Berkshire Hathaway Inc (BRK.A) 시세

She is basic accounting and bookkeeping I assume. And, in today's corporate setting auditing is much more than financial auditing, which is handled by outside CPA firm, e.g. compliance auditing. She is neither CFO nor Comptroller/Controller.

Rebecca Amick BSBA but not a CPA apparently. Been there about 40 years. Why BRK can keep secrets.

University of Nebraska at Omaha.
BSBA Accounting
1974 - 1978

I knew that and was not just thinking of it when I responded to you.

Outside counsel. That one is (or was) easy: Munger, Tolles & Olson, Charlie's law firm.

I saw Marc Hamburg's name on a BRK doc recently. "Rebecca Amick is Auditing and principal accounting officer. Never heard of her. Will look her up.

Marc Hamburg, Senior Vice President. is CFO, Kerby Ham is Treasurer, Daniel Jaksich is VP and Controller, Rebecca Amick is Auditing and principal accounting officer, Mark Millard is VP and Director of Financial Assets. This is from the 2023 Annual Report. BRK uses outside counsel, and I am not certain who its primary law firm is.

I spent a lot of time tracking down a Berkshire Hathaway logo. Turned out BRK is one of very few major corps without one! Usually it is depicted as the company name in plain ole Times new roman font and in some shade of blue. The logo I show was created by me from text, not a graphic. No logo consulting company was used... as usual with Berkshire. They do everything cheaply.

Other questions: Who is BRK's Chief Finance Officer? Who is the Chief Legal Officer? Who is the Corp Secretary?

I went to a huge amount of trouble to write this summary of BRK when I re-did the webpage intros a few years: A few things are no longer completely accurate. In writing that, I read about 15 descriptions of BRK online. It's not easy to summarize BRK in two paragraphs.

------
"Berkshire Hathaway, which began in 1839 as a textile mill, neared collapse in 1962 when 32-year-old Warren Buffett started buying control in the belief the company could be saved. Buffett initially maintained Berkshire’s textile business, but by 1967, he was expanding into other investments. Berkshire bought stock in the Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) that now forms the core of its colossal insurance operations. Other early acquisitions included See's Candies, Blue Chip Trading Stamps and Dairy Queen. BRK moved from the OTC to the NYSE in 1988.

Today Berkshire is a combination of 66 wholly owned subsidiaries such as the BNSF Railroad and 47 passive minority investments, notably its huge stake in Apple. As of 2021, BRK has a market cap of >$600 billion and 360,000 employees. Berkshire Hathaway is the nation's 7th largest business."
--------

Yes. None of BRK's subsidiaries, units of divisions have any separate life or identity other than as part of BRK. BRK only invests passively in the other publicly traded companies. I am not sure what you are trying to say in claiming that BRK has private holdings. BRK is a publicly traded company and all of BRK is publicly traded. What you do not seem to understand is that all of these divisions, units and subsidiaries that are all fully operated by BREK are Berkshire Hathaway. Just read the annual report and see all of the sources of its vast revenue from manufacturing, insurance, retail and services, railroad operations, etc. There are no separate entities outside BRK, and it has to recognize all of the revenue and pay taxes on it. If BRK was only holding investments it would not have to recognize such huge operational revenue each year from its various divisions, units and subsidiaries.

The chart you put at the bottom of your post was a chart of then BRK Board members and their other corporate and Board affiliations. BRK does not own or have investments in all of those companies.

I do understand what you are saying, but honestly, its semantics. I chose Apollo Group as a random example, but what's the difference? They both own publicly traded stock in companies and wholly owned in private holdings, they both instruct the companies how they want to be run. My daughter once worked for one of these companies that was owned by a VC, and they had to answer to them monthly.
The difference is perhaps in the taxation.
I do see how if you wish to say Berkshire produces all these products vs saying Apollo owns them, but is there really a difference?



Among the most notable companies currently owned by Apollo are Claire’s, Caesars Entertainment Corporation, Norwegian Cruise Line, Novitex Enterprise Solutions, Racksapce, and CORE Media Group.

