CW, OK, that's about it. If you're a a better investor than Buffett,
and you've done better than him for 30 years, seriously, prove it
and take the acclaim you deserve. But do it somewhere else. This
Buffettology thread is really not the place. It is very, very
easy to start threads here. I've started quite a few. There's no
reason you couldn't start "Chuzzlewitology." JHG I'm sure would
join you. You could alternatively just name it "The Next Microsoft" and the meaning and content would not be lost on SI types. You can talk about the new era, why Buffett's methods are causing us to miss all the fun, and there are many out there who would agree with you. CW, you are arguing a very simple point -that catching the biggest and best growth companies will earn you high returns. No crap. And then you throw out my "consistency" counterargument by saying a)you've done better than Buffett and b) you diversify. Really, there's got to be a record, and at the very least, a name before you expect any of us to take this. What you don't seem to get is that I and others who take on value-oriented investing (which Buffett certainly does) understand your argument and reject it very plainly.
Bill Gates? He is an extraordinarily intelligent individual who was lucky enough to happen upon some very good ideas and now he's the richest in the US. How you make the leap from that fact to his being a better investor than Buffett...well that's definitely Chuzzlewitology.
Mike |
