WEB:The Oracle of Omaha- Warren Buffett

Top 275. Dec 8, 2005 6:48 PM

» Normxxx - "Poor Charlie"

The World According to "Poor Charlie"

By Charlie Munger | 8 December 2005

Charlie Munger has been Warren Buffett's partner and alter ego for more than 45 years. The pair has produced one of the best investing records in history. Shares of Berkshire Hathaway, of which Munger is vice chairman, have gained an annualized 24% over the past 40 years. The conglomerate, which the stock market values at $130 billion, owns and operates more than 65 businesses and invests in many others. Buffett's annual reports are studied by money managers. But Munger, 81, has always been media shy. That changed when Peter Kaufman compiled his writing and speeches in a new book,

<img align="left" src="http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/fc/3c/8f9c024128a0d931794a3010._AA240_.L.jpg" border="0"> Poor Charlie's Almanack: The Wit and Wisdom of Charles T. Munger
by Charles T. Munger

Here Munger speaks with Kiplinger's Steven Goldberg.

Why has Berkshire done so well?
Just remember that we had a long run and an early start, particularly in Warren's case. It's much easier for me to talk about Warren than myself, so let's talk about Warren. Not only did he have a long run from an early start, but he got very smart very young— then continuously improved over 50 years.

Buffett was a student of Ben Graham, the father of security analysis. He was buying deep value stocks— "cigar butts"— until you got involved.
If I'd never lived, Warren would have morphed into liking the better businesses better and being less interested in deep-value cigar butts. The supply of cigar butts was running out. And the tax code gives you an enormous advantage if you can find some things you can just sit with.

There are a whole lot of reasons, and Warren was a natural for always just getting smarter. The natural drift was going that way without Charlie Munger. But he'd been brainwashed a little by worshiping Ben Graham and making so much money following traditional Graham methods that I may have pushed him along a little faster in the direction that he was already going.

How do you work together?
Well, it's mostly the telephone and as the years have gone on, and I've passed 80 and Warren is 75, there's less contact on the phone. Warren is a lot busier now than he was when he was younger. Warren has an enormous amount of contact with the operating businesses compared to what he had early in his career. And, again, he does almost all of that by phone, although he does fly around some.

What are your work styles like?
We have certain things in common. We both hate to have too many forward commitments in our schedules. We both insist on a lot of time being available almost every day to just sit and think. That is very uncommon in American business. We read and think. So Warren and I do more reading and thinking and less doing than most people in business. We do that because we like that kind of a life. But we've turned that quirk into a positive outcome for ourselves.

How much of your success is from investing and how much from managing businesses?
Understanding how to be a good investor makes you a better business manager and vice versa.

Warren's way of managing businesses does not take a lot of time. I would bet that something like half of our business operations have never had the foot of Warren Buffet in them. It's not a very burdensome type of business management.

The business management record of Warren is pretty damn good, and I think it's frequently underestimated. He is a better business executive for spending no time engaged in micromanagement.

Your book takes a very multi-disciplinary approach. Why?
It's very useful to have a good grasp of all the big ideas in hard and soft science. A, it gives perspective. B, it gives a way for you to organize and file away experience in your head, so to speak.

How important is temperament in investing?
A lot of people with high IQs are terrible investors because they've got terrible temperaments. And that is why we say that having a certain kind of temperament is more important than brains. You need to keep raw irrational emotion under control. You need patience and discipline and an ability to take losses and adversity without going crazy. You need an ability to not be driven crazy by extreme success.

How should most individual investors invest?
Our standard prescription for the know-nothing investor with a long-term time horizon is a no-load index fund. I think that works better than relying on your stock broker. The people who are telling you to do something else are all being paid by commissions or fees. The result is that while index fund investing is becoming more and more popular, by and large it's not the individual investors that are doing it. It's the institutions.