Total AUM:
USD 455 billion
Headquarters:
New York, United States


https://fintel.io/i/apollo-management-holdings


For more than 30 years, Private Equity has been a cornerstone of Apollo’s equity platform. Our tenured team works in partnership with management teams to build stronger businesses. Recognizing one size does not fit all, Apollo Private Equity is focused on providing bespoke, innovative capital solutions to Apollo-managed funds’ portfolio companies. Our flexible and vast platform enables us to add value throughout the lifecycle of an investment.

We are responsible stewards of capital and are proud of our commitment to sustainability and demonstrated ability to generate attractive returns for our investors.

Lastly, according to AI....
AI Overview

Berkshire Hathaway is a diversified holding company that primarily invests in a wide range of publicly traded companies across various sectors, while Apollo Holdings, part of Apollo Global Management, focuses on alternative asset investments like private equity, often targeting distressed companies or those requiring restructuring, making their investment strategy more actively involved and focused on specific opportunities compared to Berkshire's buy-and-hold approach.


Key Differences:
Investment Strategy:
Berkshire Hathaway takes a long-term, buy-and-hold approach to investing in publicly traded companies across diverse industries, while Apollo Holdings actively seeks out distressed or undervalued companies to invest in through private equity strategies, often involving debt restructuring or operational improvements.
Public vs. Private Investments:
Berkshire Hathaway primarily invests in publicly traded companies, while Apollo Holdings primarily focuses on private equity investments, which are not readily available to the general public.
Focus on Insurance:
A significant part of Berkshire Hathaway's business is derived from its large insurance operations, which generate "float" that is used for further investments, while Apollo Holdings does not have a major insurance component.
Leadership and Reputation:
Berkshire Hathaway is widely recognized for its leadership under Warren Buffett, known for his value investing philosophy, while Apollo Global Management is known for its expertise in distressed investing and complex financial transactions.

fung: This should get you started toward developing a better understanding of Berkshire Hathaway's units, production operations, and all of its units and subsidiaries in which its 400,000+ employees work. But you should also read its entire Annual Report, the new one of which should be out in the coming weeks in advance of the annual meeting in May.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Berkshire+Hathaway+Org+Chart&form=IARSLK&first=1

There is a very well-developed plan in place for when that unfortunate event comes to pass. Greg Abel will take over as CEO and Howard Buffett will become non-executive Chairman, and most investors feel the company will not skip a beat. Berkshires 400,000+ employees will continue to show up for work and perform just like they were prior to the unfortunate passing. And, the publicly traded companies in which BRK has passive investments, e.g. KOK, AAPL, BAC, AXP, etc. will continue to function and kick off profits and dividends for their investors. And Ted Weschler and Todd Combs, who were hand-picked and brought in by Warre Buffett years ago to help with the investing, (each was a top money manager with similar style to Buffett) will handle the investments in outside companies.

Many believe the stock price will appreciate upon the event, and other believe it will take a hit. If BRK shares fall significantly upon his passing many will be huge buyers that day, IMO, including yours truly.
My biggest concern though has always been, what happens when Warren passes?

With all due respect fung, that is BS. BRK has all kinds of various divisions and subsidiaries that produce a wide variety of products. You simply do not seem to understand that.

OK. I still stand by my point that Berkshire Hathaway is an investment company and not a production company.
I think you're arguing semantics.
My biggest concern though has always been, what happens when Warren passes?
Of course he and Charlie had stayed healthy much longer than I expected.

None of BRK's wholly owned operating companies and divisions are a separate or standalone public or a private company any more. They are all just part of Berkshire Hathaway and report to its executives and are overseen by the Board of Directors of BRK. Apollo is not in any way comparable or similar to BRK.

They both own companies both public and private wholly.

Yep, most Ihubbers think BRK consists of two *really* old guys sitting around betting on stocks based on hunches, whims and silly charts.

LMFAO! Absolutely not. Apollo is an asset management company more akin to a hedge fund. They also loan money to companies. Other than BRK's stock investments they own and operate everything outright. You really do not have a clue as to what BRK is. You should do come DD and read its annual report.

