- Joined
- 25 July 2016
- Posts
- 334
- Reactions
- 674
AAPL is very expensive currently. I would suggest BRK sold mainly due to this reason and can't find anything currently worth buying to replace it. Another GFC? Yes, BRK would go down the same again. They are not going to sell all their equities.Well old Wazza been unloading mega to cash lately so you might want to revise that quote . I got a feeling he learnt from GFC where BRK lost 55% , not happening again . . Dont know the exact figure but BRK got to be way more than 50% cash at this very moment . Edit ok seems like he is about 30% cash atm , my mistake
https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2024/08/09/a-buffetting-wind/#:~:text=The CEO of Berkshire Hathaway,holds $277 billion in cash.View attachment 182343
Berkshire sold some other stuff as well but not to the $value of AAPL and maybe Berkshire has done what i do ( take MY investment cash out , and let the profits run )AAPL is very expensive currently. I would suggest BRK sold mainly due to this reason and can't find anything currently worth buying to replace it. Another GFC? Yes, BRK would go down the same again. They are not going to sell all their equities.
something to remember when assessing his investment moves , he doesn't always just buy $xxx Million in shares , often he gets a special deal AND a director on the boardbecause he's a cunning scavenger
Sorry to be off topic but I've been in to the NASDAQ these past 12mo. though out for just over a month and this post caught my eye.I just dont get this obsession with Buffet/BRK . Sure between 1980 and 2000 Buffet was an investing god but thats long over . Data will set you free from misconceptions , cult members have zero objectivity . I am not posting anymore comparison charts , i am not pointing out BRK sold down as much as SPX in gfc . None of that matters to cult members . Ive done all this many times over the years and the cults eyes just glaze over and filter that out . I contemplated blocking all cult members but there might be less than 20% of posts left to see. AND as many threads in here end up , so far of topic its crazy , yeah i am guilty of that as well
well yes , Berkshire has developed a cult of personality , and Warren has thrown out years of simple and successful tips , but that is just very clever advertising , fancy a billionaire financier/predator that does You-Tube videos on buying McDonalds for breakfast on the way to the office ( instead of flashing a designer watch at some meeting )I just dont get this obsession with Buffet/BRK . Sure between 1980 and 2000 Buffet was an investing god but thats long over . Data will set you free from misconceptions , cult members have zero objectivity . I am not posting anymore comparison charts , i am not pointing out BRK sold down as much as SPX in gfc . None of that matters to cult members . Ive done all this many times over the years and the cults eyes just glaze over and filter that out . I contemplated blocking all cult members but there might be less than 20% of posts left to see. AND as many threads in here end up , so far of topic its crazy , yeah i am guilty of that as well
indeed it will , although that should not impact my holdings much as i have very little US direct exposure ( similar to my China exposure )Sorry to be off topic but I've been in to the NASDAQ these past 12mo. though out for just over a month and this post caught my eye.
The main reason Buffet/BRK is in the news atm is that he is selling down $Gazillions of AAPL thus releasing stock which for some reason means ETF's and Funds have to rearrange the percentage of holdings in AAPL which will affect the share price and by extension the market in other stocks. This will affect the NASDAQ and other indices.
gg
Total returns / accumulation index only way to compare returns in this scenario , BRK paid dividends only once and that was voted on while Buffet was on toilet " apparently"We'll try to go back on topic, sort of.
The Aussie market on average is definitely underperforming in the long term.
View attachment 182384
Some stocks in all indexes never pay a dividend end throughout their entire life though, even the ones that do the SP usually discounts by the div amount when they go to ex div. Pretty sure one of his protocols was to not buy companies that pay divs but rather invest the money back into the company for further growth.Total returns / accumulation index only way to compare returns in this scenario , BRK paid dividends only once and that was voted on while Buffet was on toilet " apparently"apples to apples please , oranges got nothing to do with it . Thats the chart of a cult member
and that is good thing if you are hunting for fair value in the current markets , there are some near reasonable prices without being perennial flea-bagsWe'll try to go back on topic, sort of.
The Aussie market on average is definitely underperforming in the long term.
View attachment 182384
i should have added DSK and MXI to that listand that is good thing if you are hunting for fair value in the current markets , there are some near reasonable prices without being perennial flea-bags
for instance recent buys ( the last three months ) included RMC and SRG
Firstly BRK total return is reflected in the share price but DJI and XAO are not as they pay regular annual divs . making your implied returns above redundant . on TV use DJITR or SPXTR , not sure there is an ASX total return on TV with data that far back but it is accessible elsewhere on net , google is your friend thereif you were sensible when he started trading you couldn't really lose overall.
Was going to say, we need to include dividends in 0z...We'll try to go back on topic, sort of.
The Aussie market on average is definitely underperforming in the long term.
View attachment 182384
No doubt about that:This is the S&P 500, not a total return index. I bet if you got the top US and Au stocks over 50 years and compared total returns they would still beat us hands down.
View attachment 182401
Thanks @TimeISmoney , and just to completely bring us back on track the title of the thread isWe'll try to go back on topic, sort of.
The Aussie market on average is definitely underperforming in the long term.
View attachment 182384
Thanks @TimeISmoney , and just to completely bring us back on track the title of the thread isWe'll try to go back on topic, sort of.
The Aussie market on average is definitely underperforming in the long term.
View attachment 182384
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?