What about people who want to pick stocks?
You're back to basic Ben Graham, with a few modifications. You really have to know a lot about business. You have to know a lot about competitive advantage. You have to know a lot about the maintainability of competitive advantage. You have to have a mind that quantifies things in terms of value. And you have to be able to compare those values with other values available in the stock market. So you're talking about a pretty complex body of knowledge.

What do you think of the efficient market theory, which holds that at any one time all knowledge by everyone about a stock is reflected in the price?
I think it is roughly right that the market is efficient, which makes it very hard to beat merely by being an intelligent investor. But I don't think it's totally efficient at all. And the difference between being totally efficient and somewhat efficient leaves an enormous opportunity for people like us to get these unusual records. It's efficient enough, so it's hard to have a great investment record. But it's by no means impossible. Nor is it something that only a very few people can do. The top three or four percent of the investment management world will do fine.

What would a good investor's portfolio look like? Would it look like the average mutual fund with 2% positions?
Not if they were doing it Munger style. The Berkshire-style investors tend to be less diversified than other people. The academics have done a terrible disservice to intelligent investors by glorifying the idea of diversification. Because I just think the whole concept is literally almost insane. It emphasizes feeling good about not having your investment results depart very much from average investment results. But why would you get on the bandwagon like that if somebody didn't make you with a whip and a gun?

Is finding bargains difficult in today's market?
We wouldn't have $45 billion lying around if you could always find things to do in any volume you wanted. Being rational in the investment world at a time when other people are losing their minds -- usually all it does is keep you out of something that causes a lot of trouble for other people. If you stayed away from the mania in the high-tech stocks at its peak, you were saved from disaster later, but you didn't make any money.

Should people be investing more abroad, particularly in emerging markets?
Different foreign cultures have very different friendliness to the passive shareholder from abroad. Some would be as reliable as the United States to invest in, and others would be way less reliable. Because it's hard to quantify which ones are reliable and why, most people don't think about it at all. That's crazy. It's a very important subject. Assuming China grows like crazy, how much of the proceeds of that growth are going to flow through to the passive foreign owners of Chinese stock? That is a very intelligent question that practically nobody asks.

What do you think of the U.S. trade and budget deficits -- and their impact on the dollar, which Berkshire is still betting against?
It's not at all clear exactly from some objective bunch of economic data just where the dollar ought to trade compared to the Euro. Who in the hell knows? It's clear that you can't run twin deficits on the scale that the U.S. has forever. As [economist] Herb Stein said, "If something can't go on forever, it will eventually stop." But knowing just when it's going to stop is a very difficult matter.

Is there a bubble in the real estate?
When I see people going to some old flea-bitten old condo and the list price is $1.8 million, and they decide to put it on the market for $2.2 million, and five people start bidding for it, and they sell it for $2.7 million, I say that's a bubble. So there are some bubbly places in the economy. I am amazed at the price of real estate in Manhattan.

So there is some bubble in the game. Is it going to go back to really cheap houses in good neighborhoods in good cities? I don't think so. So I think there will be huge collapses in some places, but, on average, I think that good houses in good places are going to be plenty expensive in future years.

Is there a bubble in energy stocks?
When it gets into these spikes, with shortages and uproar and so forth, people go bananas, but that's capitalism. If the price of automobiles were going up 40% a year, you'd have a boom in auto stocks. But if you stop to think about it, of the companies that you could have bought in, say, 1911, to hold for a long time, one of the very best stocks would have been Rockefeller's Standard Oil Trust. It became almost all of today's integrated oil companies.

How do you feel most corporate citizens behave in the U.S.?
Well, I disapprove of the way most executive compensation is arranged in America. I think it goes to gross excess. And I certainly don't like phony accounting that takes part of the real cost of running the business and doesn't run it through the income account as a charge against the reported earnings. I don't like dishonorable, lying accounting.

