Stocks A to Z / Stocks B / Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A)
No. of Recommendations: 3
No. of Recommendations: 2
I read the article and there doesn't seem to be a whole lot there. I was actually confused when the article ended so abruptly.
No. of Recommendations: 1
seemed pretty damming to me if true.
perhaps Berkshire puts out a press release to address it.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Good morning Nola, thanks for sharing. That story might explain the seller of approximately two million shares early this week. IF , If, it's accurate, this should shake us all to our bones. Buffett should call Becky this morning, to clear this up. We should all be prepared, IF huge IF , this report is accurate, Buffett might retire, over the weekend. I'm trying to convince myself it's fake news.
No. of Recommendations: 9
Yeah I guess I feel the opposite and this doesn't strike me as a big deal at all. We'll see what comes of it. I predict: not much
No. of Recommendations: 9
If, it's accurate, this should shake us all to our bones.
Mhm, why am I not impressed? Maybe because the article itself does not support the wrongdoing it claims?
It's basis is this:
Buffett: “I can’t be buying what Berkshire is buying and I’ve got some money around and therefore I go into my second choices or into tiny little companies.”
The shocking thing according to them is this:
roughly two decades of Buffett’s personal trades were included in a leak of IRS data obtained by ProPublica.....On at least three occasions, Buffett has traded stocks in his personal account in the same quarter or the quarter before Berkshire bought or sold shares of the same companies
Where are these 3 occasions of "insider trading", of Buffett profiting from knowing Berkshire moves? I was reading and re-reading the article. All I found was this:
In October 2012, Buffett made another noteworthy personal trade. Over several days, he sold $35 million worth of Johnson & Johnson shares. At that point, Berkshire had effectively revealed that it, too, had sold Johnson & Johnson shares.
What means "At that point"? And what "revealed"? Does "revealed" mean Berkshire sold a few days after Buffett did? So did he got a higher price than if he had waited with his sale until Berkshire's was done? "Revealed" is different from "sold". All it says is that Berkshire then made public a sale. Maybe a sale that happened before Buffett sold J&J himself, with him waiting with his own sale until the sale from Berkshire did influence the market price (with him getting a lower price then).
Without naming exact dates for both sales that's just sensational BS --- and the authors are of course know that.
If, it's accurate, this should shake us all to our bones.
Mhm, why am I not impressed? Maybe because the article itself does not support what it claims?
It's basis is this:
Buffett: “I can’t be buying what Berkshire is buying and I’ve got some money around and therefore I go into my second choices or into tiny little companies.”
The shocking thing according to them this:
roughly two decades of Buffett’s personal trades were included in a leak of IRS data obtained by ProPublica.....On at least three occasions, Buffett has traded stocks in his personal account in the same quarter or the quarter before Berkshire bought or sold shares of the same companies
So I was reading and re-reading the article, looking for the details of those three occasions. All I found was this:
In October 2012, Buffett made another noteworthy personal trade. Over several days, he sold $35 million worth of Johnson & Johnson shares. At that point, Berkshire had effectively revealed that it, too, had sold Johnson & Johnson shares.
What means "At that point"? And what "revealed"? "Revealed" is different from "sold". Does "revealed" mean Berkshire sold a few days after Buffett did? Or simply that Berkshire then made public a sale that happened before Buffett sold J&J himself, which of course would have been ok, with him waiting with his own sale until the sale from Berkshire did influence the market price (with him getting a lower price then). Without naming exact dates for both sales that's just sensational BS --- and the authors are of course know that.
The other "evidence" they name:
He sold $25 million of Walmart stock in his personal account, even as Berkshire almost doubled its stake
And what exactly is the point here? Where is he profiting from insider knowledge?
No. of Recommendations: 0
Cnbc to respond in a few minutes.
No. of Recommendations: 0
It really is incredible how many loyal brkers respond to news and disclosure. Tax returns do not disclose current positions. Buffett did not call into cnbc but Sorkin referenced how Buffett responded to the Sokol affair. Perhaps Barron’s will cover it tomorrow. I’m sure Buffett is speaking to the board this morning.