So, you are saying Berkshire Hathaway is on par with this corporation?

https://www.apollo.com/

Fung: what else do you think a corporate subsidiary or operating division is? BRK does not just own these operations. It operates them, and in every case the managers and CEO's report directly to Warren Buffet or another corporate officer in Omaha. And, BRK's some of the corporate officers, e.g. Ajit Jain, Greg Abel and Todd Combs, are actually CEO's or managers in some of these operating divisions. In a typical year, the majority of BRK's revenue and earnings come from the manufacturing, services and retail division, as opposed to the railroad, energy and insurance divisions. The fact that these operating companies and divisions retain their brand and names does not change the fact that they do not exist in any form other than as an operating division or subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway. As International Dairy Queen states on its website, it is a Subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway. All of the revenue and earnings from the Dairy Queen operations are Berkshire Hathaway's revenue and earnings and are reported as such by BRK. It is really pretty simple, and it is a very large collection of profitable operation divisions and companies, including the world's largest jewelry retailer and the world's largest home furnishings retailer. And, all of the revenues and earnings are BRK's revenue and earnings, unlike a separate company in which BRK simply has an investment, but which is not part of BRK.

You can want to classify it however you wish, but owning a company is different than making a product yourself.
I can give you thousands of examples but it seems moot.

LOL!...I guess if the desire is to feel superior to the norm, this is the place to be!

LMAO! They are all subsidiaries, or operating companies and divisions of BRK. BRK has passive stock investments in AAPL, BAC, AXP, etc., but the divisions and operations to which I referred are all subsidiaries or operating divisions operated by BRK. You obviously do not understand BRK or its operations. When BRK acquires a manufacturer or other company outright and merges it in, it is no different than when one bank acquires another and merges in all operations. Berkshire may make Peanut Butter parfaits in its Dairy Queen operations. All of the revenue and earnings of every one of those operating companies inure to BRK as its own operating earnings. You should do some DD and read the annual report.

and a whole host of other wholly owned operating companies

Yes, this is what I said. Just because they wholly own companies, does not make them the company themselves. Just as any VC cannot claim they ARE the company they own.
Berkshire is not making peanut buster parfaits.

One reason I'm on IHUB is I enjoy observing monumentally dumb investing. For that, IHUB hits the motherlode.

"I'd say 90% are either idiots or scammers looking for idiots" Yes, nicely put.

Not true fung. BRK operating divisions and companies produce all kinds of products from manufactured homes, running shoes (Brooks), high tech airplane parts, medical devices, underwear and apparel (Fruit of the Loom), paints (Benjamin Moore & Co.), candies (See's), cowboy boots (Tony Lama), chemicals and industrial lubricants (Lubrizol), carbide metal cutting tools, agricultural systems, plumbing and refrigeration supplies, carpet and flooring products (Shaw), building insulation and industrial and mechanical insulation (Johns Manville), bricks and concrete block (ACME), high quality kitchen products (Pampered Chef), RV's, buses and boats, including the Jimmy Buffett themed Pontoon boat (Forest River) to name just a few, and a whole host of other wholly owned operating companies in the manufacturing sector. Marmon Holdings alone (wholly owned subsidiary of BRK) is comprised of 11 diverse business groups and more than 100 autonomous manufacturing and services businesses. Not to mention Pilot/Flying J truck stops, which are a wholly owned operating division of BRK, as well as NetJets, the automotive group, which owns 105 new vehicle franchises through 82 Dealerships in the US, and BRK Home services Real Estate Business.

It is totally inaccurate to claim that Berkshire Hathaway does not produce anything.

IHUB is NOT a good sample of intelligent investors.
I'd say 90% are either idiots or scammers looking for idiots

Look, I know you LOVE Berkshire and feel Warren "hung the moon", which considering his age, me may have. But there ARE good and BETTER mutual funds.
Here's one of mine for example, and it has not only beaten the S&P typically, it has also bested Warren....

