John Hjorth

More like just back in again, Cardboard, The common denominator, I think, of the wind turbines, solar and oil is they are all generating money.

Furthermore, the 2018Q4 13-F/HR for New England Asset Management has to be taken into consideration. We'll just need to give Dynamic sufficient time to get precise and clear cut share numbers.

Yes, fingers crossed for buybacks, but I have no high hopes. We'll see next Friday.

Well, I think I got my guessing roughly right with AAPL. I'm surprised to see that so little has been added to other positions - only really meaningful addition is to JPM, but certainly a lot less than I expected. And then this further addition to BAC, where Berkshire already is fairly close to the self-imposed maximum 10 percent? Perhaps JPM is just some kind of "substitute" for forced selling of WFC, and later, but soon, also BAC. Perhaps Berkshire feels maxed out on total level with US financials? [We have to remember AXP here.]

MF.PA - Wendel SE. [Website]. Started small/tracker position.

Great analysis, Dynamic, Thank you. I just looked at the filing of the EOP 2017Q4 13-F/HR at the SEC website. That was filed on February 14th 2018, and if you look carefully at it at the SEC website, it's attributed a time stamp for acceptance : "2018-02-14 16:03:31". February 14th 2018 was a Wednesday. January in every year has the same number of days [31]. So, based on those observations, combined with the content of your last post, I will be surprised, if we don't see the 13-F/HR filing for EOP 2018Q4 after closing tomorrow.

Here Jeff's playing the first page - work in progress, I suppose - of a self-composed waltz [supposedly called "Trump Walls" [<- [ : - ) ]] on piano [<-? - I don't know the exact name of such a play-thingy - looks electrical to me].

It's not only the best one, but also the only one [to my knowledge], and thereby also both moaty and anti-goaty. [Among Danes, if you're tinkering with something, and you end up far from what you aimed to achieve [called failure, in short], it's in Danish language - among other things - called "There has gone goat into it."].

Hi Dynamic, Thank you very much for taking the time to explain this in depth and detail to an ignorant like me. Christ, this is complicated! Suddenly I really & finally realize how complicated it must be for you to maintain your file. I'll give my own file yet another spin, based on your explanations & guidance, and then post again. I'm pretty sure it'll weed out the vast majority of the variances, if not all. -Thank you!

Dynamic, Attached is my work in progress file, related to the US banks that Berkshire has positions in. Please note, that the filename contains "Draft" [ : - ) ] On the "Overview" tab I have added two temporary columns, containing the reconciliations to your file. Pink cells in variance column are those of interest. The two other tabs contains data from SEC, that have been processed this way: Brutal cut from the SEC website, From the clipboard dirty paste into Excel using special UNIcode paste [after which you have a frigging mess in Excel], Formatting the data as a table, to create the possibility to set filters [which makes the processing much easier and creates a better view for details to focus on, all non-relevant data can be hidden], Tweaking the share counts text data to numbers data, that Excel can calculate on [only share figures - I do not use the value data], & Adding conditional sums below the tables, linked to from the "Overview" tab [formula "SUM.IF"]. - - - o 0 o - - - Here are my conclusions on comparison with your file : For WFC, AXP, JPM, PNC & TRV the difference consist a separate line in the NEAM 13-F/HR, that are not included in your file. Those variances are immaterial, hvorever I ask if there is a specific reason to that those rows [marked pink in NEAM 13-F/HR tab] are omitted in your file? For USB it's about two rows - a row in the BRK 13-F/HR tab and a row in the NEAM 13-F/HR tab [also marked pink]. I haven't been able to find an explanation about the variance for BK. - - - o 0 o - - - I hope you will take the time to give those particular data in pink cells in my file a critical review, for the purpose of getting mutual better precision by collaboration - thank you in advance - and no hurry! [ : - ) ] BRK_-_Analysis_and_nitpicking_of_Berkshire_portfolio_of_US_banks_EOP_2018Q3_and_comparison_with_XLF_-_v2_-_Draft_-_20190211.xlsx

Thank you for elaborating here, Charlie, -All good!