Do you think the stock market will return its long-term annualized 10% in the next decade?
A good figure for rational expectation would be no higher than 6%. I think it's unreasonable to assume that the world is going to try to arrange itself so that the inactive, asset-owning class is going to get a much higher share of the GDP than it normally gets. When you start thinking that way, you get into these modest figures. The reason the return has been so good in the past is that the price-earnings ratio went way up.

Ibbotson finds 10% average returns back to 1926, and Jeremy Siegel has found roughly the same back to 1802.
Jeremy Siegel's numbers are total balderdash. When you go back that long ago, you've got a different bunch of companies. You've got a bunch of railroads. It's a different world. I think it's like extrapolating human development by looking at the evolution of life from the worm on up. He's a nut case. There wasn't enough common stock investment for the ordinary person in 1880 to put in your eye.

What do you see for bonds?
The bond market has fewer opportunities now. The short-term rates are the same as the long-term rates, and the premium interest rate you get for taking risk is lower than it ought to be, given the risk. By definition, that's a world in which bond investment is much tougher to do with great advantage.

What do you expect in terms of returns for Berkshire Hathaway?
We have solemnly promised our shareholders that our future returns will be considerably below our previous returns.

But annual reports have been saying that year after year after year.
But lately we've been better at doing what we have long predicted.

What happens to Berkshire after the two of you?
Well, the world will go on and, in my opinion, Berkshire will still be a strong, rich place and with a central culture that will be shrewd and risk-averse. But do I think that we will get another person better than Warren to come in and replace Warren? I think the odds are against it.

______________

The contents of this letter/report does not necessarily reflect the opinions or viewpoint of normxxx. They are provided for informational/educational purposes only.

The content of this message is not to be construed as constituting market or investment advice. It is intended for educational purposes only. Individuals should consult with their own advisors for specific investment advice.

-- posted by Normxxx

Top 276. Dec 23, 2005 6:57 AM

» Kirk - P&G Files Suit Against Berkshire Unit

.
P&G Files Suit Against Berkshire Unit
Thursday December 22, 9:18 am ET
Procter & Gamble Files Suit Against Berkshire Hathaway Unit, Charging Copying of Products

CINCINNATI (AP) -- Procter & Gamble Co. said Thursday said it has filed a lawsuit against McLane Co., a food distributor owned by billionaire investor Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc., charging it with selling items that copy the packaging for well-known P&G brands.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. Federal District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, charges McLane and two subsidiaries with selling products that copy Procter & Gamble's Bounty, Charmin, and Vicks' NyQuil and DayQuil LiquiCaps brands, the company said in a statement.

"It is our belief that the defendants are selling products in packages that copy the famous P&G products and packages," P&G said. "These look-alike products can confuse people and are a disservice to consumers."

A P&G spokeswoman also said the company would seek damages from McLane. A spokeswoman for McLane, based in Temple, Texas, was not immediately available to comment.

Procter & Gamble, one of the world's biggest consumer products companies, also said it would ask for a preliminary injunction to order McLane to stop distributing the disputed products, and to notify their retailers to impound or return the products.

McLane is one of the nation's biggest food distribution and logistics companies, providing food, drinks, utensils and other products to convenience stores, mass retailers, fast-food chains and movie theaters around the world. Berkshire Hathaway acquired McLane from Wal-Mart in 2003.

-- posted by Kirk

Top 277. Jan 18, 2006 7:25 AM

» Kirk - Warren Buffett's Co. Buys Business Wire

.
OMAHA, Neb. - Berkshire Hathaway Inc., the investment company run by billionaire
Warren Buffett, on Tuesday said it was buying Business Wire, a privately held distributor of press releases, for an undisclosed amount.

Business Wire, which is based in San Francisco, will operate as a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, whose other holdings include the insurer Geico Corp. as well as stakes in American Express Co., Anheuser-Busch Cos. and The Coca-Cola Co.

Business Wire and Berkshire Hathaway said they expected the deal to close in the first quarter of the year.

