Buffett pays tribute to Munger as being the architect of present-day Berkshire and acknowledges that it was better to buy wonderful businesses at fair prices rather than growth-driven approaches for approximately 15 years.
Warren Buffett released his first shareholder letter since the death of Charlie Munger in November.
Warren Buffett, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, has released his first shareholder letter since the death of his partner Charlie Munger in November. In this letter, he pays tribute to Munger as being the architect of present-day Berkshire and acknowledges that it was better to buy wonderful businesses at fair prices rather than growth-driven approaches for approximately 15 years. Buffett also notes that underperforming managers have been quick to call out something must be amiss, but he reminds readers that a triumph of growth and momentum has led some underperforming managers to lash out and declare that something must be amiss.
Warren Buffett used his annual letter to warn about Wall Street and recount Berkshire's successes
Berkshire Hathaway is a safe place to park cash as long as investors don't expect the 'eye-popping performance' of its past
Charlie Munger was the architect of the present Berkshire, who realized early on that it was better to buy wonderful businesses at fair prices
Berkshire has established a succession plan and said that vice chairman Greg Abel will one day replace Warren Buffett as CEO while the company's two other investment managers will take over the stock portfolio
Accuracy
Charlie Munger was the architect of Berkshire and realized early on that it was better to buy wonderful businesses at fair prices
Deception
(50%)
Warren Buffett's annual letter is a deceptive piece of propaganda that attempts to convince investors to ignore Wall Street pundits and financial advisors. He uses his longtime partner Charlie Munger as an architect for the Berkshire Hathaway conglomerate, but fails to mention that he was not always in agreement with him on certain matters. Buffett also ignores the contributions of other executives at Berkshire who have played a significant role in its successes over the years.
Buffett ignores the contributions of other executives at Berkshire who have played a significant role in its successes over the years. For instance, he does not mention anything about Greg Abel, vice chairman and CEO-in-waiting, or Ajit Jain, head of insurance businesses.
Buffett uses Charlie Munger as an architect for Berkshire Hathaway, but fails to mention that he was not always in agreement with him on certain matters. For example, Buffett disagreed with Munger's decision to invest heavily in Geico insurance and instead chose to focus on other areas of the business.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses anecdotes and personal experiences to make his points, which is not a reliable method for making logical arguments. Additionally, the author frequently uses emotional language such as 'smart', 'sensible', and 'wise' to appeal to readers' emotions rather than presenting evidence or reasoning.
The author uses anecdotes and personal experiences to make his points.
Bias
(85%)
Warren Buffett uses his annual letter to warn about Wall Street and recount Berkshire's successes. He advises investors not to listen to Wall Street pundits or financial advisers who urge them to trade often. Buffett writes that he always writes his letter with smart, long-term investors like Bertie in mind and tries to tell them what they would like to know about Berkshire.
Buffett advises shareholders not to listen to Wall Street pundits or financial advisers who urge them to trade often.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Josh Funk has conflicts of interest on the topics of Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway. He is an investing partner with Charlie Munger who owns Occidental Petroleum which was mentioned in the article.
, in 1965, Munger told him to forget about ever buying another company like Berkshire and instead focus on adding wonderful businesses purchased at fair prices.
Buffett followed his instructions and after Munger joined Berkshire, he repeatedly jerked Buffett back to sanity when old habits surfaced.
Charlie never sought to take credit for his role as creator but instead let Buffett take the bows and receive the accolades. In a way, their relationship was part older brother, part loving father.
Accuracy
Warren Buffett credited Charlie Munger for being the architect of Berkshire Hathaway.
Charlie Munger made key decisions that turbo-charged Berkshire's success. His best call was an investment in the Chinese automaker BYD which recently overtook Tesla in global sales of electric vehicles.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive because it omits the fact that Munger was not only an advisor but also a decision-maker at Berkshire Hathaway. The author uses phrases like 'credited his longtime partner' and 'he urged me to...' to downplay Munger's role in running the company, while emphasizing Buffett's. This is a lie by omission that distorts the truth about their partnership.
Munger made key decisions that turbo-charged Berkshire's success, such as investing in BYD at Buffett's urging. This is a lie by omission because it suggests that Munger was only an advisor and not a co-decision maker.
Buffett suggested that Munger's role at Berkshire was far more important than most outsiders realized, but he did not provide any evidence or examples to support this claim. This is a lie by omission because it implies that Buffett acknowledges Munger's contribution without giving credit where credit is due.
In 1965, Charlie told Warren to 'forget about ever buying another company like Berkshire', but now that he had control of it, to 'add to it wonderful businesses purchased at fair prices and give up buying fair businesses at wonderful prices'. This is a lie by omission because Munger was not only giving advice but also influencing Buffett's acquisition decisions.
In the meantime, however, Berkshire's cash hoard grew to a record $167.6 billion in the fourth quarter.
Later in the letter, Buffett bemoaned the dearth of worthwhile acquisition targets, but he did not mention that Berkshire had acquired NetJets and International Dairy Queen in 2018. This is a lie by omission because it implies that Berkshire was unable to find any good deals when they actually did.
Munger called Bitcoin 'rat poison' and other cryptocurrencies 'a type of venereal disease'. He also wrote in the Wall Street Journal that the federal government should ban the entire industry. This is a lie by omission because it hides Munger's strong opinions and activism against certain industries.