Investment Fund
The Growth Fund of America® (AGTHX)
JUMP TO A FUND
Share Class
A
DOWNLOAD DATA ADD TO COMPARE ADD TO TRACKER
SUMMARY
RETURNS
RATINGS & RISK
HOLDINGS
PRICES & DISTRIBUTIONS
FEES & EXPENSES
RESOURCES
Summary
A flexible approach to growth investing. Seeks opportunities in traditional growth stocks as well as cyclical companies and turnaround situations with significant potential for growth of capital.
Price at NAV $76.98 as of 1/17/2025 (updated daily)Fund Assets (millions) $297,657.2
Portfolio Managers 1,2 12Expense Ratio
(Gross/Net %) 3 0.61 / 0.61%
Quarterly Fund Fact Sheet (PDF)
Prospectus
Returns at NAV

Returns at MOP
Read important investment disclosures
21.05%
1-year return
13.60%
5-year return
13.00%
10-year return
0.15%
30-Day SEC Yield
Returns as of 12/31/24 (updated monthly). Yield as of 12/31/24 (updated monthly).
Asset Mix

U.S. Equities90.4% Non-U.S. Equities7.7%
U.S. Bonds0.0% Non-U.S. Bonds0.0%
Cash & Equivalents 4,51.9%
As of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly)
Volatility & Return VIEW LARGER CHART
Read important investment disclosures
Equities

For Class A Shares, this chart tracks the 10-year standard deviation 6 and 10-year annualized return of the equity funds
AGTHX S&P 500 Index Other AF Funds

Standard Deviation as of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly) . Annualized return as of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly) .
Market Capitalization
80.2%
Large
17.7%
Medium
2.1%
Small
$814,220.00 Million
Weighted Average 7


As of 9/30/2024 (updated quarterly). FactSet data as of 12/31/2024 (updated quarterly).
Morningstar Ownership ZoneTM 8

Large Growth
Weighted average of holdings
75% of fund's stock holdings
Morningstar data as of 12/31/24 (updated quarterly)
INSIGHTS ON THE MORNINGSTAR OWNERSHIP ZONE
Description
ObjectiveThe fund's investment objective is to provide you with growth of capital.
Distinguishing Characteristics This fund takes a flexible approach to growth investing, seeking opportunities in traditional growth stocks as well as cyclical companies and turnarounds with significant potential for growth of capital. Geographic flexibility also allows portfolio managers to pursue opportunities outside of the U.S. This differentiated approach has the potential to enable the fund to navigate a variety of market environments.
Types of InvestmentsInvests at least 65% of its assets in common stocks. May also invest in convertibles, preferred stocks, U.S. government securities, bonds and cash equivalents.
Holdings Outside the U.S.The fund may invest up to 25% of its assets in securities of issuers domiciled outside the United States.
Fund Facts
Fund Inception 12/01/1973
Fund Assets (millions)
As of 12/31/2024
$297,657.2
Companies/Issuers
Holdings are as of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly).
298+
Shareholder Accounts
Shareholder accounts are as of 12/31/2024
3,754,625
Regular Dividends Paid 9 Dec
Minimum Initial Investment $250
Capital Gains Paid 9 Dec
Portfolio Turnover (2024) 25%
Fiscal Year-End Aug
Prospectus Date 11/01/2024
CUSIP 399874 10 6
Fund Number 5
Returns
Month-End Returns as of 12/31/24

Quarter-End Returns as of 12/31/24
ANNUAL RETURNS CHART
Returns at NAV 10,11 | at MOP 10,11Read important investment disclosures
AGTHX S&P 500 Index

Growth of 10K 11

High & Low Prices
Read important investment disclosures
For Class A Shares, this chart tracks a hypothetical investment with dividends reinvested, over the last 20 years, or since inception date if the fund has been in existence under 20 years, through 12/31/2022.VIEW LARGER CHART
AGTHX S&P 500 Index

Yield
12-month
Distribution Rates 12 30-day SEC Yield
Fund at NAV 0.38% N/A
Fund at MOP 0.36% 0.15%
As of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly)
Valuation
Price/ Price/ Price/
Book Cash Flow Earnings
Fund 5.76 14.76 24.59
S&P 500 Index 4.30 15.60 21.60
Fund as of 12/31/24. Index as of 9/30/24.
Portfolio Management 1,2LEARN ABOUT THE CAPITAL SYSTEMSM
Years of Experience with Fund

