gfp

Oh gosh, someone should tell Willow Oak! http://willowoakfunds.com/select/ I think I’ve heard Charlie say that the reason it didn’t work is that each manager picked the idea they had done the most work on. He was illustrating a bias that we supposedly have to value most what we have invested the most in. In this case time.

You think he might top out at $10 Billion worth of BRK share repurchases per year because of regulatory limits? Why?

Another article on Howard - this one is a bit more balanced https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/billionaire-heir-howard-buffett-on-trump-money-and-drugs-20190212-p50x74.html

Thanks for the rec on Russian Doll - I enjoyed it and never would have checked it out otherwise I agree. When I started watching it I was thinking that there was a 80% chance it was going to be stupid and I wouldn't get through 2 episodes. I'm glad I gave it a chance, it was a pretty good show. Like groundhog day only darker with a better story.

I don't think US GAAP requires amortization of Goodwill since 2001 or so.

Yeah - “Warren Buffett daytrades in and out of Oracle!” “The Oracle of Omaha abandons Oracle!”

I agree to some extent that it is unusual and unnecessary. If I had to guess I would guess that: a.) He doesn't like the press running with false headlines about him that other, less sophisticated, investors might make investment decisions based on - and b.) He feels some desire to show he supports Tim Cook at Apple, and is not 'pulling a Ginni Ronmety' on him... It’s concerning to me that Buffett replied to a request for comment, when does he ever do that, especially regarding the stock portfolio?? Is he planning on selling Apple shares and wants to hold the price up? Why wouldn’t he want people to think that he himself is reducing shares? Presumably he’d only benefit if the stock drops due to repurchases or him buying more.

Yeah we don't know if its a static / manually adjusted price cap on the plan. We'll probably be able to reverse engineer the plan rules after a few more quarterly disclosures. It could very well be that the cap is based on a multiple of last reported BVPS. Warren would be willing to buy big blocks of shares outside the broker-executed plan when he's not in a restricted period. For the automatic plan, he really doesn't want to affect the trading price of the stock much - or establish any type of "floor."

Good stuff - thanks for posting the entire interview

Debbie Bosanek confirmed to CNBC that the small amount of AAPL stock that was sold was attributable to Ted or Todd. Could have been pension shares, since that is a big part of what they manage. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/15/berkshire-trimmed-its-apple-stake-but-it-wasnt-buffett.html

Hey Dynamic - Seems like the totals add up to me. The Berkshire 13F reports 249,589,329 shares and the 13G reports 255,300,329 shares (Berkshire's actual total economic interest). The difference is the same 5.711 million shares in New England Asset Management that Berkshire is the ultimate owner of. Berkshire's 9.30 quarterly filing shows $57.6 Billion AAPL at a closing price of 225.74, which pencils out to just about the same: 255.16 million shares - discrepancies which could be due to "57.6 Billion" not being an exact number. No big change in Apple shares that I can see. Could be one of the original T's trimmed their position at near all time highs, or it could be something else. (No big changes inside General Re NEAM this quarter - a few shares of WFC sold and continued selling off of Verisk, which Buffett never actually "bought" per se)

Thanks for the spreadsheet dynamic. Looking forward to seeing Berkshire's 13F at the end of the week - I guess Friday evening?

Thanks for that link DD - a great summary of BHE and it's always nice to relive the "failed" Constellation Energy deal. So BHE can get enormous and so far has accomplished 16% for their owners. Charlie seems happy with it

I don't see renewal dates being an issue. It is not uncommon to cancel insurance policies and receive the pro-rated premiums back as a refund. It happens all the time when an asset is sold or you decide to switch providers. I should also note that 'three page policy' is a marketing / branding thing and the actual legal contract for several types of specific business insurance that passes muster with each state regulator will be pretty standard (and long). But what they say and market in those three pages can say a lot about the company and how plainly they wish to spell out 'the deal'. Hopefully this marketing message is a hit, as Berkshire has been trying this GEICO-for-small-biz-insurance for a while now and it has remained tiny. First it was "coveryourbusiness.com" - then "biberk.com" - bi for 'business insurance - and now "threeinsure.com" with a cool new Nebraska logo and the prominent Berkshire Hathaway brand.

