WEB:The Oracle of Omaha- Warren Buffett
- MichaelC_AU
- MichaelC_AU
- Hugs
- MichaelC_AU
- Thruhiker
- ourisman
- MichaelC_AU
- DennisL
- MichaelC_AU
- TONYBRIG
This archived discussion is "read only".
For the corresponding "live" discussions, post in the active topic forum here.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »
» MichaelC_AU - Berkshire shareholders meeting
The fool has a wrap up on the big meeting at:http://www.fool.com/specials/1999/sp9905...
The meeting was May 3.
While Berkshire might not be a bargain, its annual reports are a steal, containing the thoughts of the great one. They available online at:
-- posted by MichaelC_AU
» MichaelC_AU - Sticking to what you understand.
Here's a quote I enjoyed:Buffett said he doesn't see the software world as clearly as the soft-drink world, and he doesn't think Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) will have a superior position to Coke. As he began eating his Dairy Queen Dilly Bar right there on stage, Buffett added: "The Dilly Bar is more certain in 10 years than any software."
-taken from previously posted link, by Yi-Hsin Chang (TMF Puck)
-- posted by MichaelC_AU
» Hugs - Sectors of certainty
Things that you understand is a heck of a delimiter on a whole bunch of stuff. But considering which has a better certainty of being around in 10 years, I'd pick the internet, e-commerce, advertising, and at least some kind of software over the dilly bar any day of the week. But the dilly bar is unquestionably easier to understand.Hu
-- posted by Hugs
» MichaelC_AU - Rule #2, VALUE
It is foolish to pick the internet at infinity PE. Anyway there is no sure play on the internet. Even if you thought Yahoo would be around, Yahoo is priced higher than its next 50 years of earnings! Good luck at the craps table!I pretty much agree with Mr. Buffett on his comment about the Dilly bar.
PE is very important! What else are you buying when you are buying a stock if not future earnings.
-- posted by MichaelC_AU
» ourisman - what new paradigm?
What is a company worth? In the short term, it may be worth whatever someone is willing to spend for it. But in the long term, people go into business to make money... I don't see how any other paradigm can work for long.Would you buy a money-losing travel agency [priceline.com] for more than you'd pay for the country's three largest airlines?
Would you buy a money-losing toy store [eToy] for more than you'd pay for Toys R Us or Mattel?
How can you pay those prices and ever hope to make money? As an owner, you're subsidizing a money-losing company.
By selling NYTimes best-sellers at a loss (Amazon), you're making gifts to your customers. Is this why anyone goes into business?
I agree that the Internet is a new paradigm for a medium in which business is done, and it obviously has tremendous potential. But Internet investing as it is currently being done doesn't represent a new paradigm for how to make money in the long term, at least not in my book.
-- posted by ourisman
» MichaelC_AU - Short yahoo
First of all shorts are not my kind of buy and hold investment!Second, I would not want to bet against the stupidity of all the, never invested until now, baby boomers, who are trying to make up for all of 30 years of under investing with a 3 month investment in AOL.
-- posted by MichaelC_AU
» DennisL - David O.,
I agree with what you said. In your last paragraph, you used the word "potential." I think that those who are investing long term in Internet companies are betting on that potential. For sure, it's not for the faint of heart because it is going to be quite some time before any of that potential is realized, if it is ever realized. The potential may not be realized because, as that Barons "amazon.bomb" article said, these .com companies are just middlemen, and who needs middlemen? Most people, given the opportunity, will buy directly from the company selling the good or service that the people want. Even if that direct purchase is done via the company's Web site, there is no middleman, the company makes profit, and the customer gets great convenience and a great price.-- posted by DennisL
» MichaelC_AU - BRK.A worth $90,000 per share?
An analyst, after considering Berkshire's insurance business, values the company's primary shares in excess of $90,000. BRKa now at $71,000 /share has never experienced a stock split since Warren Buffett gained control in the late 1960's, when it was trading in the low double digits.Article:
http://www.pathfinder.com/fortune/invest...
I really don't think anyone knows how much the stock is really worth, but the general consensus for years has been that Berkshire Hathaway is virtually an over priced closed end mutual fund selling way above its net asset value. Brokers have scoffed at BRK even through its run from $1000/share in the 80's. BRK investors have even conceeded that you are paying a premium for the world's best investment manager, but maybe after a look at the complicated analysis I mentioned above I will be convinced it is undervalued.
-- posted by MichaelC_AU
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next »
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.