Jump to content

Buffett is an old white man crapping on tech he doesn't understand


SpecOps
 Share

Recommended Posts

...according to Marc Andreessen, because Buffett doesn't like Bitcoin. Perhaps he missed the 50% drop in Bitcoin?

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/andreessen-horowitz-vs-berkshire-2014-3

 

I think this is the same Andreessen that is accused by Carl ICahn of screwing over EBAY shareholders in the Skype flip

 

Bitcoin is not about technology, it is about mania, bubbles, money laundering, tax evasion, human psychology etc,  Buffett knows more about these things collectively than anyone in the world

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I disagree with Andreessen, technically, anyway.

 

Buffett is certainly old, white and a man. I'm guessing he probably doesn't really understand the encryption and all the technicalities of Bitcoin either.

 

I am confident, however, that Buffett knows much more about human psychology and economics though. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is the same Andreessen that is accused by Carl ICahn of screwing over EBAY shareholders in the Skype flip

 

 

Carl Icahn is a jackass.

 

 

Marc Andreessen is one of the most successful and respected VCs in the world, and a very smart guy.

 

 

And it looks like this quote originated from someone else at Andreessen Hororitz named Monte Malhotra.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he founded three companies, out of which two failed.

 

the third one would have also probably failed if twitter hadn't been one of the 45 random investments they made in 2005-2009 and the social media bubble would've been a few years late. (just a quick analysis based on what was written in wikipedia)

 

i know icahn plays dirty sometimes, but i have a hard time believing this andreessen dude is the most respected guy in VC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that I disagree with Andreessen, technically, anyway.

 

Buffett is certainly old, white and a man. I'm guessing he probably doesn't really understand the encryption and all the technicalities of Bitcoin either.

 

I am confident, however, that Buffett knows much more about human psychology and economics though. ;)

 

I dont know where people get this notion that Buffett doesn't understand technology.  I am willing to bet he knows more about the economics of technology than most technology investors.  That is why he stays away from "pure" technology companies.  The earnings cannot be reasonably predicted as far out as Mars, Geico, or WFC. 

 

Every one of his businesses is technology intensive.  The insurance industry operates on computer models, detailed climatic analysis that can only be done by supercomputers, etc.  BNSF uses the latest in communication, and computing to manage its entire business.  Mid-america uses switching systems, sophisticated modelling, solar power, wind power.  Need I go on. 

 

Read Snowball.  He was using a computer to play bridge at the dawn of the public internet.  He was using a cell phone to negotiate the LTCM deal in 1998, before most of us had one.  In Lowenstein he was criticized for not bringing out a Cd version of world book encyclopedia.  Probably the proper decision, for the wrong reasons given the advent of wikipedia which killed the paid encyclopedia business. 

 

Rest assured he understands technology. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand the jist of this thread, it's that if you're rich you're somehow smart, and intelligence is measured by wealth?  So Buffett is one of the richest people in the world, and that would mean he's somehow the smartest?

 

Look, I think this line of thinking is stupid.  Buffett buys and collects companies with a rare talent.  But I'm not sure that translates into some general level of oracle intelligence on all subjects. 

 

There are thousands of individuals who know more about tech compared to Buffett.  There are thousands who know more about cars.  Heck the average mechanic at Pep Boys probably knows more about cars compared to Buffett.

 

Let's respect that people have areas they specialize in that they can be experts in.  Being an expert in something doesn't mean you're suddenly rich and famous.  There are experts in a variety of fields who are content to make a normal salary and don't put wealth gathering above all else.  I think money is a bad measuring stick for expertise.  Most often those who are consumed with being experts are consumed by the thing they want to be experts in, not learning enough to make as much money as possible.

 

Being rich and famous doesn't make you an expert either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andreessen is a blowhard.  No reason to get all riled up about him being the a-hole that he is.

 

WEB's comments on bitcoin have to do with whether or not it is money and a good investment, not the technology behind it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1

 

also are we talking about  bitcon the tech/algo behind it or the merits of bitcon as a currency.

 

sure WEB prob is not an expert in the tech/alog (i'll bet neither is Andreessen ) but if we are talking about currency now i am sure WEB has a good deal of knowledge behind that.

 

I can't say that I disagree with Andreessen, technically, anyway.

 

Buffett is certainly old, white and a man. I'm guessing he probably doesn't really understand the encryption and all the technicalities of Bitcoin either.

 

I am confident, however, that Buffett knows much more about human psychology and economics though. ;)

 

I dont know where people get this notion that Buffett doesn't understand technology.  I am willing to bet he knows more about the economics of technology than most technology investors.  That is why he stays away from "pure" technology companies.  The earnings cannot be reasonably predicted as far out as Mars, Geico, or WFC. 

 

Every one of his businesses is technology intensive.  The insurance industry operates on computer models, detailed climatic analysis that can only be done by supercomputers, etc.  BNSF uses the latest in communication, and computing to manage its entire business.  Mid-america uses switching systems, sophisticated modelling, solar power, wind power.  Need I go on. 

 

Read Snowball.  He was using a computer to play bridge at the dawn of the public internet.  He was using a cell phone to negotiate the LTCM deal in 1998, before most of us had one.  In Lowenstein he was criticized for not bringing out a Cd version of world book encyclopedia.  Probably the proper decision, for the wrong reasons given the advent of wikipedia which killed the paid encyclopedia business. 

