저자: 찰리멍거 · 외국인
요약 보기
버핏은 본인 사후에도 버크셔 해서웨이에 대해 매우 강세적인 입장이라고 밝힘. 유언장상 사후 재산은 아내를 위한 신탁에 배분되며, 현금의 10%는 단기 국채, 90%는 초저비용 S&P500 인덱스펀드에 투자하라고 지시. 버핏 주식은 사후 약 12년간 매각하지 말라고 신탁자에게 지시함(버크셔 주식은 다섯 개 재단에 기부될 예정이며 10년에 걸쳐 분배). 버핏은 이 지시가 자본 극대화가 목적이 아니라 아내의 안정(peace of mind)을 위한 것이라고 설명. 멍거는 버핏의 자금 배분 방식을 존중한다고 언급. 코카콜라 경영진 스톡옵션 안건 관련: 버크셔는 반대투표 대신 기권. 버핏은 보상안이 과도하다고 판단했으나 전쟁(공개적 대립)은 바람직하지 않다고 봄. 주주 제안자의 희석률 계산은 과장되었다고 지적하며, 5억 주 옵션 행사 시 실질 희석률은 약 2.5% 수준이라고 계산. 종목 전망: 코카콜라 관련 직접적 방향 예측은 없음(보상 체계 개선 기대 수준).
다듬은 글
this question comes from Jason Rothman of Oklahoma City who was the first shareholder to ask a question that subsequently was framed by a number of other shareholders as well in my mailbox this was the most popular question asked Mr Buffett you stay in your annual letter to shareholders that in your will you have given instructions to the trustee who will be acting for your wife's benefit to put 10 percent of the cash given her in short-term government bonds and 90 percent in a very low cost S P 500 Index Fund my question is why are you advising the trustee to put 90 percent of the cash into an S P 500 Index Fund instead of into Berkshire shares this might imply that you expect the index fund to outperform Berkshire in the first future when the company is run by a new CEO and chairman please clarify yeah I'll be glad to clarify that that letter didn't come from Vanguard by any chance the when I when I die incidentally then all of the virtual shares I have at that point will go to five different foundations every single share I mean there there are no shares that have not been designated uh mentally and uh to charity a good many of them and designated specifically to the numbers and all that but and they will be they will be distributed over the 10 years after my estate is closed so figure over 12 years and I tell my I tell the trustees uh we'll be holding these shares you know don't sell any Berkshire shelters until they have to be sold so my views on Berkshire at least through 12 years after my death are as bullish as anybody could possibly come up with and incidentally without those kind of instructions anybody would say you you know you're crazy to keep many many billions of dollars All in One stock I can't think of anything better to do it over those 12 years in terms of of my wife's situation you know that I that is not a question of maximizing Capital it's just a question of total 100 percent peace of mind uh on something that cannot get a bad result uh and uh well like I said there's way more money for it than she'll ever use as a matter of fact those of you who know her you know may feel that I've added about three zeros too many uh but it it is not designed for her to get even larger amounts of capital there will be capital left over on that part of it uh on the part that I care about maximizing uh I have been instructed the three trustees to not sell a single share until it has to be sold so that's that's good for 12 years after I die as to my best advice as to what I want them to hold Charlie well Warren is a little peculiar in the way he distributes money in the family and I think he's entitled to do what he damn pleases do I hear my children applauding and I've never had this feeling I had the star of the family get down to a few travels and Warren Ridley and Susie when she was alive in the same way he really is a meritocrat he he he's really quite extreme in wanting to let most of his money go back to the civilization in which it was earned I like being associated with it no Mr Buffett this is a question about berkshire's Holdings in Coca-Cola this spring Coke as shareholders to approve a magnanimous stock option program for its executives ask about it by the Press after the vote you said the program was excessive yet you did not tell the world prior to the coke shareholders meeting that you believe the program to be accessing a disclosure that had been made earlier might have made shareholders vote against them and in fact you did not vote berkshire's shares against the plan you only abstained in the voting I guess you had your reasons I must say I don't expect to agree with them and I cannot see how they can stand up under examination but I still would like to know why you engaged in this very strange unbuffet-like Behavior so why did you abstain rather than voting no against a corporate action that deserve to be shouted down yeah well some people incidentally think that strange and unbuffet unbuffet like are really not quite right it's strange as frequently above it like uh they um The Proposal was made by a shareholder who would own shares for a long time and uh was