Lorry Lokey, a former journalist and public relations executive, founded Business Wire in 1961. It is a major distributor of press releases and regulatory filings.

Berkshire said Business Wire's management team will remain in place, and day-to-day operations will not be affected by the acquisition.

Buffett "gave me a mandate to keep doing what we've been doing," said Business Wire's chief executive, Cathy Baron Tamraz. "Nothing really changes other than we'll be backed by a real giant."

Lokey will remain as chairman of Business Wire but will concentrate on his philanthropic pursuits, the companies said. Lokey has made contributions of more than $160 million to educational and medical research project over the past 10 years.

Calls seeking comment from Berkshire were not immediately returned Tuesday.

"I'm extremely happy about it," Tamraz said of the sale. "It's a great fit for Business Wire and for Berkshire."

-- posted by Kirk

.
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity...

Top 278. Jan 18, 2006 7:28 AM

» Kirk - Buffett firm cuts holdings 30% in H&R Block

Posted on Wed, Jan. 18, 2006
30 percent reduction reported
Buffett firm cuts holdings in Block
By MARK DAVIS
The Kansas City Star

Warren Buffett’s company reduced its holdings in H&R Block Inc. by 30 percent between March and September last year, according to new information made public Tuesday.

Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc., based in Omaha, reported its holdings in Block after “a request for confidential treatment” was denied Jan. 6. Berkshire’s previous reports of stock holdings for June 30 and Sept. 30 last year excluded its holdings of Block shares.

A Block spokesman declined to comment on Berkshire’s holdings but said Block shares have been a good investment. From May 2000 to the end of last year, an investment in Block would have grown 162 percent including dividends, said Nick Iammartino with Block. He said the Standard & Poor’s 500 lost 6 percent in that same period.

Berkshire’s new filing showed it held 18.76 million shares of Block at the end of September, or 5.7 percent of the company’s total shares. Berkshire held 21.83 million at the end of June and 27.02 million at the end of March, adjusting for an August stock split.

At Tuesday’s closing price of $25.42, Berkshire’s Sept. 30 holding of Block was worth $477 million.

Separately, Berkshire agreed Tuesday to buy Business Wire, a San Francisco-based firm that distributes news releases and other announcements by companies.

The companies did not disclose terms of the sale. Berkshire said Business Wire’s management would continue to operate the company.

For 2005, "Kirk's Newsletter Portfolio" was Up 13.2% vs. QQQQ up 1.2% vs. DJIA down 0.6% vs. S&P500 Up 4.8%

As of 12/31/05 the Total Return for "Kirk's Newsletter Portfolio" since 12/31/98 is Up 197% while the S&P500 only up 12%!!! & NASDAQ only up 1%!!! (my portfolio beta is roughly equal to that of QQQQ.)

What should be quite clear is a “buy and forget” market strategy using the DOW, S&P500 or NASDAQ would have under performed holding money funds over the past seven years while my newsletter portfolio nearly tripled every dollar invested

Key to my success is I pay attention to Garp. GARP stands for “Growth At a Reasonable Price.”

Make sure you read my latest article: NanoViricides, Inc. [NNVC] (01/09/06) where it seems I’ve had the good fortune to highlight a stock just before it took off to more than double!

-- posted by Kirk

Top 279. Jan 18, 2006 11:52 AM

» axolotl - Buffett warns about trade deficits - says $700 bill possible

in 2006. He says government debt does not worry him. I am concerned about both, Warren. Warren uses analogy that the USA is like a rich family that owns a hug farm the size of Texas and keeps selling off pieces - you don't notice how much it is adding up to. He says foreigners will own $15 trill one day - equal to size of current stock market. That is why I intuitively feel that Fortress America may be better, Warren, than Globalazation which I believe is mostly about cheap labor.

