Seeking Alpha
About this author:

After trashing Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) (BRK.B) just six months ago (in December), Barron's is now making a case for its purchase with an article this weekend entitled "Cheap Stock?"

To the magazine's credit, the stock has sold off since December. This comes after an article a few weeks ago entitled "The Next Buffett," which discussed how David Sokol, the chairman of MidAmerican Energy (a Berkshire unit), is now the most likely successor to Buffett to be CEO of Berkshire - and more importantly, how he is probably ready for the job. Not wanting to flip-flop too much, or at least to provide some balance, this week's issue also has an interview with Doug Kass, the popular short-selling hedge fund manager, who is still bearish on Berkshire stock, and has reiterated this view for readers.

While the criticism of Berkshire has varied over the years, the issues of the exposure of the company to its insurance business and that of Buffett's age are still often cited as reasons for selling and staying out of the stock. As for the insurance business, its impact seems to show up in October, as seen in the weekly chart below (from stockcharts.com), although this is simply a three year view and anecdotal. Nonetheless, for the past three Octobers, after the annual hurricane and storm season is over and the quarterly results begin to show how much of the float is left for Buffett to invest, the stock often has a nice end of the year rally before leveling off or making a slower accent to the next October.

The difference, of course, has been this year, when the stock has sold off and been more volatile after the December Barron's article and recent news of other hedge fund managers, such as Kass, taking a short position in the stock. The latest positive article and opinion from Barron's may stem the tide, but many of the short-sellers remain.

Even Buffett at the recent "Woodstock for Capitalists" shareholders meeting in May alluded that Berkshire may under-perform (at least its historical returns), and there may therefore be better opportunities elsewhere. But then again, Buffett is known for lowering expectations and feigning a sense of weakness, only to later make large acquisitions and investments, such as the recent decision to help finance the Mars acquisition of Wrigley, while taking a small position for himself.

While it is difficult to value Berkshire Hathaway in comparison to many other public companies, and even more difficult to predict where Buffett is deploying his capital - at least until the quarterly reports are released - it does appear that the recent sell-off of the stock has taken some of the "Buffett premium" out of the stock. This extra boost to the valuation of Berkshire, simply because of his skill and the brand that Buffett has become, is often cited as one of the concerns for the stock as it relates to both the valuation and Buffett's age.

In the past, the premium has seemed justified based on past performance, and still does, but if Buffett were to step down for any reason, there is an expectation that the premium will be immediately taken out of the stock. Yet, Buffett appears to be in good health and even better spirits, not to mention remaining active in looking for investment opportunities (notwithstanding showing up on soap-operas and CNBC at every chance Becky Quick gets).

Still, some investors are waiting on the sidelines for fear that Buffet will be replaced. This seems silly to me, since you are missing out on the opportunity to let one of the greatest investors of all time put your money to work. Furthermore, what happens if Berkshire is then run by someone else, maybe 1, 5, or 10 or years from now? Will this give you a reason to jump in? Sure, succession will be more clear, but the management of your money will be less so, regardless of Barron's pick (or guess) for a successor - for CEO, not CIO(s).

In a sense, it comes down to staying out of the stock while you wait for a pullback and possibly new management, compared to staying in the stock and benefiting from Buffett's expertise, even with a lack of succession clarity. I think many current investors will continue to take their chances.

In the end, the biggest hurdle for Buffett may not be his age, or overcoming the "Buffett premium," or worrying about the next catastrophe that will reduce the investment float. What may be more of a challenge is overcoming the law of large numbers. The company's cash for investment is considerable. To make any dent in the stock price of Berkshire, Buffett has to take a considerable position in an outside company in order for it to register enough to potentially affect earnings and move the stock. This takes time, and certainly offers less flexibility to get in and out at an acceptable price.

More than likely, this is one reason why Berkshire Hathaway has simply made large equity investments and outright purchases of companies in the last few years, although the recent volatility and credit/housing related sell-offs in the stock market have created more of the values that Buffett looks for, and has resulted in more equity positions - recent purchases include Kraft (KFT) , Ingersoll Rand (IR), Burlington Northern Sante Fe (BNI), US Bankcorp (USB), United Health Group (UNH), Wells Fargo (WFC), and Wellpoint (WLP), along with small positions in Carmax (KMX), M&T Bank (MTB), and Sanofi Aventis (SNY). Of these positions, only the added positions in Kraft and Burlington Northern Sante Fe were large enough to generate any interest on the buy side, and even then, they were adding to already existing positions.

