Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, DCG said:

Curious what they see in Sirius XM. Seems like they face way too much competition these days.

 

With their LSXMA & LSXMK shares, they will own almost 30% of "new" SIRI after the collapse of LSXM... & SIRI into 1 share class. 

Edited by jefke
Posted

Word on the street is that, Buffett’ Apple stake is now a super smooth nice round number rivalling Coka Cola ‘ roundness. 
 

I suppose Tim Cook wouldn’t want to mess that up by doing share-split with odd numbers, going forward. 

Posted

Blaspheme for Berkshire owners to be talking about stock splitting (haha) - of any equity BRK.A or otherwise.  I do understand why BRK.B has split over time and there were valid reasons each time - one being the Burlington transaction. 

 

Splitting stocks is for promoters.  Used to help retail stock salesman make more brokerage commission, now comes in the form of payment for order flow from Robin Hood/Schwab.  One could make argument for management if you want to buy a lot of stock back, splitting will create more liquidity.  I just don't know enough to fully unpack stock splits but curious if others have more insight.  

Posted
2 minutes ago, dutchman said:

do we know if he's exiting bac or if he's just trying to get under 10%?  tia 

 

we don't know.  He had permission to go as high as 25%.  He started selling.  Price went down and he stopped - maybe just temporarily.  He is still above 10% so far.

Posted
10 minutes ago, gfp said:

 

we don't know.  He had permission to go as high as 25%.  He started selling.  Price went down and he stopped - maybe just temporarily.  He is still above 10% so far.

Maybe he’ll randomly sell it down to 400M shares too. 🤔

Posted
4 hours ago, Xerxes said:

Word on the street is that, Buffett’ Apple stake is now a super smooth nice round number rivalling Coka Cola ‘ roundness. 
 

I suppose Tim Cook wouldn’t want to mess that up by doing share-split with odd numbers, going forward

 

Ha! 😅 - -But I have to give with regard to the share numbers owned are totally identical by last reporting.

Posted
4 minutes ago, KPO said:

Maybe he’ll randomly sell it down to 400M shares too. 🤔

That is rather bizarre!  If he's done selling he probably figures it won't be long before Berkshire owns as much or more of AAPL than before he began selling due to share buybacks.

Posted (edited)

I don't understand the fixation of the press and this board with the total number of shares. Why wouldn't Buffett sell more Apple in Q3? If he thought $188 was an overvalued price for Apple shares, $225 is even a better price to sell. 

Edited by Munger_Disciple
Posted
15 minutes ago, Munger_Disciple said:

Why wouldn't Buffett sell more Apple in Q3? If he thought $188 was an overvalued price for Apple shares, $225 is even a better price to sell. 

 

I don't think he planned / intended to sell all of his AAPL shares this year so you gotta stop somewhere.  When people saw the even number they figure he stopped.  We'll find out next quarter.

 

The last bit was sold at $207.64 /share average - so he did get a little bit of the AI pop action for $1.3 billion worth.

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, gfp said:

 

I don't think he planned / intended to sell all of his AAPL shares this year so you gotta stop somewhere.  When people saw the even number they figure he stopped.  We'll find out next quarter.

 

The last bit was sold at $207.64 /share average - so he did get a little bit of the AI pop action for $1.3 billion worth.

 

We don't know for sure but it's possible that Buffett may sell more AAPL shares in the future at some price if it is high enough. He generally doesn't seems to stop once he starts selling a position (although he said at the AGM that Abel will likely inherit a reduced AAPL position when he takes over). People think since KO holding is at 400 million shares, Buffett will stop at that number of AAPL shares. But my reading is that Buffett is more comfortable with KO than AAPL. Plus he never sold a single share of KO unlike AAPL. But I agree that Q3 results would be quite interesting. 

Edited by Munger_Disciple
Posted (edited)

What I heard on the annual meeting is that he said 'chances are very high that Apple still is his biggest position at the end of the year'.

