Subject: Re: Buffett sold more Apple
As of 6/30, Berkshire was down to $84B worth of Apple stock, compared to $135B three months earlier.

Somebody check my math. I wanted to have a look at how many shares were sold, and at roughly what price.

Apple holding at year end was worth $174.3 billion.
Share price was $192.53, so that corresponded to 905.3 million shares.

Apple holding at end Q1 was worth $135.4 billion.
Share price was $171.48, so that corresponded to 789.6 million shares.

Apple holding at end Q2 was worth $84.2 billion.
Share price was $210.62, so that corresponded to 399.8 million shares.

So, measured by share count, year-to-date 55.84% of the shares were sold: 505.5 million of them.
The Apple sales in Q2 alone were about 389.8 million shares.


Looking at the cash flow statement, total equity sales were $97,123 million year to June 30.
Subtracting the Q1 statement figure of $19,972 million, the stock sales in Q2 alone were $77,151 million.
(These figures are total sales, not sales-net-of-purchases)

It seems there were (unsurprisingly) no changes in the sizes of Coke, Amex, or Bank of America positions year to date. (BAC sales started in July it seems)
There were sales of about 4.1 million share of Chevron in Q2 alone, for which we might pencil in proceeds of around $640 million.
That means that all other sales in Q2 had a total value of about $76,511 million. This could be Apple, or some of the much smaller positions, but let's assume it was all Apple.
If proceeds were 76,511 million for 389.8 million shares sold during Q2 alone, that implies an average sale price of around $196.27.
(possibly a little less if some smaller positions were also sold during Q2).

So, it seems that the Apple sales took place almost entirely before the big price pop June 11-12, definitely not as a reaction to the opportunity it presented.

This lends credence to the notion that maybe (maybe) some additional Apple sales have taken place this quarter. The price that could be realized since end June is 14% more attractive, and that might be a factor.

Personally I think the dominant factor in the Apple reduction is China risk rather than valuation levels or tax rates, but he can't mention that because he is just too prominent. It would cause a poop storm of enormous size in both the financial and political worlds to come right out and say he was selling Apple stock because of perceived political risk from China's leadership.

Jim