-- posted by axolotl

Top 280. Jan 20, 2006 8:18 AM

» Normxxx - Buffet warns of trouble

Buffet warns of trouble

By SCOTT SONNER. AP | 20 January 2006

RENO, Nev.— The U.S. trade deficit is a bigger threat to the domestic economy than either the federal budget deficit or consumer debt and could lead to “political turmoil,” billionaire investor Warren Buffett warned.

“Right now, the rest of the world owns $3-trillion more of us than we own of them,” Mr. Buffett told business students and faculty Tuesday at the University of Nevada, Reno. “In my view, it will create political turmoil at some point .... Pretty soon, I think there will be a big adjustment,” he said without elaborating.

Mr. Buffett, head of Omaha, Neb.-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., was in Reno for the opening of the company's R.C. Willey Home Furnishings store.

He spoke the same day Berkshire Hathaway disclosed its purchase of Business Wire, a privately held distributor of press releases, for an undisclosed amount.

San Francisco-based Business Wire will operate as a wholly owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, whose other holdings include the insurer Geico Corp. as well as stakes in American Express Co., Anheuser-Busch Cos. and The Coca-Cola Co. Business Wire competes with PR Newswire to distribute company regulatory filings and press releases to investors and the news media.

The U.S. trade deficit for the first 11 months of 2005 totaled $661.8-billion (U.S.), surpassing the previous annual record of $617.6-billion set in 2004. Economists say when December figures are included, the final deficit for 2005 will top $710-billion. Mr. Buffett said he expects it to top $700-billion this year.

“That's $2-billion a day,” he said. “We are like a super rich family that owns a farm the size of Texas. You sell off a little bit of the farm and you don't see it.”

Fifteen years ago, the U.S. had no trade deficit with China, he said.

“Now it's $200-billion. If we don't change the course, the rest of the world could own $15-trillion of us. That's pretty substantial. That's equal to the value of all American stock,” Mr. Buffett said.

“That's the big danger. Our national debt does not bother me. Our public debt is not at a crazy level,” he said.

Meanwhile, Mr. Buffett said U.S. companies generally are enjoying some of their best times ever.

“Profits are at close to record levels. So business in America is doing very well— better than its lower-paid workers, by some margin,” he said.

“This is a pro-business United States,” he said. “If you get a group of businessmen together, they'll complain about regulation and liability suits, all kinds of things. Some of those things they are right about and some of it they are just complaining to complain.”

U.S. corporations seem to be acting more ethically in the wake of scandals at Enron and elsewhere, but that's primarily due to bad publicity rather than new federal checks and balances, he said.

“I think corporate American to a fair degree has cleaned up its act,” he said. “The press has probably contributed very significantly to that. I think managers are behaving better because of fear rather than just becoming better managers.”

Mr. Buffett said students will have to decide personally whether a master's in business administration will benefit their careers or if they'd be better off plunging into the real world.

“The one piece of advice I can give you is, do what turns you on,” he said. “Do something that if you had all the money in the world, you'd still be doing it. You've got to have a reason to jump out of bed in the morning.”

______________

The contents of this letter/report does not necessarily reflect the opinions or viewpoint of normxxx. They are provided for informational/educational purposes only.

-- posted by Normxxx

http://www.businessinsurance.com/cgi-bin...

Top 281. Feb 6, 2006 6:12 AM

» Kirk - Former Gen Re chief, execs indicted

.
Former Gen Re chief, execs indicted
Criminal, civil charges filed over finite 'scheme'
By JUDY GREENWALD
February 06, 2006

NORFOLK, Va.—Are there bigger fish to fry?

That is the question now looming after federal jury criminal indictments were handed down and a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission suit was filed last week against former General Re Corp. and American International Group Inc. officials, say observers. Both focused on a 2000 loss portfolio transaction.

Observers speculate that the indictments in particular may be used by the federal government to obtain plea agreements and "ladder up" to even higher officials, including possibly former AIG Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Maurice R. Greenberg and Gen Re CEO Joseph P. Brandon, who have not been charged.