So what is an investor to do? Barron's does provide some guidance by referring to an analysis by the hedge fund T2 Partners. T2 highlights that the intrinsic value of Berkshire has continued to grow steadily and significantly over the last few years. From Barron's:

"Meanwhile, for a truly big company -- with a market cap of $190 billion, total assets at last count of $281 billion, total equity of $119 billion and book value per share of $77,014 -- it has been enjoying quite impressive growth, especially where it really counts. The value of investments per share has climbed to $90,343 in 2007, from $52,507 five years earlier; during this stretch, pretax earnings per share, excluding investment income, has quadrupled from the $1,479 posted in '02; and intrinsic value -- which T2 calculates as investments per share, plus 12 times earnings per share excluding investment income -- at the end of last year ran somewhere between $156,300 and $158,700 a share, or comfortably more than double '02's $70,000."

As a result, T2 believes that Berkshire is undervalued by approximately 20%. Furthermore, if you are to assuming a 10% growth rate for the intrinsic value of the company, which is not speculative for Berkshire by any measure, with a business and cash buildup of $6,000 per share over the next year, the total intrinsic value could approach $178,700 per share. Given the current price, this represents a 46% premium on the stock. Going out further to two years, the number approaches $200,000.

While short-sellers like Kass will continue to short Berkshire, and give good explanations - such as Buffett's age and lack of a visible succession plan, new hedge-fund competition, new uncharacteristic exposure to derivatives, and waning benefits from the insurance industry - it is difficult to bet against someone with so much cash to deploy, as well as a track record for wisely putting it to work. While the stock has been volatile, and is receiving attention from the short side, it is difficult for many investors to sell at these levels until more of the issues that Kass describes come to light.

For the time being, most of the current long investors will no doubt hold, and look for others to join in - maybe in October.

Disclosure: Long BRK.B

Print this article with comments

This article has 16 comments:

  •  
    sorry.. but you are forgetting that Mr. Buffet is not a young man any more and a lot of BKB's pricing is about the man himself. If he goes, and I wish him long lasting health - BKB will drop 30%.. you should take that into consideration as a responsible investor..
    2008 May 18 10:43 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Undoubtedly, there has always been some of Mr. Buffet's reputation in the stock price...than again (wouldn't you logically agree?), as his retirement is an acknowledged fact, that fact should also be in the stock price. So, true, the stock may drop some on his retirement, but your 30% estimate would seem (wildly?) pesimistic.

    As for myself, I have 16 shares of BRKB. I'm disappointed that the man who called dirrivatives "weapons of mass distruction", allowed those same WMD to produce huge insurance losses for his stockholders. Consequently, I have no reason to wait for the announcement of his successor, I have placed limit sales as the stock price recovers near term.
    2008 May 18 11:18 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    p.s. Obviously, the financial press gave Mr. Buffet a pass (they have no money in the game -- I do).
    2008 May 18 11:26 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    This is a well written article. Someone like me who read Barron's write up and Doug Kass's comments was confused. This aricle clears the confusion. I attended Omaha conference and Mr. Buffett looks as healthy as he can be plus he is enjoying even more so as there are opportunities created due to Real Estate mess. I believe he will make some bang up investments in Germany as he will be visiting there soon. Just look at what Burlington Northern did; buying in the range of 75 to 80 and the stock already trading around 107. Truly an unmatched performance. My take on the stock: Buy Buy Buy.
    2008 May 18 11:32 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    guliamo is right, there will never be another Buffett

    The man is a legend and a 30% premium is not unreasonable. Being how close he is to retirement, this is one of 3 reasons I will never own BRK. The other 2 being valuation(Buffett wouldn't buy it if it wasn't his, either will I) and no dividend.
    2008 May 18 11:43 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Doug Kass has no idea what he is talking about in this case. For example, he criticized Berkshire for calling derivatives WMD (due to the consequences of counter-party risk) then selling derivatives itself.

    If Kass had actually read the letter to shareholders, he would know that Berkshire merely SOLD options. It has ZERO counter-party risk for this contract.

    If Kass can't even do this simple research, his opinion shouldn't count for much.
    2008 May 18 12:53 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    No, BRKs has been a good short for a while and will continue to be so.
    2008 May 18 02:37 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Interesting discussion and comments. I would agree that Berkshire has been a good short, and may continue to be so. I was asked off-line about the technicals. Other than referring to the October moves, I suspect and have found that Berkshire does not respond quite the same way technically given its lower volume and type of investors. Nonetheless, just looking at support and resistance, 120,000 may not provide much support, but 110,000 should. If 110,000 is broken, then the shorts definitely will have won, although again, I don't suspect this is a stock that gets pushed around like SIRI or something similar on the short side, or at least in the same way. But selling pressure is apparent. Even so, I suspect there are more strong long-term holders in this stock than most (outside of some who may have been around for a few years and are now looking for income generating stocks). It should be an interesting 6 months. Thanks for reading, and enjoy your weekend.
    2008 May 18 03:44 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    If 110000 is reached, back up the truck.

