<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: About trading and value</title>
	<atom:link href="http://trilema.com/2013/about-trading-and-value/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://trilema.com/2013/about-trading-and-value/</link>
	<description>Moving targets for a fast crowd.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2026 17:27:46 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://polimedia.us</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mircea Popescu</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2013/about-trading-and-value/#comment-91372</link>
		<dc:creator>Mircea Popescu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 19:00:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=45444#comment-91372</guid>
		<description>Yeah, the great advantages of being buddies with the political leaders in an inflation based totalitarian state : they fix your bad business bets for you.

I stand unimpressed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, the great advantages of being buddies with the political leaders in an inflation based totalitarian state : they fix your bad business bets for you.</p>
<p>I stand unimpressed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bugpowder</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2013/about-trading-and-value/#comment-91371</link>
		<dc:creator>Bugpowder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=45444#comment-91371</guid>
		<description>I believe that Buffett is now up on those short put contracts using Black Scholes valuation models, and WAY up if they were to expire at current index levels.  They recently unwound a fraction of the contracts for a $222 million gain.  

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/26/buffett-cleans-up-on-derivatives-bet/

"In this case, Berkshire, which had received $647 million in premiums in writing the contracts, paid $425 million to unwind them, resulting in the latest-quarter gain. But Buffett notes he also got the free use of the premiums over the three years the contracts were in effect. Buffett views the use of such so-called float as one of the key benefits of the insurance business, because it allows him to invest policyholder funds for Berkshire's benefit."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe that Buffett is now up on those short put contracts using Black Scholes valuation models, and WAY up if they were to expire at current index levels.  They recently unwound a fraction of the contracts for a $222 million gain.  </p>
<p><a href="http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/26/buffett-cleans-up-on-derivatives-bet/">http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/26/buffett-cleans-up-on-derivatives-bet/</a></p>
<p>"In this case, Berkshire, which had received $647 million in premiums in writing the contracts, paid $425 million to unwind them, resulting in the latest-quarter gain. But Buffett notes he also got the free use of the premiums over the three years the contracts were in effect. Buffett views the use of such so-called float as one of the key benefits of the insurance business, because it allows him to invest policyholder funds for Berkshire's benefit."</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mircea Popescu</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2013/about-trading-and-value/#comment-91367</link>
		<dc:creator>Mircea Popescu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:37:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=45444#comment-91367</guid>
		<description>Indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://trilema.com/2013/about-trading-and-value/#comment-91366</link>
		<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://trilema.com/?p=45444#comment-91366</guid>
		<description>More good stuff:

&lt;blockquote&gt;One of our goals is to have Berkshire Hathaway stock sell at a price rationally related to its intrinsic business value. (But note "rationally related," not "identical": if well-regarded companies are generally selling in the market at large discounts from value, Berkshire might well be priced similarly.) The key to a rational stock price is rational shareholders, both current and prospective. 

If the holders of a company's stock and/or the prospective buyers attracted to it are prone to make irrational or emotionbased decisions, some pretty silly stock prices are going to appear periodically. Manic-depressive personalities produce manic-depressive valuations. Such aberrations may help us in buying and selling the stocks of other companies. But we think it is in both your interest and ours to minimize their occurrence in the market for Berkshire.

To obtain only high quality shareholders is no cinch. Mrs. Astor could select her 400, but anyone can buy any stock. Entering members of a shareholder "club" cannot be screened for intellectual capacity, emotional stability, moral sensitivity or acceptable dress. Shareholder eugenics, therefore, might appear to be a hopeless undertaking. In large part, however, we feel that high quality ownership can be attracted and maintained if we consistently communicate our business and ownership philosophy-along with no other conflicting messages-and then let self selection follow its course. For example, self selection will draw a far different crowd to a musical event advertised as an opera than one advertised as a rock concert-even though anyone can buy a ticket to either. 

Through our policies and communications-our "advertisements"-we try to attract investors who will understand our operations, attitudes and expectations. (And, fully as important, we try to dissuade those who won't.) We want those who think of themselves as business owners and invest in companies with the intention of staying a long time. And, we want those who keep their eyes focused on business results, not market prices. 

Investors possessing those characteristics are in a small minority, but we have an exceptional collection of them. I believe well over 90%-probably over 95%-of our shares are held by those who were shareholders of Berkshire or Blue Chip five years ago. And I would guess that over 95% of our shares are held by investors for whom the holding is at least double the size of their next largest. Among companies with at least several thousand public shareholders and more than $1 billion of market value, we are almost certainly the leader in the degree to which our shareholders think and act like owners. Upgrading a shareholder group that possesses these characteristics is not easy.

