Post New

Baybrooke mentioned his estimate of net worth of the group is greater than $100m. I wondered what perplexity thought.

I have one definite data point, mine.

One member made $800k on his BRK in one day, so my estimate is $25m.

There are some retired petroleum engineers or who have spouses that worked for oil majors. Generally highly paid with good pensions.

A few early retirees.

Some living in fairly expensive locations.

Most long term investors.

Group size 50.

Upper bound $30m. Just a guess. A bit bigger than the known sample point.

Lower bound $2m

Result, about $900m total net worth using perplexity.

Very sensitive to the $25m being a random sample point.


Aussi

Group size 50.
Upper bound $30m.
Lower bound $2m
Result, about $900m total net worth using perplexity.

It is quite a bit larger. There are 700 active accounts, even if only 50 regular authors in any one week on the Berkshire Hathaway board. This 700 number doesn't count the far larger number that read the posts without signing up (similarly as you or I read from Seeking Alpha or other value boards without signing up).

The rate of new users signing up has not slowed over the last year. It keeps growing, which is good because it more than compensates for anyone leaving and I the rate of churn is sufficiently small that I expect we can maintain the excellent culture here.

The vast majority of all users with accounts do not post, but read regularly, and the number of people reading without an account is really enormous. There one or two requests each second, on average, and most of the requests are loading (thus reading) a post, and lot of the requests being to read a whole thread.

I don't closely know many of these 700 lovely people but 5 have indicated (and 3 for which I know for sure) having a net worth ranging from $20m to $100m. That's from a sample size of about 20 (out of 700) that have directly stated or indirectly implied their net worth. Taking the $160m known sum, and extrapolating from the 20 sample, that is 160m * 700 / 20 = approx. $6 billion in net worth over those with accounts. The figure will be a lot larger than that over the entire readership (including those without accounts).

Also, extrapolating with averages greatly underestimates the sum, because wealth distribution is not Gaussian but scalable, so one or two outliers can already be multi-billionaires, larger than the other 699 combined. Such people almost invariably find it distasteful, or at least distracting, to bring their enormous wealth up within posts, so they (almost) never do.

Another thing that might not be obvious is that there are a lot more true friendships amongst the board with people meeting privately, but not mentioning it. This is one of the really wonderful things about Shrewd'm (and its ancestry) - the "Privately email" option when writing posts, allowing people to maintain contact over email, develop friendships that also go beyond only finance discussions. It is pretty sad how other media platforms try to keep people locked in within the platform, discouraging direct contact or making it impossible. Shrewd'm must be one of the few places left in which direct email communication is a bit part of the community fabric, so the "Privately email" feature is definitely staying.

- Manlobbi

It is quite a bit larger. There are 700 active accounts, even if only 50 regular authors in any one week on the Berkshire Hathaway board. This 700 number doesn't count the far larger number that read the posts without signing up

Manlobbi

It always amazes me what you have created. Congratulations and thank you!

Aussi

" The vast majority of all users with accounts do not post, but read regularly, and the number of people reading without an account is really enormous. There one or two requests each second, on average, and most of the requests are loading (thus reading) a post, and lot of the requests being to read a whole thread."

Good morning. I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that on the old boards, Motley, Yahoo, etc, members of the brk board, money managers, fund managers, authors, etc were reading the boards but never posted for obvious reasons. Several old timers read this board but no longer wish to participate for various reasons. I grew up in the Brooklyn projects, lived in govt subsidized housing until I was 21 years old, so I suspect my skin is a bit thicker than most. PLUS, I laugh most of the day! Thanks again for sharing your expertise. hc

fWIW, I would not be surprised at all of there is a billion dollars of net worth among board members / readers here. And much more if you count AUM they control but don’t own.

I just assume the group is doing very well, and therein lies one of the great values to me. I particularly enjoy some of the OT discussion, as it allows a topic to be discussed among a group that I respect and share many similar values and concerns. My local circle of friends may not be the best place to discuss the pros and cons of a second home in the south of France (and what wine to sip there!), or the morality of tax rates. Thanks to Manlobbi and all the posters who keep this place so civil and informative.