No. of Recommendations: 0
I would guess that if Buffett made money on these trades he gave it to charity? 🙏
No. of Recommendations: 0
No. of Recommendations: 15
It really is incredible how many loyal brkers respond to news and disclosure. Tax returns do not disclose current positions. Buffett did not call into cnbc but Sorkin referenced how Buffett responded to the Sokol affair. Perhaps Barron’s will cover it tomorrow. I’m sure Buffett is speaking to the board this morning.
Boy you are really worked up about this. If ProPublica had found something worse than what they published, they would have gone with that. What they did publish does not bother me.
Would your tizzy over this dissipate if Warren put out a press release showing that he owned WFC, JNJ and WMT for decades prior to the personal sales? How many decades would it take to ease your concern?
We have long known that Buffett had purchased 100 shares each of quite a few companies in order to "subscribe" to their annual reports. After living as long as Buffett and several stock splits later, it is quite possible that he owns quite a few different common stocks. I don't think there is a conflict if Berkshire buys or sells something he hasn't touched in his personal account in 50 years.
Hell, the WFC example in the article didn't even allege that Berkshire was trading the stock one way or the other. Just that a Fortune article "claimed" that Wells had gone up because Warren had expressed confidence in it. And he sold it cheap, likely for personal tax reasons, in April 2009. I don't see the conflict.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Warren knows the disclosure rules better than most I would assume, and there is no way he would trade in an unethical manner to make a little more return, IMO.
What’s that quote he uses at times? Don’t do anything you wouldn’t want in the papers the next day, or something like that.
So yeah, I’m 99% sure this thing is a non issue.
No. of Recommendations: 2
“Indeed, Buffett has had a credibility no other investor could match — a homespun billionaire, with plain-spoken aphorisms and a handshake you could trust.”
Well, there’s one point I do on agree with from the piece. Agree with nola- Sounds like a Nothing burger and someone trying to get clicks and lots of attention. 99.999% of WEB’s net worth is in Berkshire which gets all of his attention and Best ideas. The idea that he would try to game the system and take advantage of his position to cash in a few chips in his position is laughable and absolutely ridiculous imo. Ross-Sorkin Loves to sensationalize things like this. Becky knows Warren pretty well and should be introducing the story for CNBC imo. Also, shameful someone steals and shares private tax records.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I agree with NOLA622's comments 100%.
Philmordun
No. of Recommendations: 3
Where are these 3 occasions of "insider trading", of Buffett profiting from knowing Berkshire moves? I was reading and re-reading the article. All I found was this...
First of all, "insider trading" is your term, not the article's. Second, if all you found was the J&J sale, you may want to read more slowly. The article leads with WEB's Wells Fargo sale. And also notes Walmart.
Without passing judgment at this point, since WEB hasn't responded (yet), on their face the multiple instances reported in the story run directly counter to WEB's repeated statements about his policy of steering clear of Berkshire investments.
No. of Recommendations: 1
" Ross-Sorkin Loves to sensationalize things like this. "
Very true and a virtue signaler.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Without passing judgment at this point, since WEB hasn't responded (yet), on their face the multiple instances reported in the story run directly counter to WEB's repeated statements about his policy of steering clear of Berkshire investments.
In this new report, I don't think there's a single example of a trade that was necessarily in conflict with Buffett's policy of never front-running Berkshire trades. We have known for a long time that there is some overlap between Buffett's personal holdings and Berkshire's, and that Buffett claims to have gone to extraordinary lengths to make sure there are no trades that are in conflict of interest. Now we additionally know that there have been some sales of Berkshire securities whose timing was in the ballpark of times when Berkshire has also been trading or commenting on the same stocks. But it seems to that without more detail on the timing, we don't have enough to say whether these instances run counter to Buffett's stated policy or not.
I am pretty confident that Buffett will want to respond to these accusations and demonstrate that all the trades' timing was kosher, but that is still just a presumption, just as it was my presumption before this recent news.
No. of Recommendations: 5
A) Yes, "insider trading" was my term, not theirs. But: What if not that do they imply with the whole article?
