x768, 1404852731329.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
407209

>>407094
>he said bitcoin won't be around in 10 years
Buffet won't be around in 10 years

>> No.407218

Well, he is the most successful investor of all time and i do pay attention when he talks.

He's a very smart man when it comes to investing (obviously, 4th richest guy at the moment)

I'm an Australian investor/day trader and i'm doing alright, so i'm starting to dip my toes into the US/Asian markets, just need to read up on taxes etc

>> No.407220

Also remember he missed out on buying microsoft early and apple and other tech companies because he tries not to invest in companies that he doesn't understand the "product".

>> No.407221

>>407220
I'd also ding him for investing in IBM when IBM is busy destroying the business in search of short term profit.

>> No.407222

>>407221
When did he invest in IBM? Just curious

>> No.407224
File: 23 KB, 300x300, 1400962937224.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
407224

>>407218
>he is the most successful investor of all time
Wrong. Have you seen Satoshi Nakamoto's portfolio?

>> No.407228

>>407222
>>407224
He's not worth anywhere near the amount that Buffett is

>> No.407229

>>407218
Warren Buffet is Munehisma Honma, risen from the dead?

Makes a frightening amount of sense other than the lack of slanty eyes

>> No.407233

>>407224
No one's even sure if Satoshi Nakamoto is one person or a group of people.

>> No.407235

>>407233
...what if Warren Buffett is Satoshi Nakamoto?

>mindblown.jpg

>> No.407243

>>407218

He's Jim Simons?

Whoa, now the fact that they've never been seen in a room together makes much more sense.

>> No.407244

>>407222
Recently. Within the last 5 years.

One of his underlings invested in Intel, and I believe it was his decision to invest in IBM. He unwound the Intel position(because it's a scawwy new-fangled tech company and doesn't fit his profile), but kept the IBM position, because of history.

Too bad IBM, even though they generate massive FCF, is fucking imploding in every sector. MBA's ruin another company.

>> No.407256

>>407244
Oh that's i remember now.

I'm Australian (once more) and just starting to dip my feet into the NYSE

>> No.407258

>>407256
I do pretty good on the ASX though (Australian Securities Exchange) enough to work from home for myself

>> No.407293

I bought 3 shares of BRK.B in March and it has been a steady climb since. Seems to be something I could hold onto till I'm old and smell of piss and give me some spare $$

>> No.407296

>>407244

Keep in mind that you need to process Buffet's actions, not his words. As just one example, he rails against derivatives as financial weapons of mass destruction, but then sold tens of billions of dollars of hugely complex linked index derivatives on the Nikkei, FTSE, S&P, and eurostoxx with zero risk management or pricing models.

He claims he "doesn't understand tech stock", but what he's really saying is "I understand tech stocks fine, and you're all fucking idiots for investing in pets.com or Amazon or Facebook or any company that doesn't actually make money or have a competitive advantage." He owns huge positions in Oracle, IBM, and formerly Intel, because those were businesses with durable moats against competitors and enormous cash generation.

>> No.407310

>>407235
What if satoshi nakamoto also created doge coin?

>> No.407325

>>407296
>He claims he "doesn't understand tech stock"
No, I think he really doesn't understand tech. His reasoning for abandoning the Intel position I fully understand, I work at Intel, and I'm invested in Intel, but the "moat" that Intel has is as precarious as anything in the tech industry.

His continued investment in IBM IMO is fully understandable of someone who doesn't understand tech, which is why it's a fucking mistake. IBM doesn't have the moat it used to. It's a FCF machine, with deteriorating fundamentals, deteriorating brand-name, etc.

>Keep in mind that you need to process Buffet's actions, not his words.
Absolutely true. Buffett is cunning like a fox. If he see's an opportunity for profit, he'll take it, no matter how against his normal stance it is. I can't remember the specifics, but all his actions around the financial crash are explainable with that. My understanding is the Buffett Biography, "Snowball", is very keen and unflattering on that point.

>> No.407338

>>407325
>IBM doesn't have the moat it used to.

To add onto this, what I'm saying is if IBM were like Coca Cola, I'd fully understand his decision to invest. It "looks" like they have a huge competitive moat, and years of history being "Big Blue". The go-to, never wrong solution.

It's not(IMO). IBM is a trainwreck happening in slow motion. Can they pull through? They have a disgusting amount of money coming in the door, so maybe they can.

But will they? That's another question entirely.
http://www.cringely.com/2014/06/04/decline-fall-ibm/

Just look at how AMD has disintegrated over the last 10 years.

>> No.407567

>>407338
IBM is done for. So is any company that has >5% of Indians in it.