As far as my net worth, it is not atypical, and I recently got my cash/investment ratios to a level with which I'm comfortable. I added everything up, and realized the ratio is very close to the exact ratio that BRK currently maintains. One can debate if that is wise or not, but it is probably no coincidence and my comfort level was surely influenced by the sage opinions of this group.

As far as my net worth, it is not atypical, and I recently got my cash/investment ratios to a level with which I'm comfortable. I added everything up, and realized the ratio is very close to the exact ratio that BRK currently maintains.

Berkshire market cap is $1,070 billion with $331 billion cash, so that's like what, a 70/30 fund.

If your only investment is Berkshire you have 30% in cash equivalents.

Yeah, maybe a little irrational, possibly a mental stretch, but a different way to think about it.

Such people almost invariably find it distasteful, or at least distracting, to bring their enormous wealth up within posts, so they (almost) never do.

Manlobbi


Personally speaking, I find it invariably distasteful to mention my LACK of enormous wealth within posts, so I (almost) never do. ;-/


I've been consumed with health issues for a loved one, so I haven't been following discussion on a day to day basis. I'm reluctant to post until I can sufficiently follow a discussion line to post something with gathered and deliberative thought. This is the standard set by most of the posters I follow, so it resonates as well.

My deep gratitude to ALL the posters & caretakers for the content & Shrewd'm culture that animates this board.

CmoreBmore

Also, extrapolating with averages greatly underestimates the sum, because wealth distribution is not Gaussian but scalable

💯

I suggest that for a discussion like this, median wealth of the group is a much more meaningful metric than the mean.

I don't closely know many of these 700 lovely people but 5 have indicated (and 3 for which I know for sure) having a net worth ranging from $20m to $100m.

So you do know some of them. As you live in Monaco likely not the poorest ones, so there is a good chance your sample is not representative for the whole group.

(Just wanting to point out this potential weakness; and no, it´s not to manipulate you into relaying more information.)

Whether it is done by dollar figure or percentage of net worth I do enjoy knowing in 'real meaning to the poster' what significance they are committing when making a rationale for an investment.

When you consider the sum of wealth this group has invested in BRK, and the desire of WEB to "keep the culture", putting a representative from this group on Berkshire's actual Board would seem pretty rational.

Though not a multibillionaire, I've been a multithousandaire for some time.

I don't closely know many of these 700 lovely people but 5 have indicated (and 3 for which I know for sure) having a net worth ranging from $20m to $100m. That's from a sample size of about 20 (out of 700) that have directly stated or indirectly implied their net worth. Taking the $160m known sum

I am not sure this group of 20 is a representative sample for the whole group; in fact I would venture to guess it is not. I think a poll with ranges shown is probably a better way to go.

Ultra Net Worth categorization is at least $30m-$40m of investable assets.

I think per Manlobbi's post we have more than our fair share. Not surprising at all

" And much more if you count AUM they control but don’t own."



Nola were you around on the boards 10 plus years ago? We had two guys with AUM well over 5 Billion combined. Miraculously, one was overweight brkb and apple and still underperformed and had over 1/2 the AUM taken away. Very nice fella tho.

Nola were you around on the boards 10 plus years ago? We had two guys with AUM well over 5 Billion combined. Miraculously, one was overweight brkb and apple and still underperformed and had over 1/2 the AUM taken away. Very nice fella tho.

I don't think I was on Motley Fool 10 years ago but you and I were on an old yahoo board called "Chucks Angels" and later "Ben's Angels" named after Ben Keaton who passed away in the same model of Porsche GT that actor Paul walker died in. An unstable vehicle at speed I guess. That may have been more than 10 years ago. I think I started on Berkshire related message boards around 2001.

Ben died in the crash 20 years ago. Hard to believe

An unstable vehicle at speed I guess
It might have more to do with the mentality of quite some Porsche drivers, different from drivers of Chevrolets, driving them the way a Porsche originally is supposed to be driven (I am not talking about Cayenne, Macan, Panamera, but about the few REAL Porsche´s which are still drivers cars).

I don't think I was on Motley Fool 10 years ago but you and I were on an old yahoo board called "Chucks Angels" and later "Ben's Angels" named after Ben Keaton who passed away in the same model of Porsche GT that actor Paul walker died in.

I remember Benkea. The crash was on a racetrack and wasn't Ben's fault. Him and passenger died. Very sad.

