저자: CharlieMunger/WarrenBuffett · 외국인
요약 보기
자막 기준 발언은 리스크 관리와 거래 실행력에 대한 일반론이다. 정규분포 기반 VaR 모델은 시장 행동에 적용되지 않아 어리석다고 비판하며, 버크셔의 딜 실행력(대규모 거래 신속 확정)과 경영 인력의 중요성을 언급한다. 정치적 견해로 투자 대상을 고르는 것은 부적절하다는 취지로 마무리한다. 특정 자산에 대한 가격 방향 예측은 없다.
다듬은 글
One of my favorite risk control examples. One day he fired a an associate and the man said, "How can you be firing me when I'm such an important producer?" And Sandy said, "Yes." He says, "But I'm a rich old man and you make me nervous." Yeah, we do not have anybody around. Bergkshire makes us nervous.
Not only was it this risk decision frequently delegated in America, but it was delegated to people who were using a very silly way of judging risk that they'd been taught in some of our leading business schools. So, this is a very serious problem this man is raising. The so-called value at risk and the theories that outcomes in financial markets followed a Gaussian curve invariably.
It was one of the dumbest ideas ever put forward. He's not kidding either. We've seen it in action. And the interesting thing is that we've seen in action with people that know better, that have very high IQs, that studied lots of mathematics, but it's so much easier to work with that curve because everybody knows the properties of that curve uh and and can make calculations to eight decimal places uh using that curve.
But the the only probability is that curve is not applicable to behavior in markets. and uh and people find that out periodically. Uh the second question uh but we're well equipped, Carol, and the answer to that question. We would not have anybody, you know, we're not going to have an arts major in charge of of Bergkshire.
the the question about negotiate a deal. There's there's no question that partly through age, partly through the fact we've accumulated a lot of capital, you know, partly fact that I know a lot more people than I used to know, and partly because Berkshire can act with speed and finality that is really quite rare uh among large American corporations.
We do get a chance occasionally to make large transactions, but that takes a willing party on the other side. When we got in touch with Brian Moahan at the Bank of America last year, uh I had dreamt up a deal which I thought made sense for us and I thought it made sense for the Bank of America under the circumstances that existed.
But I never I'd never talked to Brian Whitean before in my life. I uh I had no real connection with the Bank of America. But when I talked to him, he knew that we meant what we would said. So that if I said we would do five billion and I I laid out the terms of the warrants and I said we'd do it and he knew that that was good and that we had the money and that ability to commit and have the other person know your commitment is good for very large sums and maybe complicated instruments is a big plus.
Berkshire will possess that subsequent to my departure. Uh I don't think that every deal that I made would necessarily be makeable by a successor, but they they'll they'll bring they'll bring other talents as well. I mean, I can tell you the successor that the board has agreed on can do a lot of things much much better than I can do.
So if you give up a little on on negotiated financial deals, you may gain a great deal just in terms of uh somebody's more energetic about going out and making uh uh transactions. And those deals have not been key to Bergkshire. Uh if you look at what we did with General Electric and Goldman Sachs uh for example on those two deals in 2008, I mean they were okay but they they they are not remotely as important [clears throat] as you know maybe buying Coca-Cola stock which was done in the market over a period of six or eight months.
We bought IBM over a period of six or eight months last year in the market. We bought all these businesses on a negotiated basis. So the values in Berkshire that have been uh accumulated by some special security transaction are really just peanuts compared to the values that have been created by buying businesses like Geico or Iscar or BNSF or the sort.
It's not it's not a key, but the ingredients that allowed us to do that will still be uh available and to some extent uh peculiar to to Berkshire in terms of sizable deals. But if somebody gets a call from most people and they say, you know, we'll we'll give you $10 billion tomorrow morning and we'll have the lawyers work on it overnight and here are the terms and you there won't be any surprises.
you know, they uh uh they're inclined to believe it's a prank call or something of sort, but with with Bergkshire and they believe it can get done. Charlie. Yeah. And in addition, a lot of the Bergkshire directors are terrific at risk analysis. Think of the Kiwit company succeeding as it has over decades in bid construction work on oil well platforms and tunnels and remote places and so on.
That's not easy to do. Most people fail at that eventually and Walder Scott has presided over that bit of ris risk control all his life and very routinely. In the end, you know, I don't think that any employee of Berkshire. I don't think that the CEOs of any of the companies that uh we own stock in should in any way uh have their citizenship restricted.
And I mean it's uh we did not When Charlie and I took this job, we did not decide to put our our our citizenship in a blind trust. And and the uh uh you know, pe people are perfectly willing uh you know, it's fine if they disagree with us. I think it's kind of silly. I I don't know the politics of uh necessarily of Ken Chenalt or Mutar Kent or or John Stump.
I got a pretty good idea with Kvasovich at one time of the but they run these businesses in which we have 10 Jenny Romedi. I mean we got 11 or 12 billion dollars with her. I don't know what her politics are and and you know I don't know what her religion is. She's got all kinds of personal views, I'm sure, that that uh that probably are better than mine, but it doesn't make any difference.
I just want to know how she runs the business. And I really think that that 84 year old 84 year old man making a decision on what he invests in based on who he agrees with politically, uh, and it sounds to me like he ought to own Fox, Charlie. Well, I want to report that uh Warren's view on taxes for the rich has reduced my popularity on around one of my country clubs.
If it keeps him from hanging around the country club, I'm all for it. And it's a disadvantage I'm willing to bear in order to participate in this enterprise. Yeah. Char Charlie and I we don't disagree on as many things as you might think, but we we certainly have disagreed on some things over 53 years.
It's never in any we've never had an argument in 53 years. And uh maybe you can get one started here if you work on it. But the uh and it it it just it's it's irrelevant. I mean it it uh you know roughly half of the country is going to feel one way you know this November and the other half's going to feel a different way and and if you start selecting your investments or your friends or your neighbors based on trying to get people to agree with you totally you're going to live a pretty peculiar life I
Comments 0