Were we to split the stock or take other actions focusing on stock price rather than business value, we would attract an entering class of buyers inferior to the exiting class of sellers. At $1300, there are very few investors who can't afford a Berkshire share. Would a potential one-share purchaser be better off if we split 100 for 1 so he could buy 100 shares? Those who think so and who would buy the stock because of the split or in anticipation of one would definitely downgrade the quality of our present shareholder group. (Could we really improve our shareholder group by trading some of our present dear-thinking members for impressionable new ones who, preferring paper to value, feel wealthier with nine $10 bills than with one $100 bill?) People who buy for non-value reasons are likely to sell for non-value reasons. Their presence in the picture will accentuate erratic price swings unrelated to underlying business developments. 

We will try to avoid policies that attract buyers with a shortterm focus on our stock price and try to allow policies that attract informed long-term investors focusing on business values. Just as you purchased your Berkshire shares in a market populated by rational informed investors, you deserve a chance to sell-should you ever want to-in the same kind of market. We will work to keep it in existence.

One of the ironies of the stock market is the emphasis on activity. Brokers, using terms such as "marketability" and "liquidity", sing the praises of companies with high share turnover (those who cannot fill your pocket will confidently fill your ear). But investors should understand that what is good for the croupier is not good for the customer. A hyperactive stock market is the pickpocket of enterprise. &lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More good stuff:</p>
<blockquote><p>One of our goals is to have Berkshire Hathaway stock sell at a price rationally related to its intrinsic business value. (But note "rationally related," not "identical": if well-regarded companies are generally selling in the market at large discounts from value, Berkshire might well be priced similarly.) The key to a rational stock price is rational shareholders, both current and prospective. </p>
<p>If the holders of a company's stock and/or the prospective buyers attracted to it are prone to make irrational or emotionbased decisions, some pretty silly stock prices are going to appear periodically. Manic-depressive personalities produce manic-depressive valuations. Such aberrations may help us in buying and selling the stocks of other companies. But we think it is in both your interest and ours to minimize their occurrence in the market for Berkshire.</p>
<p>To obtain only high quality shareholders is no cinch. Mrs. Astor could select her 400, but anyone can buy any stock. Entering members of a shareholder "club" cannot be screened for intellectual capacity, emotional stability, moral sensitivity or acceptable dress. Shareholder eugenics, therefore, might appear to be a hopeless undertaking. In large part, however, we feel that high quality ownership can be attracted and maintained if we consistently communicate our business and ownership philosophy-along with no other conflicting messages-and then let self selection follow its course. For example, self selection will draw a far different crowd to a musical event advertised as an opera than one advertised as a rock concert-even though anyone can buy a ticket to either. </p>
<p>Through our policies and communications-our "advertisements"-we try to attract investors who will understand our operations, attitudes and expectations. (And, fully as important, we try to dissuade those who won't.) We want those who think of themselves as business owners and invest in companies with the intention of staying a long time. And, we want those who keep their eyes focused on business results, not market prices. </p>
<p>Investors possessing those characteristics are in a small minority, but we have an exceptional collection of them. I believe well over 90%-probably over 95%-of our shares are held by those who were shareholders of Berkshire or Blue Chip five years ago. And I would guess that over 95% of our shares are held by investors for whom the holding is at least double the size of their next largest. Among companies with at least several thousand public shareholders and more than $1 billion of market value, we are almost certainly the leader in the degree to which our shareholders think and act like owners. Upgrading a shareholder group that possesses these characteristics is not easy.</p>
<p>Were we to split the stock or take other actions focusing on stock price rather than business value, we would attract an entering class of buyers inferior to the exiting class of sellers. At $1300, there are very few investors who can't afford a Berkshire share. Would a potential one-share purchaser be better off if we split 100 for 1 so he could buy 100 shares? Those who think so and who would buy the stock because of the split or in anticipation of one would definitely downgrade the quality of our present shareholder group. (Could we really improve our shareholder group by trading some of our present dear-thinking members for impressionable new ones who, preferring paper to value, feel wealthier with nine $10 bills than with one $100 bill?) People who buy for non-value reasons are likely to sell for non-value reasons. Their presence in the picture will accentuate erratic price swings unrelated to underlying business developments. </p>
<p>We will try to avoid policies that attract buyers with a shortterm focus on our stock price and try to allow policies that attract informed long-term investors focusing on business values. Just as you purchased your Berkshire shares in a market populated by rational informed investors, you deserve a chance to sell-should you ever want to-in the same kind of market. We will work to keep it in existence.</p>
<p>One of the ironies of the stock market is the emphasis on activity. Brokers, using terms such as "marketability" and "liquidity", sing the praises of companies with high share turnover (those who cannot fill your pocket will confidently fill your ear). But investors should understand that what is good for the croupier is not good for the customer. A hyperactive stock market is the pickpocket of enterprise. </p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