Dynamic, The last couple of days I've been tinkering around - on and off - with the bank positions [EOP 2018Q3] Berkshire has in its tummy, with the aim to gain an overview of all those positions. I use your file as "reconciliation anchor" [because I know you have put a lot of work into that file] - thank you very much for sharing your work! In the "View only" file, tab "Look-Trough Summary", row 19, you have data [i.e. company name, shares owned by Berkshire] for KO, but the ticker "JPM". The actual outcome is that KO shares are double recorded [row 14 & 19], while JPM shares are missing. [it's a bit of a mystery to me how this has happened, because you're correctly using relative cell references [to the contrary of partially or fully absolute cell references].] -At least it's fixable quick! [ : - ) ] -Again, thank you very much for sharing your work!

Thanks, gfp, Yes, I may have misinterpreted Charlie's post.

Charlie, Berkshire went under the 3 percent threshold on its position in Munich Re on December 16th 2015, and the stub was likely sold shortly afterwards.

What gfp said. All the H/Ts and credits goes to Joel [CoBF member racemize] & Jeff [CoBF member rainforesthiker] for maintaining a wonderful website for Austin Value Capital with lots of wonderful stuff available for free, and to SlowAppreciation also for maintaining an also wonderful website with lots of good stuff. I like it a lot, and I'm from time to time puzzled about how some of that stuff on that site can actually be coded to full automation - especially the 13-F screener comes to mind here. It does not harm either that the name of the website calls for a smile every time, I'm visiting the site [ : - ) ]. To me personally, it's a giant privilege to be connected via CoBF to such great persons doing a lot of work and sharing it, always modest, forthcoming & un-selfpromotional. [<- Did I get that particular word right?] -Thank you!

Attached is the file I posted on December 29th 2018, now updated with the last trading day in 2018, December 31st 2018. I have [mechanically] projected the reverse engineering outcome from 2018Q3 to 2018Q4 [i have no other reasonable fixpoints as of now - the information will be available in the 10-K that we will see soon]. The file indicates a bit north of USD 4 B in buybacks [~ USD 4.2 B] for 2018Q4. The file also indicates a quarterly volume of USD 75 B, indicating monthly volume of USD 25 B for the quarter at an average volume based stock price of 207.66. [Elaboration: If the buyback threshold was 230, the broker running the buybacks would be buying 10 percent of everything every day, then indicated in that case, that the buybacks would be USD 7.453 B - ten times that figure is ~ USD 75 B for the quarter.] Still no bling in the file. BRK_-_Calculation_of_maximum_share_buybacks_period_20181001_-_20181231_-_v1_-_20190210.xlsx

There is also Joel's monster Buffett compilation made available on the Austin Value Capital website and on Twitter. That sucker of a file [4,821 pages [<-!]] is a compilation of everything Buffett: partnership letters, Berkshire Hathaway letters, annual meeting transcripts, memos, and articles. The file is a searchable pdf-file, with a directory. Use the directory to find the first AGM transcript and place the cursor in the beginning of that transcript, and you can thereby use the search function to search through all transcripts in the file.

I just noted your edit to your post #1030, quoted above, Dynamic, It's to me certainly worth a separate discussion about Berkshire, and I hope you'll take the initiative to start a new topic about it.

Thanks Dynamic, I think I spotted it, because of the lack of dynamics on the main page. [ ; - ) ] I have noted, that there is a delay in the "Updated" date on the main page at just about every News Release ... - sometimes a few hours, sometimes a few days. - No need to go fancy with a coded automatic "Updated" date. [it may be my own browser cache though.] So I suppose the typo on the sub page will be fixed sometime soon, too.

Isen't the sustainability link on the Berkshire main webpage to the Berkshire sustainability sub page new?