opposed to the to the option program his calculations and on I probably should but his calculations is a dilution were wildly off and we did not care to get into a discussion of that or anything else but we did talk or I did talk uh do moutar can't and I informed him that we were going to abstain I told him that we admired enormously the Coca-Cola Company we admire the management and we thought the compensation plan although was very similar to Great many plans uh was excessive and uh moutar and I had a very good discussions right here it almost as a matter of fact as well as a couple of telephone discussions and then immediately after the vote I announced that we had abstained and gave the reasons that we thought the plan was successive and I think that in terms of having an effect on the uh Coca-Cola compensation practices as well as maybe having an effect on some other compensation practices that that is the most effective was the most effective way of behaving for Berkshire we made a very clear statement about about the uh about the uh excessiveness of the plan and at the same time we in no way I went to war with Coca-Cola we have no desire to go to war with Coca-Cola and we did not endorse uh some calculations that were wildly inaccurate and uh and joined forces with someone that I had really no contact with them and I received several letters in the mail after they'd first been given to the Press so I I think you have to be I don't think going to war is a very good idea in most situations and I think if you're if you're going to join forces and going to war with somebody you better be very sure about uh about uh what that Alliance might mean so I think the best result for the Coca-Cola Company was achieved by our abstention and we will see what happens in terms of compensation between now and the next meeting of coke Charlie I think you handled the whole situation very well and Charlie remains Vice chairman I Charlie Charlie incidentally um was the Charlie was the only one with whom I talked over the the vote uh before or the abstention before I did it I called Charlie and told him about the plan and uh um and we agreed on on the course of action but uh I should I should point out one thing and and In fairness to David Winters who may who led the War uh he took figures from the Coca-Cola proxy statement so it's hard to fold him for that um but for those of you who would really would like to know how to think about calculating dilution uh Coca-Cola has regularly repurchase the shares that are issued uh through options and the Share account is thereby come down just a small bit of Coca-Cola not anywhere near as much as if they hadn't issued as many shares though and repurchase shares but Coca-Cola has a has a plan that involves 500 million shares and they say in the annual report that they expect to issue these over approximately four years and then they have a further calculation between performance shares and option shares but I'll leave that out make this a little simpler um and that's a lot of shares let's assume for the moment that Coca-Cola selling around forty dollars a share now to which it is and that one does and that all the options are issued at 40.
and that the when they're exercised we'll say the stock is sixty dollars now at that point there has been a 10 billion dollar transfer of value twenty dollars a share times 500 million shares a 10 billion dollar transfer value now the company when that is done gets a a tax uh deduction and at the up for 10 billion and at present tax rates that would result in three and a half billion of less tax so if you take 20 billion of proceeds from exercise of the options and you add three and a half billion of tax savings the Coca-Cola Company receives 23.5 billion and if they should buy in the sock at sixty dollars a share uh which it would be selling for then they would be able to buy um 391 million 666 666 years so uh in effect the Coca-Cola Company Net would be out a little over eight 108 million shares and that's on a base of 4 billion four so the the dilution assuming all the all the proceeds from the option exercise and the tax refund were used to buy shares the dilution would be 108 million shares on 44.4 billion or about two and a half percent and I don't like I don't like dilution and I don't like two and a half percent dilution uh but it's a far cry from the numbers that we're we're getting tossed around it's a long explanation but I've never seen the maths written about I mean I've seen people throwing out claims and all of that and you can change my my supposition from 55 60 to 55 or 65 it doesn't change things very much
댓글 0