I was cleaning out some binders recently and found a post of Ben's I'd printed from the AOL board (yes, I used to print the internet, the good parts, anyway).

Hope his family are doing well.

"...printed from the AOL board..."

I meant Yahoo board, of course.

Do we not have the ability to do a poll here on the board to get some actual net worth data?

Maybe not— I don’t see a poll option, but I’m using a mobile device.

I remember you both from back then on yahoo, and Babyb on the Angels board. hope all well with ou both

I feel there are many of us here today that were on the Yahoo board and like me are now using different monikers. Benkea was often quite prescient in his analysis. It was a big loss to all the day a Ferrari driver pulled into his path while his Porsche was at speed.

Another commenter from that era was Wabuffo who had great correlating insights into the interworking of money flows, interest rates, deficits and the like.

The gentleman who developed the Berkshire price simulator (I cannot remember the name of the simulator but can remember it ran in Java) did us all a great service. In utilizing the different settings (liquidation value, conservative value, optimistic value - sorry, cannot remember the exact names for the settings), it was amazing how well the numbers it generated tracked the value of Berkshire in the following years.

As has been noted, there have been some great minds on this, the current board, and predecessor boards who have shared their investing logic with us. It has been beneficial for all concerned.

Uwharrie

Russ from the old Yahoo board was a favorite of mine. While I seldom post anything, I am a loyal follower of this board and appreciate those willing to share their thoughts and knowledge. Thanks for the site, Manlobbi!

jg

I feel there are many of us here today that were on the Yahoo board and like me are now using different monikers.

Out of curiosity - and if you don't mind my asking - how many of posters date back to the old AOL board of the mid-90's era.

If you don't wish to ID yourself now, I understand. I have reconnected with a few of you.

Those were the days when we were still struggling to value float. And folks like Buffet's daughter and his childhood friend were active posters. I was a newbie back then. Still around.

Tex

Cool it with the net worth stuff. It accomplishes nothing and one shouldn't talk about their wealth, particularly on the internet.

And to clarify, I'm not talking about the highly enjoyable trip down memory lane with the old boards. I'm also not scolding. I am just pointing out that you can easily attract the wrong kind of attention this way in general, and specifically for this site. The board is readable without being authenticated, which has all sorts of benefits but the drawback of it being on the radar for indexers and bots.

Another commenter from that era was Wabuffo who had great correlating insights into the interworking of money flows, interest rates, deficits and the like.

The gentleman who developed the Berkshire price simulator (I cannot remember the name of the simulator but can remember it ran in Java) did us all a great service. In utilizing the different settings (liquidation value, conservative value, optimistic value - sorry, cannot remember the exact names for the settings), it was amazing how well the numbers it generated tracked the value of Berkshire in the following years.

Wabuffo (Bill) is still very active on twitter
https://x.com/wabuffo

The java app was called the "intrinsivaluator" LOL - a great name.

Hi Uwarrie,

I feel there are many of us here today that were on the Yahoo board and like me are now using different monikers. Benkea was often quite prescient in his analysis. It was a big loss to all the day a Ferrari driver pulled into his path while his Porsche was at speed.

I want to thank you and everyone for remembering Ben in this thread. It also was nice hearing some familiar favorite names mentioned: Babyb, Wabuffo and others! One that wasn't mentioned was Trepanne...one of Ben and my favorite friends.

June 2, will be 20 years since his passing. I was supposed to be there with him that day...an overcast, very drizzly morning at the track. But I ran a bit late due to a cancer treatment I had at the very same hospital to which he was transported. Weird! His wife called my wife to make sure that I wasn't in the car with Ben. Lucky me. Corey, a renowned internet sales guru, unfortunately, wasn't lucky.

It appeared to me that the fault of this accident fell mainly upon the race track. The entrance for oncoming cars to the track appeared to be at the fastest section of the track and there didn't seem to be enough "runway" for a car to be able to come up to speed. I think that the decision to enter or not enter the track had to be almost instantaneous...to go or no go. I don't think it was Ben or the Ferrari driver's fault.

Ben was a very unique, quality, individual. I've had a lot of friends in my life, but very few best friends. Ben was the best friend any guy could ever have...I still miss him a ton.

I was on the old AOL board. Not certain of what my screen name may have been.

