Jump to content

Berkshire Q3 13F

Ballinvarosig Investors
 Share

Recommended Posts

boilermaker75 Rising Star

boilermaker75

Posted
Posted

 

Since Buffet's original purchase, no one would have ever lost money on BRK if they were patient. I'm always writing puts on BRK. Everything I have been put to I have either sold for above the put price or still hold with a nice gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jurgis Apprentice

Jurgis

Posted
Posted

 

Since Buffet's original purchase, no one would have ever lost money on BRK if they were patient. I'm always writing puts on BRK. Everything I have been put to I have either sold for above the put price or still hold with a nice gain.

 

That is true.

 

But it's also true that one could have sold BRK in March at a loss, bought other stocks and have outperformed BRK (and SP500) hugely since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boilermaker75 Rising Star

boilermaker75

Posted
Posted

 

Since Buffet's original purchase, no one would have ever lost money on BRK if they were patient. I'm always writing puts on BRK. Everything I have been put to I have either sold for above the put price or still hold with a nice gain.

 

That is true.

 

But it's also true that one could have sold BRK in March at a loss, bought other stocks and have outperformed BRK (and SP500) hugely since then.

 

Also true, but how many can do that? I probably would have lost even more trying that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jurgis Apprentice

Jurgis

Posted
Posted

 

Since Buffet's original purchase, no one would have ever lost money on BRK if they were patient. I'm always writing puts on BRK. Everything I have been put to I have either sold for above the put price or still hold with a nice gain.

 

That is true.

 

But it's also true that one could have sold BRK in March at a loss, bought other stocks and have outperformed BRK (and SP500) hugely since then.

 

Also true, but how many can do that? I probably would have lost even more trying that.

 

Yeah, but the context is Ackman's sale of BRK. And it quite possibly was not a big mistake considering his other portfolio moves. Although it's not easy to say for sure, since we don't know day-by-day cash position and buys/sells.

 

Personally, I did not sell BRK, but I sold-and-bought stocks in March/April/May that sometimes worked out great and sometimes resulted in hugely lost opportunity. So I would not blame Ackman for BRK sale at a loss during that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LearningMachine Mentor

LearningMachine

Posted
Posted

Here is what Buffett and Munger said in 1999 about buying a group of pharma stocks at below market multiple:

 

Yes, they might be trading at below market multiple, especially if you compare to some tech stocks, but these pharma stocks are not cheap.

If he's buying a basket of pharma stocks, then I wonder has he bought more than the ones listed in this 13F?

 

I would not be at all surprised if he's bought Glaxo (London listed) and Sanofi (Paris listed). Both are good companies and would fit into his basket approach. He has also owned both before, and both are arguably cheaper than when he owned previously. He could have bypassed the 13F listing requirement by buying both stocks on the local exchanges, something he has done before (Tesco).

 

Didn't he own Sanofi before?

Yes, he sold out after some time because Sanofi didn't go anywhere in terms of making money for shareholders.

 

Putting politics aside, I think Trump's attempt at taking away pricing power of drug companies is a big negative for drug stocks: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/20/trump-drug-prices-overseas-438819.

 

I'm surprised market didn't react as strongly as I thought it would on MRK, ABBV, BMY and PFE today.

 

Yes, it will get challenged in court, but it does bring the issue to limelight.  So, it will be harder for next administration to escape it.  If politicians start discussing it, it might eventually lead to the crux of the issue about changing the law to give Medicare power to negotiate prices, which currently it is not allowed to do so by law.  Wonder who helped draft that law :-): https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20160919.056632/full/

 

Canada negotiates and is able to get better prices.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DooDiligence Experienced

DooDiligence

Posted
Posted

Here is what Buffett and Munger said in 1999 about buying a group of pharma stocks at below market multiple:

 

Yes, they might be trading at below market multiple, especially if you compare to some tech stocks, but these pharma stocks are not cheap.

If he's buying a basket of pharma stocks, then I wonder has he bought more than the ones listed in this 13F?

 

I would not be at all surprised if he's bought Glaxo (London listed) and Sanofi (Paris listed). Both are good companies and would fit into his basket approach. He has also owned both before, and both are arguably cheaper than when he owned previously. He could have bypassed the 13F listing requirement by buying both stocks on the local exchanges, something he has done before (Tesco).

 

Didn't he own Sanofi before?

Yes, he sold out after some time because Sanofi didn't go anywhere in terms of making money for shareholders.

 

Putting politics aside, I think Trump's attempt at taking away pricing power of drug companies is a big negative for drug stocks: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/20/trump-drug-prices-overseas-438819.

 

I'm surprised market didn't react as strongly as I thought it would on MRK, ABBV, BMY and PFE today.

 

Yes, it will get challenged in court, but it does bring the issue to limelight.  So, it will be harder for next administration to escape it.  If politicians start discussing it, it might eventually lead to the crux of the issue about changing the law to give Medicare power to negotiate prices, which currently it is not allowed to do so by law.  Wonder who helped draft that law :-): https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20160919.056632/full/

 

Canada negotiates and is able to get better prices.

 

This has been bandied about before & I believe it will eventually get traction (if politicians can put politics aside).

 

www.policymed.com/2015/09/hillary-clinton-unveils-new-plan-for-lowering-drug-cost.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LearningMachine Mentor

LearningMachine

Posted
Posted

Here is what Buffett and Munger said in 1999 about buying a group of pharma stocks at below market multiple:

 

Yes, they might be trading at below market multiple, especially if you compare to some tech stocks, but these pharma stocks are not cheap.

If he's buying a basket of pharma stocks, then I wonder has he bought more than the ones listed in this 13F?

 

I would not be at all surprised if he's bought Glaxo (London listed) and Sanofi (Paris listed). Both are good companies and would fit into his basket approach. He has also owned both before, and both are arguably cheaper than when he owned previously. He could have bypassed the 13F listing requirement by buying both stocks on the local exchanges, something he has done before (Tesco).

 

Didn't he own Sanofi before?

Yes, he sold out after some time because Sanofi didn't go anywhere in terms of making money for shareholders.

 

Putting politics aside, I think Trump's attempt at taking away pricing power of drug companies is a big negative for drug stocks: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/20/trump-drug-prices-overseas-438819.

 

I'm surprised market didn't react as strongly as I thought it would on MRK, ABBV, BMY and PFE today.

 

Yes, it will get challenged in court, but it does bring the issue to limelight.  So, it will be harder for next administration to escape it.  If politicians start discussing it, it might eventually lead to the crux of the issue about changing the law to give Medicare power to negotiate prices, which currently it is not allowed to do so by law.  Wonder who helped draft that law :-): https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20160919.056632/full/

 

Canada negotiates and is able to get better prices.

 

This has been bandied about before & I believe it will eventually get traction (if politicians can put politics aside).

 

www.policymed.com/2015/09/hillary-clinton-unveils-new-plan-for-lowering-drug-cost.html

 

One thing that gives me a pause is how will some politicians put politics aside if their elections are getting funded by pharma companies (legal bribes).  If the issue gets enough limelight, they might not be able to escape it.  However, so far they have been able to come up with slogans to pacify the unsophisticated voters instead of doing anything.

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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...