Sinbius

According to Druckenmiller never happened that if inflation goes over 5% we didn't have a recession... ...also never happened that if inflation went over 5% it went down without the fed funds rate going over CPI... (this second thing actually can not happen or the world will implode )

I consider that operating income in the bag... ...and all the talking and compliment on the people doing it is just the classic psychological tactic to keep the good employee loyal and good working...

BRK is 590 Billions in market cap...more than 400 Billions in cash and equities...is it more hard to keep a regulated industry running or to allocate 400Billions in the most effective way possible? I know it is in part misleading what I wrote but to make a point fast...

I just hope Ted and Todd will be completely unleashed when the time will come...and that they will be iperaggressive when needed... I hope Warren and Charlie have been investing big time on them, behind the scene, during these years...

I have a different point of view... For example let's say Buffett die tomorrow...was really "priced in" that Buffett will die tomorrow or was more priced in that he will die 5 years from now?... ...and yes it makes a great difference especially if is "priced in" his added value on the "priced in" eventual recession that's coming before the 5th year from now... I don't believe much in this priced in stuff...people need time to digest changes...and spend more time and effort on understanding the implication only if forced to do so (because it really happened)...and if in part gets priced in it is priced in the average of the outcomes...or generally the most probable...

Putin is ultra rich...

Not if you have the reputation on being the number one in the world...with such a huge network of high value people...Buffett and Munger have access to anything...and investors go to contact them... In decade you have never bumped/searched for a great investor to succeed you? I thought it was Ted and Todd...Do you really think they were hired just to allocate "only" 34 Billion? If they will not have huge control over BRK future investment it means someone screw up...

I don't have his track record as an investor but Thomas Gayner portfolio is the classic zero conviction, know-nothing investor with lots of less than 2-3% positions....and I remember he was defending his use of EBITDA as a metric to look at... There are people that outperform with that kind of "diversified" portfolio...but it is the opposite style Berkshire has always used... Ted and Todd have that concentrated investment style and is years they are face to face with Buffett and Munger...I hope for a purpose...

I don't like the idea Not finding an investor to succeed Buffett is a big failure...considering he also like the idea to be remember as a teacher...a teacher that never made a real investment valuation example and that was not able to find a successor for the business?... I hope he is just keeping Ted and Todd out of the spotlight for the moment but after they will have complete control...

Hi, reading another thread I realized that my point of view about BRK is that this two people really are of no interest to me...about how to judge the future of BRK... What I would like to hear is about Ted and Todd...Will we BRK shareholder have some investor superstars with no constraints ( that can move hundreds of billions when and how they want) or not? Without some mega investor BRK will just be a no growth-utility like business...and I'm pretty sure that if they will not give to Ted and Todd complete power and autonomy they will just leave...and who is going to allocate capital?

I think that Ted and Todd if they are extremely good ( likely) should become the new Berkshire...and I think that if they will not....they will just say...it was a nice experience, bye bye (and I will move my BRK money to them).

I'm the only one surprised and sad that Buffett in all his life was not able to find a real successor...Or I am wrong and Ted and Todd will actually move also hundreds of billions in a year without constraints? I'm ok as an investment to think the future of BRK like a no growth-utility company that just make buyback but it is sad that Buffett doesn't pass all his investment knowledge to someone that keep going...

Raising rates is for Banks a net positive only if it does not have very bad consequences on the assets the banks have ... ...and most italian banks are trash not because interest rates...but because of bad lending and high leverage (US banks have nowdays less leverage that EU banks)...

Aren't Banks cyclical with lot of leverage? I didn't know they can do well in stagflation or recession...but I'm from Italy...so I have bias about this From the little I know, I thought on average banks are mediocre to bad business in a cycle...of course it is possible to make lots of money on them (...Charlie Munger did...). Any source/reference to see better the opposite point of view?...

Sometimes they have wrong numbers...like amazon eps in 2021 of 64$

Thank you!!! ....it is almost perfect great!!!!

Hi, looks like Morningstar does not give anymore that page that for me was gold... Any other free resource to get that type of 10 years data in one page?

DVA ... very small position for my style ...I think I'm influenced by the macro picture and I don't want to be completely invested...I want to have some cash...I'm 15% cash... I really hope the obvious big increase in interest rates and macro recession and further market crash ahead don't come true so I have a real reason to never ever look at the macro picture again....I hate to be influenced by it...and I hate spending time on it...

I have read it but I didn't find it useful...I expected some insight into some business models...almost nothing...

I'm surprised he read so many journals instead of just annual reports or company/sector specific stuff ... does he have a top-down approach?

Looks like he and Buffett are into macro too (Buffett always says he doesn't...)...