I remember a get together at the Doubletree during one of the meetings. A fun group. Let’s tip a glass to the late John Garman(?) and his wacky hat.

I am grateful for the memories as well -- I wish I could think back to when I first heard of Berkshire, when I first "took the plunge" and when I really committed.

I'm virtually certain that my first AR visit was around the '08 era, which sure feels like a long time ago.

I loved the Chuck's Angels era -- and love hearing those old screen names. Wasn't someone like "veryearly" or something?

Anyway, great memories and glad the party continues.

I go back to the yahoo board, for years there.

"veryearly" is "The Brooklyn Investor". His posts were every bit as good as his current blog.

OK, so we’re all in Lake Wobegon, with our bank accounts and schwanzes above average, and we’re happy for it.

With a big bank account and presumably a bunch of A’s, or at least B’s stacked up in a closet somewhere, how many have contributed to Manlobbi to help defray - just a teensy bit - his costs of running the site and giving us an island of refuge and learning in the morass of the internet?

A site takes maintenance. It takes electricity. It takes equipment. It produces headaches, and occasionally joy. How about it? Worth a cup of coffee or aperitif now and then?

https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?support

"veryearly" is "The Brooklyn Investor". His posts were every bit as good as his current blog.

Thanks for noting this. I recently "re-discovered" his blog and I agree he is very good. I did not know he was an early poster. I also used to enjoy susan400's posts, but I may have been the only one lol.

I rarely visit other boards these days because the signal to noise ratio is so bad, but I do occasionally miss seeing a broader variety of perspectives. I'd love any recommendations.

abromber

Amen. Good reminder. We are blessed that Manlobbi created this forum.

how many have contributed to Manlobbi to help defray - just a teensy bit - his costs

The thought bubble above my head:

1) Me!

2) Uh...pretty sure it was within the last year

3) Better check...

4) Yep, Quicken says it was June. Yay me. Better set a remind...uh-oh.

5) It was June of 2023.

6) Dang it. On it. And: thank you for the reminder, G

-- sutton

how many have contributed to Manlobbi

Joined this group recently after being on prior BRK Motley Fool board for ages. Didn't know until your post that we could donate. Thanks for the info, I just donated. Thanks @Manlobbi for keeping up this wonderful site!

how many have contributed to Manlobbi….
—————————————————-

A little more background on the board’s Renaissance Man that created this great meeting place for all to enjoy!

“The International Cochran Piano Competition, established in 2014, is the first entirely online piano competition in the world. It was inspired by the music of Julian Cochran and is open to adult pianists with no upper age limit. Participants submit digital recordings of their performances, eliminating the need for travel”

https://youtu.be/wAphcj19zRk

ciao

how many have contributed to Manlobbi….

I have it set for automatic monthly Paypal contributions. Much better content than many of the streaming services I subscribe to.

I got a LinkedIn "you should connect with" from a name that was weirdly familiar. I couldn't place it, but later in the day suddenly I realized who this was.

It was mdcigan from the Motley Fool boards.

Out of curiosity - and if you don't mind my asking - how many of posters date back to the old AOL board of the mid-90's era.

I am from way way way back. Not so much on the Berkshire boards but on some of the others. I started out on the usenet boards in the early/mid 80s. Then was on the AOL boards in the 90s, which IIRC became the motley fool boards at some point in the late 90s. My user profile on Motley Fool said "member since at least 1997" because they didn't have exact join dates for folks who migrated from the AOL boards early on.

I am from way back

Me three.

I was running a radio station in NBC Tower in Chicago in 1994. The Chicago Tribune Tower was about 100 yards away, and one day I got an invitation to come visit some fellows there, so I stopped by. Hidden on an upper floor in a small square room without windows there was a plus sign of cubicle walls smack in the middle, adding up to 4 work stations. It could have been a store room or worse, but a few calendars, memos, or other miscellanea were taped on the walls giving it some business-grunge hominess, and nestled in each of the four corners of the plus sign, a PC with the AOL program running, the screens glowing with the (soon to be) ubiquitous AOL splash screen.

After a demo and nice chat, they gave me a free account if I would add a “presence” of my radio station online, which I did. There was almost nothing to it; we were “all news”, no personalities, no promotions, just a non-stop faucet dribbling out a 22 minute cycle of headlines (none of which went on the app, such was the technology at the time) - but I got a free account out of it.