 

There is only 1 scenario in which he would keep the possibility open that Apple wouldn't be his biggest position, and that is the scenario in which continues to sell as much as he can.

 

So that remains my base case.

Edited by janusdr
Posted
4 minutes ago, janusdr said:

What I heard on the annual meeting is that he said 'chances are very high that Apple still is his biggest position at the end of the year'.

 

There is only 1 scenario in which he would keep the possibility open that Apple wouldn't be his biggest position, and that is the scenario in which continues to sell as much as he can.

 

So that remains my base case.

 

He can sell another 200 million shares of Apple and it would still be the largest equity holding for Berkshire at roughly $45 billion. 

Posted

Do you think WB will be haunted by the Ghost of Charlie Munger, Jacob Marley style, this Christmas if AAPL continues its upward trajectory? 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Eldad said:

Do you think WB will be haunted by the Ghost of Charlie Munger, Jacob Marley style, this Christmas if AAPL continues its upward trajectory? 

 

Let it go. Total waste of your time and mental energy.

 

Not a matter for any of us here on CoBF. Your only feasible reaction on the AAPL sale is [Berkshire] hold, sell - whole or partially, or buy more.

 

No matter your stance related to Mr. Buffetts doings on this Berkshire position, you had no influence on the decision when it was made, - what so ever. No matter what you think about it by now, it has been a homerun. 

 

In short, it's 'the privilege' of investing in a majority controlled listed conglomerate. Get used to it, or those kind of investments are not for you.

Posted
2 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Let it go. Total waste of your time and mental energy.

 

Not a matter for any of us here on CoBF. Your only feasible reaction on the AAPL sale is [Berkshire] hold, sell - whole or partially, or buy more.

 

No matter your stance related to Mr. Buffetts doings on this Berkshire position, you had no influence on the decision when it was made, - what so ever. No matter what you think about it by now, it has been a homerun. 

 

In short, it's 'the privilege' of investing in a majority controlled listed conglomerate. Get used to it, or those kind of investments are not for you.

Haha you are right. It was meant to be a joke. 

Posted
3 hours ago, ValueMaven said:

we dont need more P&C subs ... we recently bought alleghany

 

Are there any areas of reinsurance or P/C insurance, where Everest may provide some new business or business lines to the pallette of Berkshires?

Posted
9 hours ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Are there any areas of reinsurance or P/C insurance, where Everest may provide some new business or business lines to the pallette of Berkshires?

 

No.  With National Indemnity (think very large complex P&C policies), GEICO (US Auto), Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance (former AIG team - P&C, much smaller and faster book of biz), Alleghany (P&C and reinsurance - more internationally focused) we have it all mostly covered.  Which is why floating Chubb as an M&A target wont happen either.  

Posted

Only place in risk bearing vertical I can think BRK not materially present is the fronting model (Trisura - publicly traded in Canada, State National which is Markel, there are some others) - which is the sexy vertical.  Do not see BRK fronting deals as a business.  BRK being the deepest pocket and courts would make BRK pay even if there was not a financial default.  Fronting kinda goes against the principals of Mr. Buffett as well - its insurance bearding.  They may some some on the books but have not seen Berkshire market fronting as a business like others.  

 

Mr. Buffett has steered away from writing Homeowners policies as well.  They do it but not at scale.  He is quoted as saying the base policy Homeowners limits are deceiving (in favor of insured, not the insurance company).  If you take all HO policy limits including all the coverage extensions with state mandatory endorsements - the risk per policy is too large to support paltry premium ergo not a profitable enterprise.  I agree by the way.  Mr. Jain has also said Cyber Liability is of no interest and thats all the rage today for growth, growth, growth.  

 

Good news for Berkshire is rise and marketability of Excess & Surplus Lines insurance brought by wholesale brokerage will bring more unique risks (agnostic to line of business) to Berkshire's table without having to spin up new subsidiaries/change in model, Berkshire gets to just sit back and have brokers serve up deal after deal and wait for Berkshire's price to hit the bid.  

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
×
×
  • Create New...