[syassami]

They actually did not buy any AAPL stock. Rather it came from Allegheny's (company they acquired recently) portfolio which they liquidated aside from AAPL. - Berkshire nerd.

[mvid]

Is there any realistic difference?

[ericmay]

Yes because the company the acquired may have purchased the stock at a price that fit with Berkshire’s previous purchase prices based on their own internal financial assessments.

[jjtheblunt]

For taxes, the purchase price of "inherited" shares bought sometime ago by Allegheny (sp?) likely differs than the purchase price at the moment?

[philip1209]

If you want to be pedantically technical, the Depository Trust Company still technically owns all the shares anyways! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depository_Trust_Company

[plonk]

Someone read the latest Matt Levine email :)

[nabla9]

If you want to be pedantically technical, Cede & Co. owns all of the publicly issued stock in the United States.

[MuffinFlavored]

Does Berkshire have any tricks from a 'cunning investor' perspective other than

1. Buy AAPL

2. Use their size as an advantage to bully distressed companies into giving them access to basically "sweetheart" deals?

[dkural]

Berkshire is not unique in its ability to buy what you call "distressed" companies. The companies it buys are not usually distressed, but just undervalued by rest of the market. It's entrance into tech is fairly recent.

Overall strategy is simple to state but hard to execute over time consistently: 1) Actually read financial reports. Buy what you truly understand. 2) Don't buy stuff during bubbles or when overvalued (which is a lot of the time) and be happy with just sitting on your accumulated reserves, 3) Buy when you spot companies/stock that is undervalued relative to the market 4) Mostly HOLD forever.

The reason tech came relatively late is it failed Rule #1 of "buy what you understand", and vast majority of the time it fails Rule #2.

What not to do: Time Warner-AOL merger was worth $350 Billion. In 2015, Time Warner got sold for $78 billion.

[richardw]

They have many. In a lot of cases the original creator of the company stays on to run it, which would be extremely weird if they were forced into the situation. Why would you force someone into a bad situation and then let them run your newly bought company? It's like kicking them in the knee and then handing them a knife. Why would they take up the offer, except if they thought it was net positive for them? Why do many continue to run the business for many years, rather than cashing out and running?

If you have a distressed company, that's not his fault. You create the situation, he merely offers you one of 100 options, you can choose that one or absolutely any other from the other people knocking on your door, who would presumably pay a premium for the company Buffett has just said is worth the money by virtue of having offered you a price.

[pristineshatter]

Shortly after I joined a company it was acquired by Birkshire. I witnessed how they transformed operations and streamlined processes and trained/equipped employees. I was quite taken back by how good they were at their job and that's when I realized the value of good management. They were very customer oriented and wanted to make employees happy. I was in the Real Estate industry, my biggest complaint was how they bought out brokers, title, insurance and mortgage companies and they would engage in an incestuous relationships that IMO broke the fiduciary duty that a broker has with a client.

[Tuna-Fish]

As a gigantic insurance company, a lot of the money they invest is not money they own, but insurance premiums that have not been paid out as claims yet. I think this has some favorable tax implications for them.