Berkshire 2022 Annual Report

[MMM20]

https://rationalwalk.substack.com/p/berkshire-hathaways-2023-proxy-statement

 

Rather than insulting the reader’s intelligence with meaningless self-congratulatory verbiage and virtue signaling hypocrisy related to various trendy political and social issues, Berkshire’s proxy focuses on matters that are actually relevant to shareholders. The company refuses to engage in typical corporate “diversity” initiatives and rightfully focuses on merit and skin in the game rather than the color of one’s skin:

“Berkshire does not have a policy regarding the consideration of diversity in identifying nominees for director. In identifying director nominees, the Governance Committee does not seek diversity, however defined. Instead, as previously discussed, the Governance Committee looks for individuals who have very high integrity, business savvy, an owner-oriented attitude, a deep genuine interest in the Company and have had a significant investment in Berkshire shares relative to their resources for at least three years. 

Berkshire does have women and minorities on the board, but rather than insult them by treating these highly accomplished individuals as props to generate a checkmark on some diversity grid, the proxy emphasizes that they were selected due to what they bring to the table in terms of experience and ownership. In response to a shareholder proposal that is intended to force Berkshire into the practices of most other large companies, the proxy responds with the following statement:

“Berkshire’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion and the effectiveness of our companies’ related programs starts with our leaders, including our Board of Directors, of which four members are female and two members are racially or ethnically diverse. However, it should be noted that these directors were not selected for diversity purposes. To ensure long-term success for our shareholders, Berkshire encourages its leaders to execute diversity, equity and inclusion strategies that are tailored to the unique aspects of their businesses.” [Emphasis added]

Readers of the biographies covering Mr. Buffett’s life know that he was an advocate for civil rights from the earliest days of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. He has also made numerous comments over the years about the loss to individual businesses and to society as a whole when women are discriminated against in employment markets. None of this seems to matter to politically driven pressure campaigns intended to intimidate businesses to elevate skin color, gender, and sexual orientation over ownership and business acumen when it comes to corporate governance. 
 

Edited March 18, 2023 by MMM20

[Blugolds]

3 hours ago, MMM20 said:

https://rationalwalk.substack.com/p/berkshire-hathaways-2023-proxy-statement

 

Rather than insulting the reader’s intelligence with meaningless self-congratulatory verbiage and virtue signaling hypocrisy related to various trendy political and social issues, Berkshire’s proxy focuses on matters that are actually relevant to shareholders. The company refuses to engage in typical corporate “diversity” initiatives and rightfully focuses on merit and skin in the game rather than the color of one’s skin:

“Berkshire does not have a policy regarding the consideration of diversity in identifying nominees for director. In identifying director nominees, the Governance Committee does not seek diversity, however defined. Instead, as previously discussed, the Governance Committee looks for individuals who have very high integrity, business savvy, an owner-oriented attitude, a deep genuine interest in the Company and have had a significant investment in Berkshire shares relative to their resources for at least three years. 

Berkshire does have women and minorities on the board, but rather than insult them by treating these highly accomplished individuals as props to generate a checkmark on some diversity grid, the proxy emphasizes that they were selected due to what they bring to the table in terms of experience and ownership. In response to a shareholder proposal that is intended to force Berkshire into the practices of most other large companies, the proxy responds with the following statement:

“Berkshire’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion and the effectiveness of our companies’ related programs starts with our leaders, including our Board of Directors, of which four members are female and two members are racially or ethnically diverse. However, it should be noted that these directors were not selected for diversity purposes. To ensure long-term success for our shareholders, Berkshire encourages its leaders to execute diversity, equity and inclusion strategies that are tailored to the unique aspects of their businesses.” [Emphasis added]

Readers of the biographies covering Mr. Buffett’s life know that he was an advocate for civil rights from the earliest days of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. He has also made numerous comments over the years about the loss to individual businesses and to society as a whole when women are discriminated against in employment markets. None of this seems to matter to politically driven pressure campaigns intended to intimidate businesses to elevate skin color, gender, and sexual orientation over ownership and business acumen when it comes to corporate governance. 
 