Some observers also say the indictments signal federal authorities' continued zeal for investigating similar deals embarked on by other insurers and reinsurers (see story page 22). Their interest has led to the virtual disappearance of finite risk products from the market.

Last week, a federal grand jury in Norfolk, Va., indicted former General Re Corp. CEO Ronald Ferguson, former Gen Re Chief Financial Officer Elizabeth Monrad and the reinsurer's former assistant general counsel, Robert Graham, charging they conspired to commit fraud in connection with the transaction. Also indicted was Christian Milton, formerly AIG's vp-reinsurance.

The SEC also has filed a civil suit against the four individuals, as well as retired Gen Re Senior Vp Christopher Garand, charging them with aiding and abetting securities fraud.

Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher said that, according to the indictments, the defendants "arranged a complex scheme to cook the books at AIG."

AIG conceded last year that the deal, a retrocessional loss portfolio transaction, did not transfer risk and restated its results to account for it as a deposit rather than as reinsurance. The indictment notes that "additional co-conspirators, not named as defendants herein, included senior-level executives at AIG and Gen Re."

None of the defendants still works at Gen Re. Mr. Ferguson retired as CEO of Stamford, Conn.-based Gen Re in 2001, and Ms Monrad left the reinsurer in 2003 to become CFO of New York-based TIAA-CREF, from which she resigned in November 2005. Mr. Graham retired from Gen Re in October of last year.

New York-based AIG terminated Mr. Milton last March. No other AIG officials face criminal charges stemming from the probe.

Mr. Brandon was not among those either criminally indicted or named as a defendant in the SEC suit, although he was served with a "Wells" notice last year, which informs recipients that the SEC is considering filing civil charges against them for violating securities laws. A Wells notice gives its recipient an opportunity to respond before the SEC takes action. A Gen Re spokesman could not be reached.

Observers say the defendants technically could face decades-long prison sentences, although such lengthy sentences are unlikely. They may also reach a plea bargain agreement, which was the case with the two former Gen Re officials indicted last year. John Houldsworth, former CEO of the reinsurer's Cologne Re Dublin unit, and Richard Napier, a former senior vp, pleaded guilty to criminal conspiracy charges related to the investigation in June.

Federal authorities will likely have a hard time winning their case if it does proceed to court, though, said Jacob S. Frenkel, a former SEC enforcement lawyer now with Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker P.A. in Rockville, Md.

"It's going to be real tough to get a jury to care, absent victims and the other hallmark signs that tend to gather a jury's fancy," he said.

Mr. Graham's attorney, Alan Vinegrad, a partner in the New York office of Covington & Burling, said, "Rob Graham is an attorney of the highest integrity, who always acted in good faith and within the bounds of the law. ... He looks forward to having his day in court and expects to be vindicated at trial."

Mr. Garand's attorney, Robert J. Cleary, a partner at Proskauer Rose L.L.P. in New York and chair of the firm's corporate defense and investigations practice, said, "This came as quite a surprise that the SEC would see fit to file a complaint against Mr. Garand, and I was quite dismayed that they saw fit to file such a complaint without giving us the courtesy of letting us know this was about to happen and sending me a copy of the complaint."

He said, "I have spent a lot of time investigating this matter, and in the course of our own investigation, Mr. Garand voluntarily met with the SEC on multiple occasions. He answered all of their questions; he helped educate them on the complex nuances of the reinsurance industry, and through all of that it is crystal clear to me that Mr. Garand did absolutely nothing wrong."

Some observers say the indictments and lawsuits could be part of a government strategy. "These indictments may only be the beginning of the investigation and could, in exchange for a plea bargain, be used to draw in other, higher executives at either AIG or Gen Re, or lead to testimony uncovering other alleged fraudulent conduct," said Jerry Reisman, a defense attorney with Reisman, Peirez & Reisman in Garden City, N.Y. He noted the government followed such a strategy in its Enron Corp. investigation.

