Yes, Jurgis, I sold DNB when it was reported Mr. Buffett sold. Whether I sold above or below his price isn't significant to me. (Although regarding happiness - I'm not happy that I apparently sold too soon.) The point is there was enough profit in the stock for me upon selling to make the investment worthwhile. And that it was an expensive stocks, imo, when I bought, and I might not have been attracted to stay with it without Mr. Buffett's involvement.
If a Buffett stock drops on no adverse news, yes, I'd buy more.
(I've done this with GMT after others here reported they were adding -- and it's a company reporting not-so-good news.)
If there are no confirmed Buffett stocks to buy because Mr. Buffett isn't buying, then of course there is nothing to buy with this tactic.
This mechanical technique would be the complete opposite of the G&K methods, I am guessing. The mechanical approach requires no due diligence. Whereas, it seems to me on the G&K thread, the 'old timers' are very data or proof driven. Nothing gets listed unless there's complete, thorough study, and the business aspects of a company are discussed continually to assure that the competitive advantages are there and enduring. (My impression anyway.)
I've been around long enough to know that people invest for a number of reasons, some not so obvious. If a couple of reasons though are to make money and/or align oneself with the country's acknowledged greatest investor, then this mechanical method has worked.
I am not saying this method should be used to the exclusion of any other method or way of investing. In my world a number of methods coexist.
Paul Senior |