 

Rational, logical, a voice of reason. I'd expect nothing less from Omaha. As someone racially/ethnically diverse, its refreshing to read that BRK #1 priority is shareholder benefit. I dont need the board to have an African/Asian, LBGTQ director on the Board, I need them to have the best person for the job. If that person happens to also be African/Asian LBGTQ, good for them. But you cant get your board seat on that merit alone...

 

The people who demand that there is diversity for diversity sake on a BOD are essentially demanding what they are attempting to combat. A BOD full of diversity with no merit is just as bad as a BOD with zero diversity full of rich old white guys aka "yes" men who got the position based on the good 'ol boy network or their alma mater. Swinging to one extreme is no better than the opposite extreme they are attempting to replace. Its madness. 

 

As mentioned, Omaha should be the least of their concerns, as they have always been a lighthouse of integrity in the turbulent ocean of deceit that is wall street. Said simply, their barking up the wrong tree. 

[whatstheofficerproblem]

3 hours ago, MMM20 said:

https://rationalwalk.substack.com/p/berkshire-hathaways-2023-proxy-statement

 

Rather than insulting the reader’s intelligence with meaningless self-congratulatory verbiage and virtue signaling hypocrisy related to various trendy political and social issues, Berkshire’s proxy focuses on matters that are actually relevant to shareholders. The company refuses to engage in typical corporate “diversity” initiatives and rightfully focuses on merit and skin in the game rather than the color of one’s skin:

“Berkshire does not have a policy regarding the consideration of diversity in identifying nominees for director. In identifying director nominees, the Governance Committee does not seek diversity, however defined. Instead, as previously discussed, the Governance Committee looks for individuals who have very high integrity, business savvy, an owner-oriented attitude, a deep genuine interest in the Company and have had a significant investment in Berkshire shares relative to their resources for at least three years. 

Berkshire does have women and minorities on the board, but rather than insult them by treating these highly accomplished individuals as props to generate a checkmark on some diversity grid, the proxy emphasizes that they were selected due to what they bring to the table in terms of experience and ownership. In response to a shareholder proposal that is intended to force Berkshire into the practices of most other large companies, the proxy responds with the following statement:

“Berkshire’s commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion and the effectiveness of our companies’ related programs starts with our leaders, including our Board of Directors, of which four members are female and two members are racially or ethnically diverse. However, it should be noted that these directors were not selected for diversity purposes. To ensure long-term success for our shareholders, Berkshire encourages its leaders to execute diversity, equity and inclusion strategies that are tailored to the unique aspects of their businesses.” [Emphasis added]

Readers of the biographies covering Mr. Buffett’s life know that he was an advocate for civil rights from the earliest days of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. He has also made numerous comments over the years about the loss to individual businesses and to society as a whole when women are discriminated against in employment markets. None of this seems to matter to politically driven pressure campaigns intended to intimidate businesses to elevate skin color, gender, and sexual orientation over ownership and business acumen when it comes to corporate governance. 
 

 

I am in tears, if only.. if only all companies had this policy, a lot of good people would have their share. DEI recruitment is even worse. I don't know where the world is going, there is now a filter in school admissions and after being admitted there is a filter in employment, this double filtering is nothing but insult. Thank you Berkshire for being the voice of reason in today's world, or whatever it is.

Edited March 18, 2023 by whatstheofficerproblem

[Paarslaars]

On 3/19/2023 at 12:16 AM, Blugolds11 said:

A BOD full of diversity with no merit is just as bad as a BOD with zero diversity full of rich old white guys aka "yes" men who got the position based on the good 'ol boy network or their alma mater.  

I would still argue the former is worse, as rich old white guys are still likely to have some form of merit to them as they are rich... even if the only thing they did is not fuck up inherited wealth.

[Spooky]

Are there any other companies out there that are following a similar board approach as Berkshire? It is really refreshing to read what they wrote in the proxy.

[yesman182]

Yeah, just about every private company. How many private CEOs are taking money out of their  pocket to hire a ESG consultant? And hiring an outside risk manager?