Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Discussion of the Stock portion of the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
robtkatz
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:43 pm

Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by robtkatz » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:28 pm

Why not BRKB: Berkshire Hathaway INC for the stock portion of the Permanent Portfolio?
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by dualstow » Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:49 pm

Not enough volatility.
Too many eggs in one basket.
Manager risk.

A fine vp choice, though.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
mukramesh
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 3:27 pm

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by mukramesh » Fri Jan 23, 2015 5:02 pm

Why use Berkshire Hathaway? In your opinion, what advantage is there in using it over a general stock index for the PP?
dragoncar
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1111
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by dragoncar » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:23 pm

mukramesh wrote: Why use Berkshire Hathaway? In your opinion, what advantage is there in using it over a general stock index for the PP?
One advantage is no dividends if you are accumulating
robtkatz
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:43 pm

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by robtkatz » Fri Jan 23, 2015 8:04 pm

mukramesh wrote: Why use Berkshire Hathaway? In your opinion, what advantage is there in using it over a general stock index for the PP?
Berkshire Hathaway is a multinational conglomeration of a diverse array of stocks  picked by a guy who has beaten the S&P repeatedly, and with lower fees than any ETF.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by MachineGhost » Sat Jan 24, 2015 4:36 pm

Tracking error?
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
bedraggled
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:20 am

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by bedraggled » Tue Jan 27, 2015 3:23 am

The guys running Berkshire are getting very old.  An article on cbsmarketwatch.com said their new hires did not beat the s & p 500 in 2014.

The no fees idea is nice but VTI may be the better bet.
robtkatz
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:43 pm

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by robtkatz » Thu Jan 29, 2015 7:45 am

bedraggled wrote: The guys running Berkshire are getting very old.  An article on cbsmarketwatch.com said their new hires did not beat the s & p 500 in 2014.

The no fees idea is nice but VTI may be the better bet.
Yeah, I'm wondering what'll happen to Berkshire Hathaway when Buffett departs.  What'll be it's price?  and will it even continue to trade?
bedraggled
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:20 am

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by bedraggled » Thu Jan 29, 2015 9:04 am

In Buffett videos on Youtube, Warren suggested the returns for Berkshire would approach normalcy.

The new people, who probably will not have Buffett's or Munger's talent, may effect just that.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by dualstow » Thu Jan 29, 2015 10:51 am

robtkatz wrote:
mukramesh wrote: Why use Berkshire Hathaway? In your opinion, what advantage is there in using it over a general stock index for the PP?
Berkshire Hathaway is a multinational conglomeration of a diverse array of stocks  picked by a guy who has beaten the S&P repeatedly, and with lower fees than any ETF.
However, it's very telling that that guy who has beaten the S&P has chosen the S&P as the investment for his progeny. Just google it even you haven't seen it already: Buffett wants his heirs to use 90% S&P, 10% cash or short-term treasuries. Not Berkshire shares.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
Sam Brazil
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 1:01 pm

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by Sam Brazil » Thu Feb 26, 2015 7:37 pm

There may be more underlying the story of why he wants his heirs to be in the S&P500. IIRC, Buffett has some very strong beliefs around not giving his heirs a lot of wealth. He has a "I worked hard, so you have to make your own way" type of mentality. He's definitely not solving for maximizing his heirs' wealth when it comes to all his decisions.

More telling would be what he's doing with money that he plans to donate or go to causes that he cares about, beyond enriching his "lucky sperm club" members.
User avatar
MachineGhost
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 10054
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:31 am

Re: Why not Berkshire Hathaway?

Post by MachineGhost » Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:18 pm

Sam Brazil wrote: More telling would be what he's doing with money that he plans to donate or go to causes that he cares about, beyond enriching his "lucky sperm club" members.
Its all going to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which, so far, aren't careerists.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes

Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet.  I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
Post Reply