B) Yes, the article notes Walmart:
He sold $25 million of Walmart stock in his personal account, even as Berkshire almost doubled its stake
As I mentioned at the very end of my post (after accidentally pasting everything in that post a 2nd time which was confusing so that you might not have continued to that end): What exactly is the point here? What's his wrongdoing, his profiting from insider knowledge by doing the opposite of Berkshire?
Because that, without using the term, is what the whole article implies: That Buffett profited from insider knowledge/trading --- without that article providing any hard facts supporting that. Wouldn't it be the most natural thing with their leaked IRS records to provide the exact dates of those trades, the exact details for those alleged "at least 3 occasions"? Why don't they give us those dates/details which would enable everyone to judge for oneself?
No. of Recommendations: 21
This whole uproar seems to have an analogy to Caesar's wife. We don't know all the facts. And there are some people who love any opportunity to attack Buffett. It's a classic game of them playing "I'm OK, you're not OK."
But Buffett has set such a public image with his statements over the years that for some he must - like Caesar's wife - be "above suspicion".
For myself, I don't require that. His actions over decades, while not perfect, gives him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
No. of Recommendations: 18
His actions over decades, while not perfect, gives him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.
I rather expect him to make a short statement on the subject.
And I expect to believe him.
Maybe it would be nice to make members of US congress have half that level of integrity in their stock investments.
But then again, if they did, the ETFs that track their oddly successful trades wouldn't be available to us!
Both NANC and KRUZ have outperformed the average S&P 500 stock quite handily since inception, though the history is very short so far. NANC has also beaten the S&P 500.
Jim
No. of Recommendations: 2
""Maybe it would be nice to make members of US congress have half that level of integrity in their stock investments."" Good morning Jim , what next, compare Buffett's level of integrity to used car salesmen, employees at the Chicken Ranch, and posters on TikTok ? Come on man !!
No. of Recommendations: 20
<Jim ,what next, compare Buffett's level of integrity to used car salesmen, employees at the Chicken Ranch, and posters on TikTok ? Come on man !!>
Hey Vegas,
Do you ever post anything positive?
Or are you a habitual bucket-emptier?
Asking for a friend.
Thanks
No. of Recommendations: 0
"" Hey Vegas,"" Hey banksy, are you a stalker ? YOU, are going to teach me about transparency and disclosure ? Run along kid, wouldn't want you to be late for class. I thought Buffett might call Becky this morning but still, no call. Perhaps Barrons will shed more light on the story.
No. of Recommendations: 7
$20m hunh? If you had $100 would you risk a crime for an additional 20 cents? And Buffet has way more than $100. I have not ever judged Buffet to be motivated by greed.
No. of Recommendations: 0
it would be great if Warren addressed this. If unfounded, lay it out.
If close to the line, lay it out
No. of Recommendations: 17
I think Buffet will not answer.
Once you read it is so immaterial that it does not deserve to answer it.
If he answers he will amplify the issue and give more credit to this that the credit it deserves.
My 2 cents
No. of Recommendations: 11
If he answers he will amplify the issue and give more credit to this that the credit it deserves.
Agree. He shouldn't answer.
Saw this today:
“I don’t know if Warren Buffett is collecting Social Security but if he is, shame on you,” said Christie. “You shouldn’t be taking the money.”
Chris Christie using Buffett's name to get articles and clicks. Despicable.
No. of Recommendations: 0
"If he answers he will amplify the issue and give more credit to this that the credit it deserves."
Perhaps that is true but he will be asked at the Annual mtg
will be fascinating
No. of Recommendations: 5
If this is an item of discussion at the annual meeting, it will be a waste of valuable time.
No. of Recommendations: 0
Perhaps it will be something he covers briefly in his annual letter to shareholders?
No. of Recommendations: 1
$20m hunh? If you had $100 would you risk a crime for an additional 20 cents?
I think hromay is a bit closer on the math: My 2 cents
That said, how would it “appear on the front page of their local paper written by a smart but semi-unfriendly reporter who really understood … It has to pass that test as well.”
I would enjoy seeing an enterprising young reporter dig into this “issue”, looking at dates, amounts, market conditions. I fully expect the world would get a lesson in ethical “insider” trading.