"The common strategy is to ladder up," agreed Mr. Frenkel. He added, though, that it may be significant that while five people were named as defendants in the SEC suit, only four were cited in the criminal indictments. In a criminal case, guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, while in a civil case, such as the SEC's, only a preponderance of evidence is required.

It is not clear whether the fewer number of criminal indictments here is "an indication as to whether prosecutors can reach Hank Greenberg, or if the SEC even will be able to do so," said Mr. Frenkel.

It is also unclear why the government was apparently unable to obtain plea agreements, he said. "It may be those four defendants chose to fight or the criminal case cannot go any higher," he said.

Robert Heim, an attorney with Meyers & Heim in New York, said he does not believe the scope of the investigation will be broadened to include either Mr. Greenberg or other CEOs such as Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett. General Re is a Berkshire subsidiary.

"Normally, when the government announces charges against multiple defendants like they did today, they include all of the defendants at one time, and, by leaving out Mr. Greenberg and Mr. Buffett, it's most likely that the evidence is not there to make a case against those two," he said.

New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has indicated, for instance, that Mr. Greenberg will not be criminally charged, although a civil suit against him continues.

Mark A. Hofmann contributed to this report.

-- posted by Kirk

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060208/medi...

Top 282. Feb 8, 2006 8:39 AM

» Kirk - Warren Buffett to play investor in kids show

.
Wed Feb 8, 5:58 AM ET

LONDON (Reuters) - British brand management company DIC Entertainment said on Wednesday it had signed up

Warren Buffett to create an animated DVD series featuring the billionaire investor as a financial mentor for children.

The series titled "The Secret Millionaire's Club" will feature the words, voice and likeness of Buffett, who runs Nebraska-based investment company Berkshire Hathaway.

In the shows Buffett will help four children decide what local companies and businesses to invest in with story lines involving corporate raiders, crooked politicians and corrupt accountants, DIC Entertainment said in a statement.

Production is underway and will consist of 13 titles with the first two scheduled for release before the end of the year.

Financial terms of the partnership deal with Buffett, the world's second-richest person behind Microsoft founder
Bill Gates according to Forbes.com, were not disclosed.

DIC Entertainment, which has a market value of around 108 million pounds ($189 million), has its headquarters in Burbank, California.

-- posted by Kirk

Top 283. Feb 14, 2006 7:41 AM

» Kirk - Buffett to step down from Coca-Cola board

.
Buffett to step down from Coca-Cola board

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Billionaire investor
Warren Buffett will step down as a director of Coca-Cola Co. (NYSE:KO - news) this year after 17 years on the board, the world's largest soft-drink maker said on Tuesday.

Both Buffett and J. Pedro Reinhard have told Coca-Cola that they do not plan to seek reelection to the board at the upcoming annual shareholders meeting, the company said in a news release.

Buffett, who owns about 8.3 percent of Coca-Cola shares and has been on the board since 1989, cited increased demands on his time due to Berkshire Hathaway Inc.'s (NYSE:BRKA - news) acquisitions of companies . Berkshire Hathaway, the investment company controlled by Buffett, will maintain its Coca-Cola share holdings, the soft-drink maker said.

Buffett, an active Coca-Cola board member, was influential in the company backing out on its plans to buy Quaker Oats Co. and its crown jewel, the Gatorade sports drink, in 2000. Rival PepsiCo Inc. (NYSE:PEP - news) eventually acquired Quaker Oats, which has been key to the No. 2 soft drink maker's revenue and earnings growth.

Buffett also was a driving force behind the resignation of former Coke Chief Executive M. Douglas Ivester in 1999, according to published reports at the time.

Following Buffet and Reinhard's decision, three of Coke's 14 directors will not be standing for reelection this year.

Last November, another Coke director, Maria Elena Lagomasino, said she would not stand for reelection to the board following a request from her new employer.

(Additional reporting by Brad Dorfman in Chicago)

-- posted by Kirk