While Berkshire is a good holding for the long term...the current run from the low 80s to 89 in a very short term has provided significant opportunity to harvest profits. I think the primary reason for this run is the news of Buffett completing his cancer treatment. That said both Munger and Mr. Buffett are not getting younger. The book value is around 107,300 last Q and ikely around 110,000 this Q. The Buffett buy point is around 120,000 on A and around 80 on B. The stock has run up too fast and as charities sell there could be downward pressure and Buffett will not buy till it drops to 1.1x book if he chooses to engage in buying..
I liked the run and took the profit and now on to other deep values till BRK comes back down
It's not "nonsense" at all. It's a fact based trading strategy. However, most traders lose in the long run because no one has invesnted a completely reliable crystal ball. When they make money they can credit their prescience. When they lose money, they were too early or too late.
At least our friend has put his prognostication on the record, even though his holdings and trade may be imaginary. (Someone with true convictions about a "good holding for the long term" most likely would have sold in the money options.)
Anyhow, if the strategy blows up, the poster can always get a new Yahoo! id and start all over again.
I think that most people don"t like the stock because there is no dividend!It, in my opinion this is a peaceful night's sleep stock.The stock is my core holding along with CVX.Wouldn"t sell it til retirement.I got in at 3500 pre-split,you should have done same!
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Well, I don't know about other people, but the lack of a dividend is why I now refuse to own this stock and I have owned it several times over the past fourteen years.. My very first purchase was actually one week short of fourteen years ago, at a split adjusted 39.56, (I paid 1,978 plus commission on 9/28/1998). I didn't know it at the time, but I had bought it at roughly 2.4X book, a big mistake, a really BIG mistake, considering that WEB's hints now imply that it might be worth 1.22X book at best. If I had held and had sold at last Friday's close (89.54 on 9/21/2012) my annualized total return, before expenses, would have been about 6.0%. That's nothing to brag about. But back to dividends. In my opinion, the single most important thing that dividends do for a stock is create a credible means of valuing it. Without historical dividend data one resorts to all sorts of nonsensical financial fantasies (the two column method, other folk's intrinsic calculators, look-thru-earnings, price to book, etc.) trying to come up with what ultimately turns out to be an incredibly inaccurate, horribly bad, guesstimate of intrinsic value.