4 ms·
Yes, and yes. But, if Berkshire wanted to they could pump BTC to new heights and undoubtedly make a profit.
by maxqin1 5y ago
Yes, and yes. But, if Berkshire wanted to they could pump BTC to new heights and undoubtedly make a profit.
- DSingularity 5y agoDoubt they are rich enough to corner the BTC market if that is what you are suggesting.
- betterunix2 5y agoBerkshire Hathaway's market capitalization is more than $600B, so actually they could corner the market on it if they really wanted to (though it would probably become obvious that they were trying that long before it happened). They have no interest in Bitcoin because, from their previous comments on it, it produces nothing and they only invest in productive assets.
- solveit 5y agoAll they have to do is invest a billion or so in bitcoin, announce it (as they are required to), then sell it. It would be relatively trivial.
- maxqin1 5y agoExactly. But these guys are too old for the short game at this point. They are about legacy. And that should make these statements hit that much harder.
- kamyarg 5y agoI think what the parent comment suggests is "Seal of approval" situation, similar thing that happened with Tesla buying bitcoin caused price surge. When a well known entity invests in crypto, trust in crypto goes up. Berkshire buying bitcoin would definitely make me buy more bitcoin.
- SXX 5y agoThey are not Tesla. This would be very much against their risk profile.
- maxqin1 5y agoIt's against everything they stand for in terms of value investing.
- jl2718 5y agoOr they know they can’t, so they are moral grandstanding until they come up with a plan for the digital economy.
- maxqin1 5y agoAt their ages they can barely stand on their own, so I'm not too worried about any grandstanding.
- calsy 5y agoIf they could undoubtedly make a profit, why haven't they done so. What investment firm would miss making a profit on a sure thing?
- maxqin1 5y agoLegacy. Do you really think they're only worried about profits at this point?
- elliekelly 5y agoOne that has a long and storied history of only investing their money in productive assets. Buffet doesn’t even buy gold.
- adventured 5y agoBuffett isn't entirely adverse to metals such as gold, the reason he doesn't buy gold is he doesn't think it's often undervalued. His history with silver for example: "Warren Buffett made an unusual move in 1997 when he bought 111 million ounces, or nearly 3,500 tons, of silver. The famed investor's purchase helped make Thomas Kaplan a billionaire." https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffett-bought-3500-tons-silver-made-thomas-kaplan-billionaire-2020-5-1029228443 https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/warren-buffe... https://seekingalpha.com/article/376711-evidence-that-warren-buffett-manipulated-the-silver-market-in-late-1990s https://seekingalpha.com/article/376711-evidence-that-warren...
- adventured 5y agoBuffett and Berkshire in fact have a long history of intentionally not always seeking the maximization of profit. Read Lowenstein's Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist for several examples. Berkshire is not an "investment firm" (although that may have been an accurate description 40 or 50 years ago). And they operate almost solely by the dictate of Buffett, not by theroetical shareholder demand for optimizing for max profit. That means they operate by parameters that Buffett deems prudent. Berkshire for example could have been deep into the supposed sure thing of the real-estate bubble circa 2005, instead they were one of the few mega corporations on the planet almost entirely insulated from it (so much so they were the ones doing the bailing out of other large corporations). That philosophy is the same reason why Berkshire might choose to pass on a supposed sure thing in crypto today: they don't like the risk; others may see a sure thing, they're skeptical (for better or worse).