Years of Experience with Capital Group

Years of Experience with Investment Industry
Julian N. Abdey29225Christopher D. Buchbinder292911Mark L. Casey242412J. Blair Frank313023Roz Hongsaranagon22225Carl M. Kawaja373314Aidan O'Connell30215Anne-Marie Peterson302012Andraz Razen26206Martin Romo323214Eric H. Stern35336Alan J. Wilson343412
A boldface number indicates that years of experience with Capital Group is equal to years of experience with investment industry.
Ratings & Risk
Morningstar Rating TM 13

Overall Morningstar RatingTM
Funds rated(1020)
3-yr. Morningstar RatingTM
(1020 funds rated)
5-yr. Morningstar RatingTM
(952 funds rated)
10-yr. Morningstar RatingTM
(748 funds rated)
Overall Morningstar Risk Below Average HIGHLOW
Category Large Growth
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF MORNINGSTAR RATINGS

Ratings are based on risk-adjusted returns as of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly).
Lipper Leader Scorecard 14
Overall 3 yr. 5 yr. 10 yr.
Consistent Return Within Category
Funds Rated

(627)
(627)
(593)
(469)
Expense Within Category
Funds Rated

(167)
(167)
(165)
(152)
Preservation Within Category
Funds Rated

(12261)
(12261)
(11246)
(8291)
Tax Efficiency Within Category
Funds Rated

(628)
(628)
(594)
(470)
Total Return Within Category
Funds Rated

(628)
(628)
(594)
(470)
Category Large-Cap Growth Funds
KEYHIGHEST LOWEST
As of 12/31/2024 (updated monthly)
Risk Measures
Fund
Standard Deviation 6 16.74
Sharpe Ratio 6 0.74
For the 10 Years ending 12/31/24 (updated monthly).
American Funds/
Morningstar Benchmark 6
S&P 500 TR USD
R-squared 92
Beta 1.04
Capture Ratio (Downside/Upside) 104/104
American Funds and Morningstar Benchmark for the 10 Years ending 12/31/24 (updated monthly).


https://www.slickcharts.com/berkshire-hathaway/returns

I remember the slobbering mob of IHUB fad "players" around 1998 being furious with grandpas Buffett and Munger for not owning any Dot Com stocks. I didn't own any either.

Mutual funds are always marketing to the customer base. No so, "the boys."

I remember the slobbering mob of IHUB fad "players" around 1998 being furious with grandpas Buffett and Munger for not owning any Dot Com stocks. I didn't own any either.

Mutual funds are always marketing to the customer base. No so, "the boys."

And everyone takes Buffett's phone calls over some mutual fund hack.


Well you are half right.
They DO take his calls (and most likely, the companies are the ones making the call),
but to call mutual fund managers "hacks" is ridiculous. First off, they aren't allowed to get the info Warren gets by law, and
many of those "hacks" are managing hundreds of billions of dollars or trillions!

Mutual Fund Assets TTM Yield Expense Ratio
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares (ticker: VTSAX) $1.8 trillion 1.3% 0.04%
Vanguard 500 Index Fund Admiral Shares (VFIAX) $1.3 trillion 1.3% 0.04%
Fidelity 500 Index Fund (FXAIX) $599.4 billion 1.2% 0.015%
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund Admiral Shares (VTIAX) $463.3 billion 2.8% 0.12%
Fidelity Government Money Market Fund (SPAXX) $351.1 billion 4.5%* 0.42%
Fidelity Government Money Market Fund Premium Class (FZCXX) $351.1 billion 4.6%* 0.32%
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund Admiral Shares (VBTLX) $343.4 billion 3.4% 0.05%
Vanguard Institutional Index Fund (VINIX) $309.8 billion 1.3% 0.035%
American Funds The Growth Fund of America Class A (AGTHX) $296.8 billion 0.5% 0.63%
American Funds The Growth Fund of America Class C (GFACX) $296.8 billion 0.0% 1.39%

For that reason alone BRK gets deals the others don't. BRK's office in Omaha has about 25 workers with average tenure of about 20 years. There are no consultants.

And everyone takes Buffett's phone calls over some mutual fund hack.