>> No.407579

>>407199
This. Munger is more than capable of running Berkshire after Buffet croaks.

Wait for the price to tank after Buffet bites it, then jump aboard. If, you know, you've got a few hundred thousand dollars lying around.

>> No.407587

Bill and Melinda Gates will inherit everything. So it's all good. If it were to go to his kids, the economy would be fucked.

>> No.407614
File: 27 KB, 610x443, berkshire hathaway.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
407614

>>407579

Munger is a decade older than Buffet. Odds are he'll croak first. In fact, let me fetch my actuarial tables...

There's even odds one will die in the next three years, even odds Warren will die in the next seven, and even odds both will be dead within a decade. If Buffet dies first, a significant amount of the goodwill will evaporate and Berkshire will get conglomerate discounted hard. Considering they're trading at around 1.4x book value, and conglomerate discounts are typically 10-15% of book value (it's possible to work it out with options pricing theory, but I lack my household computer with my notes on it), then that implies a drop of 40% once his cherry coke halo dries up.

Significant risk, especially since he can only manage to barely beat market returns now. Assuming he can average 10% returns going forward, then that will mean you'll have a 3% return after his death, a average return of 15% means you'll have 7% after his death, and an average return of 19.6% means you'll have 11%. These aren't exactly great returns for the risk you're taking on. I'd suggest you wait until he dies and then pick it up for cheap. Jain has been groomed for decades to take over, and I'm pretty confident he'll do just fine running the business.

>> No.408213

>>407567
Agreed. I won't even buy anything for myself affiliated with Indians, let alone stocks.

Yesterday, I was thinking about what car I want in the future, and at first I thought Jaguar, until I found out Tata Motors now owns the brand. So, I dropped that fucking quick, and back to Audi.

>> No.408230

>>408213
It's owned by Tata Group but has no cross over with Tata Motors.
The assembly is still in England and so is the design house. I'd agree if the assembly was shipped out to India and even more so if design was shipped out there too.

>> No.408261
File: 2.51 MB, 1946x4914, HideUnderANewTrip.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
408261

>Inb5 iHaz
(1/2)

>> No.408264
File: 663 KB, 1285x4609, Into The Medical Waste It Goes.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
408264

>Inb5 iHaz
(2/2)

>> No.408284

>>407062
but it's not an investment vehicle

>> No.408296

>>407209
And his corpse will be still be worth more money then every one of the people complaining about him pissing on bitcoins.

>> No.408777

>>407256
Fellow Ausfag here. Any advice for a new investor. What stocks to get? How much did you start off with?

>> No.408825

best value investor in the world. infrastructure of the best value investing firm in the world. there is much sense in owning. him and munger dying wont mean shit.

>> No.408842

berkshire is too correlated with the S&P 500

just buy S&P500

>> No.408843

the man gets 2 billion in dividends a year but never pays out a dividend to his shareholders. The man is a scrooge.

>> No.408887

>>407222
He believes it's the type of tech company that will still be around long after he is. He gave a statement at the time about investing in companies that would still be around even if the markets went dark for 200 years. I suppose he thinks that in the long run they'll get back to their roots of base level technology innovation.

>> No.408894

>>407614
Someone seems to have to remind everyone of this in every thread about this man: It's not about his returns on individual years, it's about long term holding. He might only get 10-15% on a bullish year like 2013 but could also get that same 10-15% on years when the indexs drop throughout the year.

>> No.408896

>>408230
There's still the social cost to consider. I wouldn't want my money going to certain individuals either.

>> No.408907
File: 24 KB, 526x394, 857bb21c_stop-posting-cat-paw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
408907

>>408843
> http://www.nasdaq.com/article/warren-buffett-hates-dividends-cm262834

>> No.408923

>>408843
He re-invests them, tard. What would you rather have, $10,000 now or $100,000 ten years from now?

>> No.408941

>>408843

>companies can deduct dividends received
>individuals can't

>therefore, it makes sense to insulate dividends in a company to compound their growth without incurring additional tax liability

In other words, you're a idiot.

>> No.409023
File: 35 KB, 600x600, e3c195c4-0e43-4d89-b2bd-efa4240cd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
409023

>>407209
>Implying he'll die in 10 years or less

These ancient wealthy fucks live to be like 1000 before they finally keel over

>> No.409059

>>407057
>Is there any sense owning Berkshire shares?
Yea through an Index Fund. You don't know if Berkshire shares are going to do well or not so just own an index fund that tracks the whole market.

>> No.409212

>>409023
This.

They have access to medicines and procedures the rest of us will never have.