 

Rest assured he understands technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To paraphrase, I believe Buffett told Becky Quick on CNBC interview that Bitcoin is an instantaneous money order in essence.  As a result, it has no intrinsic value in and of itself so buying them as an investment doesn't make sense and using them for transactions subjects the holder to speculative fluctuations in the exchange rate.  It's not a matter of liking it or not - it's an assessment of value.

 

I understand the value as a result of scarcity argument, but that's not an investment, it's price speculation.  I also understand the value in terms of computing power required to "mine" each subsequent coin increasing the cost of each additional coin, but just because something costs a lot doesn't give it intrinsic value.

 

Quite frankly, they will be "all that" when world currencies are quoted in Bitcoins not the other way around.  Widespread acceptance is they key here.  All Bitcoin has to do to get there is replace the visceral feel and centuries old previous value store of heavy gold, displace the existing global currencies (US Dollar, Euro, Renmninbi etc) by convincing governments to forfeit their money printing capabilities . . . no need to continue past this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand the jist of this thread, it's that if you're rich you're somehow smart, and intelligence is measured by wealth?  So Buffett is one of the richest people in the world, and that would mean he's somehow the smartest?

 

What annoys me is that if the most accomplished investor of all times calls something a bubble he suddenly is 'an old white man who doesn't understand technology'. During a week when a VR glass company gets taken over for $2b and an internet storage company with annual revenue of $124m vs profit of $-168m IPO's at a > 2$b valuation. It's encouraging the madness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watch, Warren is gonna send his homey BillG to straighten Marc out. Marc still mad about that.

 

 

I don't think WEB's views on bitcoin have anything to do with technology, and Marc's view just smacks of the narcissist and self-absorbed Silicon Valley worldview.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is the same Andreessen that is accused by Carl ICahn of screwing over EBAY shareholders in the Skype flip

 

 

Carl Icahn is a jackass.

 

 

Marc Andreessen is one of the most successful and respected VCs in the world, and a very smart guy.

 

 

 

Doesn't mean ICahn is wrong though and Marc didn't screw over Ebay shareholders :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair I don't think Buffett accurately assessed BitCoin.

 

He compared it to Western Union, just a way to transfer money from one person to another.  However it is more than that, since you can buy BitCoins, and keep them, sort of how you can buy another currency and keep it, hence BitCoins do have a value relative to other currencies.  The IRS has ruled that it is a property, not a currency, but that is still different than Buffett's definition.

 

I think the currency is prone to theft and fraud and there is not a legal framework around it as there is with other currencies.  What keeps a currency stable is the perception of its reliability and BitCoin has none.

 

So in short I don't really understand Buffett's view of BitCoin, nor do I understand Andreessen's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When WEB weighs in, forcefully and directly as with Bitcoin, the pool of speculator-suckers who are on the other side of the VC or market makers got smaller. Just makes it that much harder for them to pick pockets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is the same Andreessen that is accused by Carl ICahn of screwing over EBAY shareholders in the Skype flip

 

 

Carl Icahn is a jackass.

 

 

Marc Andreessen is one of the most successful and respected VCs in the world, and a very smart guy.

 

 

 

Doesn't mean ICahn is wrong though and Marc didn't screw over Ebay shareholders :p

 

 

Fair enough. iCahn is still a jackass though.  ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I understand the jist of this thread, it's that if you're rich you're somehow smart, and intelligence is measured by wealth?  So Buffett is one of the richest people in the world, and that would mean he's somehow the smartest?

 

Look, I think this line of thinking is stupid.  Buffett buys and collects companies with a rare talent.  But I'm not sure that translates into some general level of oracle intelligence on all subjects. 

 

There are thousands of individuals who know more about tech compared to Buffett.  There are thousands who know more about cars.  Heck the average mechanic at Pep Boys probably knows more about cars compared to Buffett.

 

Let's respect that people have areas they specialize in that they can be experts in.  Being an expert in something doesn't mean you're suddenly rich and famous.  There are experts in a variety of fields who are content to make a normal salary and don't put wealth gathering above all else.  I think money is a bad measuring stick for expertise.  Most often those who are consumed with being experts are consumed by the thing they want to be experts in, not learning enough to make as much money as possible.

 

Being rich and famous doesn't make you an expert either.

 

Well said Nate!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andreessen is good at blowing bubbles and cashing out before they burst, because that's the business he's in (finding greater fools).

 

Andreessen on value investing vs venture capital:

1/Venture capital and value investing fundamentally differ in one key way: VC = long change; VI = short change. However...

2/Otherwise I think venture capital has more in common with value investing than any other kind of investing. For example:

https://twitter.com/pmarca/status/448633135974977536

 

HP bought Autonomy for $10 billion with Andreessen serving on the board.

 

Andreessen serves on the board of Facebook,[3] eBay, Kno,[43] Hewlett-Packard, Stanford Hospital,[44] Bump Technologies, Anki,[45] Oculus VR,[46] and TinyCo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Andreessen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he saw it exactly for what it is . It is a only money ledger that solved the double spending problem. What he also said was that it was indeed a revolutionary tech, but not practical to use as money because of the fluctuations. And it is also difficult to value. So he stays away from it.

 

http://blockchain.info/nl/charts/n-transactions

 

If you look, nobody is using it to actually transact with other people, despite the hype. It has the same number of transactions in the block chain then when it was virtually unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...