Generally the latter. The very short version is that he focused on cash flow, and liked (re) insurance due to success managing float and risk. From there, he'd buy/invest stable businesses and brands. Insurance wasn't his first go, he started bookie work as a kid.
As for saving, he was the guy with a big pile of money in '08 (and other times). Someone you call when your business is dying or you want to retire; he gets the deal, not you. His Bank of America warrant play was a big one from that time.
I didn't finish snowball, but the first half goes over a lot of it.
I like WB as much as the next guy and while he was wildly successfully at making money, he hasn't really done anything else. His main motivation has always been to make money for himself and his shareholders, so why would we expect anything else?
Some of his biggest investments are in things like candy, soda, beer. Not exactly great for society overall and not really enabling anything other than diabetes.
He was already an massively wealthy in 2008 and just having a huge pile of cash and using it to make more deals is not some great achievement to be celebrated.
Yes he made billions off of his 2011 bofa investment, so good for him and brk but what did this do for anyone else?
If BH didn't exist would it really matter? I don't think so.
The Economist doesn't use bylines for its news. The goal is to have a "common voice" for the whole organization, rather than a collection of individuals.
It doesn't aim for neutrality, the way a lot of top American newspapers do. It has opinions, generally being in favor of free markets and economic liberalism. But they also require strict fact-checking, and they're not biased towards any particular politician or party. They will make clear who they feel to be right or wrong.
I agree this would be a positive direction, but something that gives me pause is the forced upgrades and hardware cycle of both mac and windows now. They both scan files in your system constantly for various reasons, so for this purpose you're really stuck on *nix variants, right?
This isn't the accounting definition of goodwill; to an accountant, its just "hey you overpaid according to book value." I don't think the HR "goodwill" is formally accounted for.
Goodwill is realized only a sale yes. It is the difference between the fair market value of the assets and the price (i.e. value) paid of the asset.
FMV is calculated and updated in books periodically, price or value is only possible to account for if there is a sale otherwise any metric for value is not sound accounting wise, but that doesn't mean those things don't have value at all(or only on sale), they are just not accounted until then. It is for a good reason you wouldn't want a company to say use goodwill as a security for leverage for example. Goodwill does conventionally include intangible value like brand, some forms of IP, and things like customer(employee?) loyalty and so on.
Cool idea! I had something similar for using LLMs as an intermediary not for spam but for "boring" local news matching to your profile. Court stuff, town meetings on youtube, that kind of thing.
My (admittedly aged) experience with XBRL is that each company was able to define its own fields/format within that spec, and that most didn't agree on common names for common fields. Parsing it wasn't fun.
I have spotty education on the matter but I believe they all conform to a FASB taxonomy so there is at least a list of possible tags in use. I do wonder if any of the big data vendors actually use this though.
As I understand it, with low (<1%) interest rates... Take a low-interest loan against a % of your wealth. If you can get the loan, then it seems like you get to have your cake (unrealized appreciation gains) and eat it too (non-income money now.)
This goes somewhat deeper than you might expect. "Literal" spells are for sale on e.g. ebay, and presumably authenticity/belief are managed like reputation?