Yes. I know the advantages they have. However, in the fact they are not a company that produces anything, and their goal is to own a whole bunch of profitable companies, they are in this criteria, a mutual fund.
Of course they have the advantages of not having to report things for a while, and are of course, privy to all sorts of inside info......this isn't a criticism, just a fact.
So again though, how in heck can they possibly keep up with technology if Buffet only likes buying companies he understands and Charlie is gone?
I've followed this for years and admittedly talked my father out of keeping his shares, which in hindsight may or may not have been a mistake. I've never done the math as to whether he would have been better here or APPL, MSFT, MSFT, AMZN and a bevy of other stocks which he bought after selling this.

BRK can keep secrets.

Ahhhhh, the unfair advantage.

"Berkshire is basically a mutual fund," Yes and_no.

Among many differences, mutual funds are required to distribute 95% of net realized capital gains to shareholders every year. As you know BRK usually keeps it all. BRK wholly owns many corps, some are not publicly traded (such as BNSF, Sees Candies), and is very active in running some of them. BRK can be a smart investment for investors who prefer tax favored capital gains over ordinary taxable income. BRK can lend money.

BRK can be non-diversified if Buffett wants to go that way. Most mutual funds have broad diversification requirements. BRK doesn't.

BRK's management costs are much lower than most mutual funds. BRK can keep secrets.

BRK is a diverse conglomerate with many separate operating companies and several wholly owned units, e.g. BNSF, BK Energy, etc., in addition to many stock investments, as opposed to being akin to a mutual fund fung.

Berkshire is basically a mutual fund, the average mutual fund has a beta around 1, so it is a bit low, however this doesn't change the volatility of the stocks within it.
Which brings up an interesting question.....Warren has always said, he buys stocks he can understand.....will he buy into the AI industry? He owns Microsoft but what else?

$96 billion in net profit. Lord!

What one would expect with all BRK's cash.

Smoothly upward for the past year or more
https://ih.advfn.com/stock-market/NYSE/berkshire-hathaway-BRK.A/chart/streaming

BRK.A's beta is an extremely low 0.88. The A and B shares usually track each other very closely.

I am shocked by how volatile Berkshire has been lately. Speaks volumes to their focusing more on tech than ever before.
Of course, $KO isn't helping much.

Berkshire Fine Spinning Associates is Formed

Berkshire Fine Spinning Associates Inc. incorporated under Massachusetts laws in 1929 as a consolidation of Berkshire Cotton Manufacturing Co., Valley Falls Co., Coventry Co., the Greylock Mills, and Fort Dummer Mills. The company changed its name to Berkshire Hathaway in 1955 when it acquired Hathaway Manufacturing Co. Berkshire Fine Spinning Associates Inc. manufactured fine grades of cotton textiles and specialized in fine lawns, batistes, nainsooks, organdies, dimities, handkerchief cloths, broadcloths, oxfords, sateens, rayon and silk mixtures. Plants were located in New Bedford, Massachusetts. Berkshire offered 33,000 shares of common stock in 1929 at $40 per share as well as 4,860 shares of 7% Preferred stock, also at $40 per share. Unfortunately, the shares were offered in the middle of the 1929 bull market, and the share price collapsed soon after. In November 1929, the ask price for Berkshire stock was still at $40, but in November of 1931, shares sank to $0.50. Sales for the company declined and Berkshire ran losses until 1936.

As late as 1940, shares traded as low as $3, but profits and the share price picked up with the war. Berkshire did well enough that it was able to reinitiate a regular dividend in 1942 (the dividend had been suspended in March 1930), and in September 1947, the company had a 3-for-1 split. Of course, the split marked the high mark for Berkshire and the stock began a downward trend that lasted until 1962. The graph below shows the performance of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. stock from 1929 until 1967 when Warren Buffett took over the company. As you can see, there was little change in the stock price in the forty years before then. Berkshire lost money between 1930 and 1936, and it lost money in 1957, 1958 and 1961 to 1963. Despite the fact that sales had tripled between the 1930s and the 1960s, there was no comparable increase in profits. In 1963, Berkshire stock was still trading below the price it had been offered at in 1929!

Buffet Buys Berkshire
Buffett began buying shares in Berkshire Hathaway at less than $8 in 1962 and by 1966, Buffett and his partners had taken over the company.As soon as Buffett took over Berkshire, he began focusing on insurance and other businesses rather than textiles. Buffett had invested in American Express when Anthony de Angelis’s fraud caused the price of American Express to drop dramatically in 1964. In the 1970s, Buffett expanded his investments to include media companies (The Washington Post and ABC) as well as other companies that fit his investment criteria. The final Berkshire mill was closed down in 1985.