    Chartists who are blind to fundamentals always make for a good laugh.
    2008 May 18 04:20 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    There are two distinct pieces to any Berskshire related discussion .
    Let's talk about intrinsic value first. Despite its present size, berkshire's oerating businesses should grow earnings at a 10+% clip over a full business cycle. Performance will be lumpy (insurance pricing, super cat performance, housing and economy), but for someone with a long term view, these businesses will grow earnings. This portion of berkshire does not have a huge dependence of Buffet as performance is driven by talented and motivated managers. Moving to investments, it's investment portfolio is positioned superbly. If I'm doing my math right, Buffet deployed 20 billion in bonds recently and still has a war chest of 20+ billion remaining (growing by 8+ billion every year). Most of the existing 70+ billion equity portfolio is invested in 15+% ROE opportunities. It's safe to say that intrinsic value over longer periods of time will grow at 15% but growth will be lumpy.
    The stock price will be affected by two factos: lumpy growth and how markets value liquidity. Lumpy growth has been a way of life at berkshire and is one of things I like about berkshire. When liquidity is freely available and the rest of world is levering (tons of stupid money chasing all kinds of model driven gains), berkshire's stock price will languish. When the opposite happens and the leverage is unwound, people will disregard buffet's age and embrace the war chest and AAA rating.
    If your edge is patience and a longer time horizon, a long position in berkshire at today's prices can double your money in the next 5-6 years. Beyond that, there are any number of ways to make something simple more complicated.
    2008 May 19 12:11 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    One would think that "Buffett premium" would mean that Berkshire Hathaway trades at premium multiples, but that's simply not the case. Any moron could run Berkshire successfully and sooner or later one probably will.
    2008 May 19 01:29 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    This is the oldest written article in the book. Kass is like everyone else looking to get his name in the papers (before there are none left) Berkshire employs 200,000+ people pays tons of taxes, has a built in charity program for shareholders...Yeah lets live in a world where this is something we hope goes down. Kass's out look is free information available on the net, anything free on the net is as worthwhile as silly cat pictures.
    Bottom line Berkshire has been adding a full zero to the end of peoples entire net worth for a looongtime anyone who wants to short it an scrape out a measily 20% and go to the golf course and brag about betting against Buffett I say enjoy it. Berkshire is receiving the identical media/analyst treatment that Apple has received in the last 4-5 months...look at the opportunity lose the media created there. I for one jumped into Apple and I continue to add to my Berkshire on a monthly basis as I have been doing for years.
    2008 May 19 03:42 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Total short interest in BRK A+B is roughly 500+ million (59,000 B shares and 2,687 A shares), sort of a drop in the bucket compared to other short interests. Look at AAPL or GLD they have 2-3 billion in short interest and those stocks have risen 30-50% off their lows. I will still side with Buffet whose port investment has quadrupled in the same time period Kass has delivered 40%+
    2008 May 19 06:02 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I find most of the comments interesting about Buffett. I think the most sensible one was by ustead. The continous reference to Doug Kass as the" expert" on Berkshire is laughable. I read many article about the Co. and have some "B" shares but explain to me how the experts value the big part that it owns that is NOT public such as See's candy,the funiture store,Jewlery store ,Mid America , Icar ,Geico,Morman and now the Mar/Wrigley deal which has the potential of Berskshire owning Mars. How can any of the shorts take these into consideration? I find these people are experts as long as things are going their way but I never see them quoted when things change and the do.
    A few years ago some one told me an "EXPERT" is just that ,some one that was a "PERT".
    2008 May 19 09:05 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The Buffet premium indeed. However, a CEO replacement will have to work with Charley Munger, the genius 2nd banana, and that is doable. The loss of both men would crash the "premium".
    2008 May 19 11:35 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Well, after trouncing his peers (all financials, GE, whomever) in 2006/2007, the geniuses claim to know what "fair value" is on this stock. An even more ludicrous proposition, given the close to $20 billion put to work in acquisitions in the last twelve months or so. A 1 billion plus temporary write down of a credit derivative?? peanuts relative to capital base, and the 10's of billions written off by peers. Given that it is a credit bet, I know where I would put my money. This is a damn cottage industry. One can look at the % declines over the last twenty years, and see how many times it was 20% or greater, and how many years it took to get back to breakeven (in the stock price). Only once was the decline greater (80k to 40K approximately). This is the last time, an institutional money manager has the chance to actually capture real value here buying today taking advantage of "market dislocation" (flight to quality exiting) and seeing todays acquisitions flourish in the next five years to ten years before he croaks. The large institutions that haven't owned the stock should be embarrassed not having owned this for the last five years. Doug Kass has probably covered already
    2008 May 20 04:23 PM | Link | Reply