After Munger joined Berkshire, he repeatedly 'jerked me back to sanity when my old habits surfaced'. This is a lie by omission because it implies that Buffett had his own ideas and did not always follow Munger's guidance. In reality, they worked closely together as co-managers of the company.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by crediting Charlie Munger for being the architect of Berkshire Hathaway and stating that his advice was crucial in running the company. This is a form of halo effect where one positive attribute (being a successful investor) is used to make other attributes seem more positive than they actually are. The author also uses an example of false dilemma by presenting two options for Buffett: either forget about buying another company like Berkshire or add to it wonderful businesses purchased at fair prices and give up buying fair businesses at wonderful prices. This creates a sense of urgency and pressure on the reader to choose one option over the other, when in reality there may be more alternatives available. Additionally, the author uses an example of inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Bitcoin is rat poison and comparing it to a type of venereal disease. This language is intended to evoke strong emotions in the reader and make them view Bitcoin negatively.
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies, including an appeal to authority, false dilemma, and inflammatory rhetoric.
Bias
(85%)
The author Steve Mollman is biased towards Charlie Munger and the role he played in building Berkshire Hathaway. The article repeatedly praises Munger's contributions to the company and his ability to provide crucial advice about running it. It also highlights some of his successful investments, such as BYD, which was an investment at Buffett's urging. Additionally, the author uses colorful language and quotes from Munger that are meant to be humorous or critical of other industries like cryptocurrency.
Warren Buffett credited his longtime partner Charlie Munger for being the architect of Berkshire Hathaway.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest with the topic of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger as they are both executives at Berkshire Hathaway. The article also mentions BYD which is a company that competes with Berkshire Hathaway in some areas.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger as they are both executives at Berkshire Hathaway. The article also mentions BYD which is another company that Berkshire Hathaway invests in.
Warren Buffett released a shareholder letter after the death of his partner Charlie Munger in November
`Value investing' has underperformed growth-driven approaches for approximately 15 years as of present
Charlie Munger was the architect of the present Berkshire, who realized early on that it was better to buy wonderful businesses at fair prices
Accuracy
Some value investment managers have underperformed and expressed concerns about market conditions
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by citing Warren Buffett's opinion without providing any evidence or reasoning for it. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when they describe the market as being in seismic changes and growth-driven approaches as having crushed value investing.
The Oracle of Omaha reminded investors how important it is to change with the circumstances (emphasis mine)
Bias
(75%)
The author uses Charlie Munger's name to promote Warren Buffett's philosophy and his own investment advice. The author also mentions the growth-driven approaches that have been successful in recent years, which could be seen as a form of bias towards those methods.
>Buffett has told versions of this story before,
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jonathan Levin has a financial tie to Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger as they are both members of the board of directors for Berkshire Hathaway. This could compromise his ability to report on them objectively.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jonathan Levin has a conflict of interest on the topics of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger as he is an author for Bloomberg. He also has a financial tie to Berkshire Hathaway which is mentioned in the article.
Charlie Munger was the architect of the present Berkshire
Warren Buffett credited Charlie Munger for being the architect of Berkshire Hathaway.
`Buffett described his relationship with Munger as part older brother, part loving father`
Accuracy
Berkshire Hathaway's huge size leaves no possibility of eye-popping performance, according to Buffett
`Warren Buffett acted as the 'general contractor' to carry out Charlie Munger's vision`
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Charlie Munger was the 'architect' of Berkshire Hathaway when it is clear from Buffett's own words that he acted as a general contractor to carry out Munger's vision. Secondly, Buffett states that his relationship with Munger was part older brother and loving father which implies an equal partnership but in reality, Buffett has been the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway for many years while Munger has only served as vice chairman. Thirdly, the article quotes Buffett stating that he prefers to focus on Berkshire's operating earnings that exclude investments when it is clear from his own words that this preference was not always in line with mandates from on high. Finally, Buffett states that there are only a handful of companies capable of moving the needle at Berkshire but fails to provide any evidence or data to support this claim.
The author claims Charlie Munger was the 'architect' of Berkshire Hathaway when it is clear from Buffett's own words that he acted as a general contractor.
The article quotes Buffett stating he prefers to focus on Berkshire's operating earnings that exclude investments when it is clear from his own words that this preference was not always in line with mandates.
Buffett states there are only a handful of companies capable of moving the needle at Berkshire but fails to provide any evidence or data to support this claim.
Buffett states his relationship with Munger was part older brother and loving father which implies an equal partnership but in reality, Buffett has been CEO for many years while Munger served only as vice chairman.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when Buffett says that Munger was the 'architect' of Berkshire Hathaway and that he acted as a general contractor to carry out his vision. This implies that Munger has complete control over the company, which is not true. Additionally, there are several instances where Buffett uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing Munger's role in the company.
Berkshire Hathaway could not have been built to its present status without Charlie’s inspiration, wisdom and participation
In a way, his relationship with me was part older brother, part loving father.
Bias
(85%)
The author uses the phrase 'architect' to describe Charlie Munger and his role in building Berkshire Hathaway. This is a clear example of biased language that deifies Munger as if he were responsible for everything good about the company.
]Charlie was the architect of the present Berkshire, and I acted as the general contractor to carry out his vision,
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest with Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and Daily Journal Corp.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topics provided as they are directly related to Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and Daily Journal Corp., which are companies that have been mentioned in the article.
