Berkshire Seen Failing Buffett 5-Year Test for First Time (bloomberg)

[dcollon]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-02/berkshire-seen-failing-buffett-5-year-test-for-first-time.html

[Guest longinvestor]

I was waiting for the media to publish this story. And of course, Bloomberg did, on the dot of midnight, Jan 1, 2014. Guess I screwed up, should have bought the index 5 years ago versus putting 80% into BRK over this period? My choices at this moment are:

 

A) Put it all in a low cost index fund. Reap market returns over the long term of 5-7 % as we're told.

B) Buy an actively managed fund to have any chance of getting BRK like returns of the past. You have to pay up for performance expectations and upfront of course.

C) Do nothing, keep the money in BRK, pay no fees but reap modest returns. Very modest returns given their checkered past, I'm told the number to expect is 7 to 9% over the long term.

 

My head says B, it is giddy with greed especially after reading several posts on the "Your 2013 Returns" thread on COBF, don't we have some superstars with 15, 30, 50% (or more!) returns in our midst?

 

My gut is telling me to stick with C. Easy for lazy me. Guess I'll suffer the modest performance while sleeping well. 

[LC]

My gut is telling me to stick with C. Easy for lazy me. Guess I'll suffer the modest performance while sleeping well.

I agree! And, it jives with my favorite line (in my signature) of Buffett's!  ;D

[jay21]

I'm hoping that WEB rethinks his buyback program in response to this, but I doubt that will happen.

 

Also, I think they will increase IV by double digits still.

[frommi]

Why not

D) Be a value investor and find opportunities yourself?

[Guest longinvestor]

Why not

D) Be a value investor and find opportunities yourself?

 

I believe I did. Bought BRK between 2006 and 2010 and near or below BV. I'm done looking for a while, until something materially different happens to the BRK culture (that's not the end of WEB's reign).

[Kraven]

Michael Steinhardt going off on Buffett.  Looks like this was from a couple of years ago.

 

http://csinvesting.org/2014/01/05/the-temptations-of-saint-warren/

[cubsfan]

I remember that interview when it was done live a few years ago.

 

Steinhardt is a total blowhard POS.

 

 

He is still pissed from the time when Munger and Buffett

unfortunately had to take out his buddy John Gutfreund from Salomon.

 

If Gutfreund had not tried to protect their rogue trader multiple times

from the Feds - he would have not gotten himself fired.

 

 

[Guest longinvestor]

Michael Steinhardt going off on Buffett.  Looks like this was from a couple of years ago.

 

http://csinvesting.org/2014/01/05/the-temptations-of-saint-warren/

 

Looks like he has this long standing grouse with Buffett. He is FOS trying to downplay Buffett's philanthropy. Buffett has been giving all along his life, only that he has given the rest of it away recently. The "rest of it" has attracted attention because of the large amount involved. For ex. the Buffett children have been involved in their own charitable work for a while now. They just got a larger piece of the estate now. Also, Steinhardt has issues with the bulk of it going to "one guy", Gates. Steinhardt can go #@$$ himself.

 

The world will be a better place indeed with how well Buffett has played his philanthropic cards, allowing compounding to work, concentrating it in a few hands and requiring it all to be spent in short order and most importantly not playing charity capital allocator himself (outside circle of c).  This could well turn out to be a new model of giving that others will likely follow.

[Mephistopheles]

Michael Steinhardt going off on Buffett.  Looks like this was from a couple of years ago.

 

http://csinvesting.org/2014/01/05/the-temptations-of-saint-warren/

 

Looks like he has this long standing grouse with Buffett. He is FOS trying to downplay Buffett's philanthropy. Buffett has been giving all along his life, only that he has given the rest of it away recently. The "rest of it" has attracted attention because of the large amount involved. For ex. the Buffett children have been involved in their own charitable work for a while now. They just got a larger piece of the estate now. Also, Steinhardt has issues with the bulk of it going to "one guy", Gates. Steinhardt can go #@$$ himself.

 

The world will be a better place indeed with how well Buffett has played his philanthropic cards, allowing compounding to work, concentrating it in a few hands and requiring it all to be spent in short order and most importantly not playing charity capital allocator himself (outside circle of c).  This could well turn out to be a new model of giving that others will likely follow.

 

I like how Steinhardt mentioned several times how Buffett "thoughtlessly" gave the money away. If you know one thing about Buffett, it is that he doesn't put thought into where his money goes.

[Guest ajc]

Michael Steinhardt going off on Buffett.  Looks like this was from a couple of years ago.

 

http://csinvesting.org/2014/01/05/the-temptations-of-saint-warren/

 

Thanks, Kraven.

 

The more I hear it, the more the mainstream Buffett narrative sounds to me like it actually belongs to a ruthless, modern-day Ranse Stoddard.