Whoops. Small mistake, Harve.
I see now, that you actually said BV was $70 a share, not $68.
So, you were even FURTHER off the mark than I thought you were.
Slot machines, H.
Know your limitations.
Of course. Why wouldn't he buy at the best possible price? That's better, in the end, for shareholders. But then, so is buying at a higher 'support' price. Gosh, why it's all just good for shareholders, no matter what. What a world.
That doesn't sound right to me. Didn't the A's finish Q2 at around $98k ($65.33 equivalent for the B's)? With the S&P down around 10% since, I wouldn't expect book to be over $100k now.
What's really interesting about this whole buy back for me is how it takes book value from some abstract, archaic metric that is somewhat interesting in context to something no opinion much matters unless it's stated in the context of book value. Isn't that what Buffett's always wanted?
Your latest change of tone is probably connected to the fact that Buffett has now so *directly* contradicted your opinion --and, on some level, you KNOW that he's about ten-thousand times smarter than you are, and the chances are he's right, and you're way, way wrong (as usual).
Actually, Beach, you've repeatedly told folks here it's *overvalued.*
Then, once in a while, you suddenly indicate that you actually think it's *cheap.* (You've said so a couple of times.)
That generally happens after a big up-spike in the price
--which of course makes the stock more expensive, not cheaper-- but because your analysis is governed purely by the movement of the herd, you conclude that it must be a better buy after it's risen, and must be a sell after it's dropped.
(This probably has a lot to do with your apparently God-awful results.)
Other times, like now for instance, you seem to realize you have no idea what the f**k you're talking about, so you hedge your bets, and say mealy-mouthed BS like, "I'm not really sure it's as undervalued as some people think."
Strat - The S&P is down 10% since the end of last quarter. Obviously a significant impact across holdings and derivatives offset by cash from investments and operations, but wouldn't you assume it's a net negative. I see many people on this board offering these precise calculations of current price to book without any indication of how, or if, they calculated book. What are you using for book? There's money to be made, if you're a trader, in getting real good at projecting BRK's book at any point in time.