Berkshire continues to go after the primary insurance business with the launch of a new product called "THREE" that features a "three page policy" for small businesses covering workers comp, multiple liability coverages, property & auto. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20190211005143/en/Big-News-Small-Business-Berkshire-Hathaway https://www.reinsurancene.ws/berkshire-hathaway-to-launch-three-page-insurance-product-for-small-businesses/ www.threeinsure.com - most interesting to me is that this is being launched under the Berkshire Hathaway name, not any of the existing primary companies in this space, like GUARD, BHSI, the various 'home state' companies, etc. This one is all Ajit! (this is the current offering direct offering - the new one will be a big marketing push to take share in this space) https://www.biberk.com https://www.reuters.com/article/us-berkshire-biberk-idUSKBN18528N https://www.omaha.com/money/buffett/companies-like-biberk-aim-to-make-buying-insurance-paying-claims/article_815acffe-3188-5f79-a23d-c876d6580527.html

These all expired worthless. Was able to get as much as $1.10 on Friday, hours before expiry.

They are both in the reinsurance industry. I doubt Charlie was buying BRK for any Munich Re look-through. As you mention, BRK may not own any Munich Re anymore. BRK's most recent European insurance investment that I can remember was a major stake in Italy's Cattolica insurance group. 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.

Thanks to all of you - it certainly is easier to find specific bits of information you are trying to remember than it used to be

Hard to say what is better for shareholders. But Berkshire isn't going to repurchase stock aggressively unless it gets really cheap. The current plan takes in 5-10% of the average daily volume on days the stock is below a cap price. The current plan takes in 10% of ADV as a target, but actually was something like 11% on the B-shares for the 11 actual days they were active. Harder to calculate on the A-shares because they traded at a premium to the B's during the 7/7-7/24 period, and may not have had the same cap. It allows them to be active during what would otherwise be blackout periods and it accomplishes Buffett's goal of not manipulating the share price (much). If he got some big blocks of stock offered to him he would probably take them. But those seem infrequent, so this slow dribble of - at best - less than $4 Billion per quarter will probably be all we get. I estimate Q4 repurchases were somewhere between $1.5 Billion and $2.7 Billion $2 Billion and $3.5 Billion, depending on how they figure the cap price. I would expect that they continued share repurchases subsequent to quarter end as well, which we will be able to tell when they file the 10K with a share count as of mid-Feb.

Fairfax has nothing to do with it guys. Here is a primer on unsponsored ADRs https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unsponsoredadr.asp

Channelling my inner Boilermaker and selling a few Feb 8th 2019 expiry 200 strike put contracts on BRK.B for fiddy-cent (cue stock market collapse)

Just every time the CEO talks about his exit strategy for his investment, which is practically every earnings conference call, he mentions the comps that he looks at as acquisition candidates are all valued at 3-3.2x net revenues on an enterprise value basis. He convinced Biglari to hold off on forcing the Put deal at $6 until April next year. $6 per share is $45 million. Sardar isn't a charitable guy. Here's a recent one, but there are several like this one. Also mentions by the CEO that he's not getting any younger and 'doesn't want to be hanging around this place forever.' He's old, rich, and running this company is no fun. He's going to sell it.

Yeah - who knows why people think it's worth $17 million on an exchange and $13 million over the counter, but I got really interested today. I still think this company gets sold by next April. And I think they sell it for $50 million give or take. I wonder if they will quantify how much they believe SEC reporting is costing them beyond what publishing simple financial statements on their website will cost. SG&A is $2million a quarter so there may be a material savings. I owned some going in to today at $2.20 average cost. But I own a lot more coming out of today. 7.46 million shares outstanding. CEO has a bunch of his family's capital tied up in it and is getting old and tired. Sardar's put extension buys them a bit over a year of time.

This announcement from last year discusses Ajit's unsolicited offer to take over MAC's (South Australia's Motor Insurance company) run-off book. The offer was only good on a private, exclusive, no-bid basis. Doesn't say the premium or float asset/liability transfer, but it is over $300 million, since $300m of the insurance premium paid will remain in Australia, $100m will remain for at least 5 years. https://premier.sa.gov.au/news/warren-buffett’s-berkshire-hathaway-expands-into-south-australia https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/au/news/breaking-news/berkshire-hathaway-to-manage-sas-back-book-of-ctp-claims-118716.aspx

If you liked Get Out (as I did) and Lakieith Stanfield (as I do) - he's in 'Get Out' and hilarious in 'Atlanta' - you might enjoy a movie we saw over the holidays called "Sorry to Bother You." Written and directed by Boots Riley, a first time filmmaker, it is pretty entertaining for a debut. It's not polished like 'Get Out' though. My Brother-in-law is one of those voting/nominating members for the film awards shows, so our family holidays have become a kind of mini film festival with 20-30 academy screeners to watch over a few weeks time. Really great to see stuff I wouldn't otherwise get to the theater to see.