Berkshire Hathaway paid a regular dividend between 1942 and 1960 when the dividend was suspended due to losses. Buffett paid a $0.10 dividend in November 1967, but that was the only dividend the company ever paid under Buffett. Thenceforward, profits were reinvested in the company to allow the share price to grow. Buffett lived off of his $50,000 salary and outside investment income. Berkshire Hathaway stock continued to trade OTC until October 1976 when it listed on NASDAQ. The shares moved to the New York Stock Exchange in November 1988 and in May 1996, Berkshire issued lower-priced Class B shares to investors who could no longer afford to buy a share of Berkshire Hathaway, Class A shares, which by that time had risen in price to $35,000.

Berkshire Booms

The impact of Buffett on Berkshire was incredible. Shares in Berkshire which had gone nowhere for 40 years began increasing at a rapid pace. The stock closed at $18.625 in 1966. Shares first broke the $100 mark in 1977, the $1000 mark in 1983, the $10,000 mark in 1992 and the $100,000 mark 2006. Shares now trade around $200,000. Buffett could have bought any company and the results would have been the same. As soon as Buffett took over Berkshire Hathaway, he began to focus on other businesses and ignore the company’s core manufacturing business. In fact, at one point, Buffett said that buying the textile business had been the worst trade of his life. I guess everyone is allowed one mistake.

https://globalfinancialdata.com/berkshire-before-buffett

Berkshire Hathaway's Start

Long Lost Buffett Footage

Berkshire holding $325 Billion in CASH:

https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175323996

Tomorrow's BRK earnings release will shed a lot of additional light on things here bar, including any additional share sales, cash position, buybacks, etc.

Meet America's Newest $1 Trillion Company. Warren Buffett Has Spent $77.8 Billion Buying Its Stock Since 2018

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstocks/meet-america-s-newest-1-trillion-company-warren-buffett-has-spent-77-8-billion-buying-its-stock-since-2018/ar-AA1sPTie?ocid=BingNewsSerp

"Buffett warns of ‘casino-like’ investor behavior. Here’s the hidden cost of ‘free’ investing"

"The landscape of investing has undergone a seismic shift, with the advent of commission-free trading and low-cost ETFs. While this has empowered retail investors, it has also introduced new challenges. Fees have been significantly reduced, but investors now face less visible but equally harmful costs associated with increased risk."

"Buffett’s warning
In today's "free" investing world, many in the finance industry seem bent on distracting investors from this goal. Investors who have not (yet) embraced broad market indexing are being encouraged to trade more actively and take more risk. As Warren Buffett observed, “markets now exhibit far more casino-like behavior than they did when I was young. The casino now resides in many homes and daily tempts the occupants.”"

"This casino-fication of markets can be seen in the explosion of stock options trading volumes, particularly in lottery-like zero-day-to-expiration options, and the glorification of day-trading on online trading platforms that are almost indistinguishable from online gambling sites. All sorts of leveraged, concentrated, and options-based ETFs have come to market, and have attracted hundreds of billions of dollars in short order."

"Double-whammy for active investors
Unfortunately, the bad news for ordinary investors doesn’t stop here. When retail investors take on extra risk, the market participants taking the other side of their active bets are also, on average, taking extra risk. These professional trading firms need to make extra returns to compensate them for the extra risk they’re taking, and the only place that can come from is the pockets of active retail traders. This is a double whammy for active investors—they need to get extra return for the extra risk they take, but instead they wind up with a lower return, because other market participants higher up in the food chain are making extra returns at their expense. While the payment of fees can be thought of as a zero-sum transfer in that one party pays a fee and the other party receives the fee, the cost of taking extra risk is a negative sum phenomenon across all parties.

While the allure of "free" investing is strong, the “risk matters hypothesis” reminds investors to be cautious about the risk associated with deviating from the market. In most cases, the best bet may be to stick with broadly diversified index funds."

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

I think you're going to have another chance to buy shortly. A shares support currently around $609k. Current price $669015

And the share price just keeps going up, and up!