At the beginning AOL charged you by the minute, I lived through the switchover to monthly subscription; it didn’t matter, I had the master blaster free account of a “provider”, even though the reason for it had long since disappeared; I left the station in ‘95. Anyway, I played with the new toy and discovered (among other things) the chat room of the Motley Fool. It was fairly soon that I pulled out of my proprietary Dean Witter mutual funds, sold to me by the nice Dean Witter agent at the Dean Witter office with their high Dean Witter commissions and swell Dean Witter backend loads, and began buying my own stocks, and having discovered the addictive quality of being “on line” among my first purchases was a slug of AOL (through Charles Schwab.) I also discovered the joy of paying $29.95 for a trade instead of $140, but I digress.

I couldn’t place it exactly (well I suppose I could if I researched deep enough) but long about ‘96 or so I bought some Berkshire, probably around the time the B’s were created. I wasn’t buying in pieces big enough to get an A, but once the B’s came around (Warren’s hand was forced, I recall) I was in. I bought more along the way, although in the early days it was mostly AOL I was buying, it kept rocketing up and splitting, and I bought more, then more. Berkshire too, but in smaller numbers. A little Cisco, some Lucent, and few more traditional issues like McDonald’s and Walgreen.

Around 1999-2000 I sold every drop of the AOL (and most of the other stuff) and none of the Berkshire. I went on to buy a couple of A shares later in the 2000’s, and I’ve still never sold a single one. (I did downconvert those into B’s, the reason for which escapes me entirely.)

Tribune was an early investor in AOL - hence the grunge garage ethic of the room in the Tower, and I owe very much to that chance meeting - and to the Motley Fool for educating me that the priests of Wall Street don’t have some magical mystical goo, and of course to Warren, who has proven that you can be ethical, nice, and still be a genius in business and take your partners along with you.

He has given me quite a ride: more like a Greyhound Superliner than a 4G roller coaster, but one that I will happily lay back and enjoy, sleep well, and have an ever growing endowment for whichever charities I deign when the closing bell rings.

"wabuffo" on Twitter, who several posters have mentioned, is a must follow. It's been uncanny as to how accurate he has been in what the direction of interest rates will be and what the chances are of there being a recession, etc.

Hello all!

I've been lurking for awhile but glad to see Manlobbi resurrect these boards with some of the great posters from the old Motley Fool BRK board congregating here.

I promise to keep my macro stuff for twitter/X - I really just do it because I'm bored with equity markets at these price levels and also to poke fun at the "experts". Nobody can predict the direction of the US macro economy.

I don't have much to add for the moment - but since the Daily Journal was brought up a few weeks ago on this board and it sorta/kinda has a connection to BRK through Charlie, maybe I'll post an update of my thoughts on it. I've been following it since 2009 when Munger first made his move into equities.

Hope everyone is doing well.

Bill

"Hello all!

I've been lurking for awhile but glad to see Manlobbi resurrect these boards with some of the great posters from the old Motley Fool BRK board congregating here.

I promise to keep my macro stuff for twitter/X - I really just do it because I'm bored with equity markets at these price levels and also to poke fun at the "experts". Nobody can predict the direction of the US macro economy."

Well if you're bored please spend more time here:-) I remember you well from the old boards and always appreciated your insights.

<<<Out of curiosity - and if you don't mind my asking - how many of posters date back to the old AOL board of the mid-90's era.<<<

Hi Tex, I'm one of those and it was so good to reconnect with you. I was grahdodd back then and later on MF. You taught me so much back then and I got a front row seat in those days living in Omaha. Several of our friends have passed but I hope some of the others turn up here. Hope all is well!

how many have contributed to Manlobbi to help defray

First I heard of this! Thanks for the info.
Contribution sent.

Smufty

...how many of posters date back to the old AOL board of the mid-90's era...

I'm still here.

The old days where messages were stored in folders on the old AOL and when they would fill up, we would have to wait until someone created a new folder.

Back when Susie (Doshoes) Buffet would regularly post. Led to my first BRK annual meeting in 2000.

Wheezy

Post New

Berkshire Hathaway FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.