73 Reds

Hmm, for someone who prides himself on the law of probabilities, you seem to spend a lot of time focusing on an extreme long shot.

I dunno, allocating less than 1% of market cap to perhaps the best known brand name on the planet is hardly going to make a dent in what Greg might ultimately be able to do with Berkshire's cash hoard if/when the shit hits the fan. In any event, last few times that happened Buffett mostly sat on his hands so who says Greg has the cojones if he's not willing to take some minor swings now?

I'll probably continue to own it since it is my only direct India exposure and there is a lot of untapped potential there.

+1. I think it all comes down to a change in investment objectives. Buffett's was purely preservation of wealth. Greg's is more growth. I prefer the latter.

I think the difference is that WEB has always been averse to real estate investments (even though he often uses a farm in his analogies for income producing assets) and Greg is not.

Maybe, but not sure why current earrings have anything to do with companies that Berkshire acquires.

Agreed. Winding down the TRS should be done when the stock is overvalued or at least trading at fair value. This is precisely the time to add to the TRS, if anything at all.

For now, at least life is great. The issue that scared me is how many terms of Biden and his likeness would it take to irreparably destroy this country? That thought made me vote for Trump.

LOL, you've never had a root canal!

He is an elected official with a job to do. If you go to a doctor, lawyer, accountant, or any other professional or business providing a service, do you dissect their personal histories, beliefs and what they have to say about any and every particular issue? Or do you expect them to perform a service and ignore everything else? Most voters opt for the latter while being able to differentiate between politics and nonsense.

At the end of the day all that matters to most voters is whether they are getting what they voted for. Not sure why anyone cares about anything else.

Yeah, boots on the ground in Iran are wholly unnecessary. We can incapacitate them in other ways and Israel can take care of any dirty work. But Trump delusion keeps bringing this issue back here.

We'll see. Some people (not you, so much) far undersell Trump's abilities because they allow their personal ideologies to take over.

I'll take the other side of that bet. Like him or not, Trump is no politician, a positive in my book. The clock is ticking and he's got one chance to make a difference.

We've been through the "imminent threat" issue multiple times over. The question is, who decides when there is an imminent threat, why anyone would want to wait that long anyway, and what parties are being threatened. Raising the issue here again only eggs on those who like to pile on; yawn. From my perspective, Iran hasn't demonstrated anything but the ability to extend its own misery. There is nothing foolproof about a regime that lives underground and serves as target practice for our armed forces and those of Israel. The only people who care about "support" for this endeavor are those who are, and have been against it from the git go. This entire saga is now so far removed from Trump and all about change in the Middle East. The World can potentially be much safer and more economically productive if the Iranian regime is toppled. Otherwise, a nuclear threat has been removed for some indefinite period of time but the enemy remains in power of an otherwise powerless population. Why anyone would prefer the latter is something I cannot understand. The idea that people would politicize this issue is why I now refuse to address some of them here on this site.

Logic, reason, and Western common sense thinking are not part of their ideology. That, in a nutshell is why we can't negotiate with them or trust them. The only real solution is to destroy them.

Correct. An MOU isn't worth the paper it is written on.

Yeah, I've long since grown tired of politicians - all of them. Whether we come out better or worse, at least some of us are willing to give the alternative a try.

Cubs, I'm slowly coming around to your way of thinking about Trump. Have been spending time lately in places where the chorus here would have us believe Trump is universally hated. Yet the people I speak with tend to either like him or could care less because they have more important issues to think about, despite gas prices much higher than anywhere in the US. When we're not being lectured by those who claim to know better, most folks can think for themselves and form their own opinions with the common sense they were born with.

I think Marco's response mirrors my own. But bigger picture is the Palestinians to date have demonstrated no capability to govern themselves in a manner beneficial to them or anyone else. Just because certain factions claim a right to land doesn't give those same factions the right to use the land as a means of death and destruction to everyone around them, including their own people. Israeli settlors simply want to live in peace. Were it not for terrorist regimes, the question of whose land this is would not be an issue because Israelis are perfectly willing to co-exist in peace. The same cannot be said for the other side which is why people here who don't understand why "both sides are equally to blame" are remarkably naive and ignorant.

@vinod1 The issue is moral equivalence. If you believe that, there is nothing to discuss.

I think he kind of admits selling it was a mistake. Back when he bought KO and AXP they comprised a pretty good sized % of the entire company and he never felt compelled to sell even as their valuations rose. The fact that AAPL was as large as all the other equities in the portfolio really doesn't mean much b/c operating companies drive BRK's success today. And he acknowledges that AAPL is better than any of BRK's wholly owned businesses. You can tell by this dialogue that he struggles with having sold it down.

I still wonder why Buffett sold down the AAPL stake. It's not as if BRK needed the money and Buffett's opinion of AAPL has remained steadfast.

Sanjeev, I am no longer going to exchange thoughts in this thread with you or anyone who chooses to ignore history but I would urge you learn more about how we got here.

I would argue that at least 90% of all politicians are con men. Hard to succeed in politics if you're genuine.