저자: WarrenBuffett및CharlieMunger · 외국인
요약 보기
버핏과 멍거는 소액 자산이면 전혀 다른 투자 기회가 열린다고 설명하며, 대형 버크셔는 대형 주식으로는 고수익을 내기 어렵다고 말한다. 20년 장기 관점에서는 채권보다 주식을 택하겠다고 했고, 단기 시장 방향 예측은 하지 않는다고 밝혔다. 과거 은 매도는 너무 이르게 판 실수였다고 회고했다. 은 가격은 수요·공급으로 결정된다는 견해를 밝혔다.
다듬은 글
Mr. Buffett, you claim you can do 50% a year. If you had to start over with a small portfolio, would you still be doing buy and hold, buying quality companies at a good price, or would you be doing arbitrage and really getting down to the nitty-gritty Benjamin Graham cigar butts that you did in the the Buffett partnership?
Yeah, if I were working with a very small sum, uh and you should all hope I'm not. Uh if I were working with a very small sum, I would be doing entirely almost entirely different things than than I do. I mean, there's there's your universe expands. I mean, if you're looking there's thousands and thousands and thousands of times as many of options to think about if you're if you're investing $10,000 than if you're investing a hundred billion.
And obviously, if you have that many you got all the options you got with a hundred billion except buying entire businesses and you've got all of these other options. So, you can earn very high returns with very small amounts of money and it will always be such. I don't mean that everybody can do it, but if if you know something about values and investments, you will find opportunities with small sums and it will not be with the portfolio that Berkshire itself owns.
It You we can't earn we cannot earn phenomenal returns putting three billion, four billion, five billion in a in a stock. It it won't work that way. It won't even come close to working that way. But if Charlie uh or I were in a position of working uh with a million dollars or five hundred thousand dollars or two million, we would find little things here and there and it wouldn't always be stocks uh where we would earn very high returns on capital.
Um Charlie? Yeah, but it's there's no point in our thinking about that now. But he's thinking about it, Charlie. If I were mark managing a very large endowment fund, for one thing it would either be a hundred percent in stocks or a hundred percent in long bonds or a hundred percent in short-term bonds.
I mean, I don't I don't believe in layering things and saying I'm going to have 60% of this and 30% of that thing and then why do I have the 30% if I think the 60% makes more sense? So, I And if you told me I had to invest the fund for 20 years and I had a choice between buying the index 500 or a 20-year bond, you know, I would buy stocks.
Uh You know, that doesn't mean they won't go down a lot and but it but if you I would I would rather have a equity investment. I wouldn't rather have an equity investment where I pay that ton of money to somebody else that took my stock return down dramatically. But simply buying an index fund for 20 years of equities or buying a 20-year bond, I would I would it would not it would not be a close decision with me.
I would I would buy the equities. I'd rather buy them cheaper, you know, but I'd rather buy the bond with a bigger yield, too. But in terms of what's offered to me today, that's the way I would come down. Charlie? Yeah, I don't think that was the answer that was expected, but that's the answer. That doesn't have a thing to do with where we think stocks or what we don't think at all, but where stocks could be or bonds could be into it.
We We don't have the faintest idea where the S&P will be in three years or where the long-term bond will be in three years, but we do know which we would rather own on a 20-year basis. We'd also we expect that the current scene will cause some real disruption. Yeah, but not too many years ahead. That's true, but if you go back a hundred years, you could almost say that you know, at almost any period and and you will get disruptions from time to time and it's very nice if you have a lot of cash then and you have the guts to to do something with it, but predicting them or waiting around for them, that sort of thing is not our game and I mean, we bought five billion dollars worth of of equities in the first quarter or something like that.
And you know, we don't think they're anything like They aren't they're not it'd be a joke to even compare them to 1974 or a whole bunch of other periods, but we decided we would rather have them than cash or we would rather have them than sit around and hope that things get a lot cheaper. We don't spend a lot of time doing that.
It It you can you can freeze yourself out indefinitely. So, anytime we find something what we think is intelligent to do, we just do it. And we hope we can do it big. Number seven. My name is Nathan Nerusis from Vancouver, Canada. Mr. Buffett, Mr. Munger, my question concerns your previous silver bullion investment.
I'm curious to hear more about why you sold when you did. More specifically, whether you sold your bullion to the organizers of the silver exchange-traded fund in return for cash plus perhaps important non-cash consideration in order to keep silver markets from either rising or falling sharply. Thank you very much for anything you would care to share with us.
I'm not sure who we sold it to, but whoever we sold it to was a lot smarter than I was. Uh I I bought it too early. I sold it too early. Other than that, it was a perfect trade. Couldn't have done Charlie, do you have anything to add? Charlie had nothing to do with the silver decision, so so that one falls entirely on me.
I think we've demonstrated how much we know about silver. The fact you asked us a question on silver flatters us because nobody asked us about silver anymore. But we'll we'll come up with something else at some point. With the you know, the uh There the last part of your question, there there was a small implication, I think, of perhaps a silver conspiracy or conspiracy We we've As soon as we started it got known that we bought silver, we started getting all these letters in the mail from people who had all these different theories about about the fact that that hedging was was killing things or these kind of traders were doing something.
In the end, silver responds to supply and demand just like oil supply responds to supply and demand. Oil is the price of oil at 60 or 65 dollars is not a product of a bunch of oil executives conspiring or anything of the sort. It's supply and demand on a huge commodity. Silver's a small commodity, but on any kind of commodity like that, supply and demand is what determines prices over time.
Although the Hunt brothers, I must admit, for a short period there in a few years managed to change the equation and they forever wished they hadn't. Uh number eight. Charlie, you were quoted in Poor Charlie's Almanack as saying, quote, "Ben Frank-Glenn was a very good ambassador and whatever was wrong with him from John Adams' point of view, probably helped him with the French." End quote.
If you are willing, I am curious to hear your additional thoughts regarding John Adams and his wife Abigail Adams. Well, of course they were wonderful people, both of them. And uh Did you know them personally, Charlie? But if you wanted to have a really jolly evening, I would have take Franklin every time.
And uh And the the French loved Franklin. I think I remind many people too much of John Adams and too little of Ben Franklin. He does pretty well in respect of Ben Franklin, too. Let's go to number seven. Uh
Comments 0