Author Topic: Semper Augustus  (Read 68916 times)


  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2293
Re: Semper Augustus
« Reply #130 on: February 22, 2021, 05:09:18 AM »
I don’t think using look through earnings is aggressive, as long as one doesn’t then double count the stock portfolio.

What’s more aggressive is to normalize the earnings power for interest rates without any other adjustments. He points out how much of the earning power this is so it’s easy to get rid of/not include.

We measure Berkshire’s normalized profitability at roughly $42 billion for 2020. How much of that is available for investment? Consider that $10 billion is spoken for because it stays with the stock market investees as retained earnings. Another $7 billion, at least, represents capital expenditures in excess of depreciation charges. Much of this is contemplated growth capital spending at predictable returns. Finally, another $5 billion of “assumed income” is presently not being earned thanks to interest rate suppression by the Fed. Our method for
deriving normalized profitability assumes that a portion of Berkshire’s current cash will ultimately be
invested in higher-earning assets. $5 billion represents the present value of the portion of cash likely be
deployed in the intermediate term, perhaps on share repurchases.
In all, of the $42 billion in “profit,” just
over half is already accounted for (or doesn’t exist yet as cash profit).

 Overall, appreciate his work.

EDIT: on second thought, this may actually not be that aggressive in that at reasonable earnigns multiples, you'll get a value lower than the actual cash amount.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2021, 05:43:49 AM by thepupil »


  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 586
Re: Semper Augustus
« Reply #131 on: February 22, 2021, 03:48:59 PM »
great points.  thank you


  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Semper Augustus
« Reply #132 on: February 22, 2021, 10:43:59 PM »
Hi :)

I think that counting all of the retained earnings is just slightly aggressive, since Buffett most likely wouldn't own the same companies if he didn't have to pay taxes when selling them. But I think that giving them credit for deploying so much of the cash pile is quite aggressive given the historic cash to float ratio.