I've been busy with other stuff the last few days, but I'll provide an update for 2018Q4 soon, before we will have the 10-K. That will be Saturday February 23rd 2019, right? - - - o 0 o - - - Next thing must be the 2018Q4 13F-HR on Friday just after market close next Friday, Friday 15th 2019. -I can almost hear the silence around Berkshire lately! - Only 6 [six] SEC filings since last [2018Q3] 13F-HR! - - - o 0 o - - - Tracking the volume on a continuing basis is a great idea. I'll just have to "merge" the files I already have. Personally, I have trouble imagine that the price of Berkshire will stay in "buyback territory" [whatever that specifically means] going forward for prolonged time spans - I consider it too good to think that it will actually happen. Time will tell. - - - o 0 o - - - What are your interim thoughts about the "buyback ceiling" [maximum price for share buybacks] for 2018Q4, gents? gfp has earlier expressed and shared thoughts with us about that it would be adjusted quarterly, perhaps related in a way to the quarterly development in book value per share. [That line of thinking makes sense to me, personally.] Furthermore, rb has posted earlier, that perhaps the buyback scheme is a bit more nuanced and not so simple as what the reverse engineering of the buybacks for 2018Q3 showed support for. Perhaps a larger percentage than 10 percent of average daily volume, if the market price deviates materially downwards from the buyback ceiling, like we experienced around Christmas? - - - o 0 o - - - Daily volumes for January 2019 - just by looking at a chart - looks about similar to volumes in 2018Q4 - and I would expect Berkshire has been buying back the whole month. Privately negotiated deals will continue to stay a joker until next 10-Q or 10-K.

Thank you, bizaro.

Thank you for taking your time explaining it to me, so to say "on the rim", Cigarbutt!, It makes sense to me, as an ignorant layman in the field, despite years of reading here on CoBF. -What a game! - It reads like "Klondike anno 2019"... - Now I'll just keep my mouth shut going forward and continue reading.

I've been reading the O&G topics here on CoBF for many years, keeping my mouth totally shut. Here I ask a few basic questions, -I hope you'll pardon me, and also answer me: 1. What does it mean "to abandon a well"? [is it just removing the superstructure above ground, or what?, - how about i.e. properly sealing?] 2. Is there a stated, written & approved upon [by regulatory body, or perhaps by lawmakers] standard for "abandoning a well"? 3. Is there follow-up, control & approval about bullet #2?

A very fascinating topic, agreed & thank you to all posters in this topic. Attached is an old article, that I back in 1998 asked a neighbour dear to me to read [she is a socialist, and not my neighbour any longer], on the condition that she delivered the physical newspaper back to me, which she did not do. Since then I have tried so many times to recover the loss, in which I succeeded as late mid August 2014, via access to a newspaper article database, that I work related suddenly found available under my fingertips. I couldn't download it, but could grab it by cut & paste into M$ Word : Jyllandsposten - March 1st 1998 - Erik Eisenberg og David Trads : "The debate that got lost", attached. [if you give it a spin in Google Translate you'll get more than the overall meaning of it.] Here, I've translated the second paragraph: It reads as a prelude to the recent Greek tragedy, right? A whole European nation sitting tilted on the pot, ready to poo on the seat! -Well, it never happened! - More the opposite! Attached is also a chart of the amount of circulating Danish T-Bills [a bit dated, yes - nothing material has changed since the download from the Danish Statistical Department] - In short, there basically are none to default on! Spekulatius & Cigarbutt, I really want to discuss this and your thoughts expressed above in this topic, but perhaps we should go to another topic, perhaps a new one, not to derail this topic. Edit: I screwed up with names of the files attached, by not converting file names to English language - the files are there - just click on the "clip". If the file names cause you trouble, please just post, and I'll reupload renamed files. Kristian_Mogensen_-_Debatten_der_blev_væk_-_1998-03-01.docx Kristian_Mogensen_-_Debatten_der_blev_væk_-_1998-03-01.pdf