Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Buffettology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Senior who wrote (2990)	1/30/2002 10:24:38 AM
From: Stock Farmer	Respond to of 4691

Good points Paul. I just caution that we aren't exposed to all of his moves. Many of those we see, it's a good bet we don't understand. Dogma makes a poor basis for strategic decision making. And the environment has a habit of selecting its heros and goats retrospectively. And treating them harshly in the present and unpredictably in the future. As far as past strategies being successful and still not carrying success forward into the future... we're both aware of at least one. John. BTW, what's with the "You guys bit"?

To: Paul Senior who wrote (2990)	1/30/2002 1:21:15 PM
From: Paul Senior	Respond to of 4691

I'll take a little AIG here at today's relatively low stock price. (And I'll assume the accounting hubbub surrounding AIG today will soon pass.) AIG is still very expensive imo. There's no clear succession plan for the long-time CEO, and I'm not sure that AIG's estimates for its World Trade Center losses are fully reflected in the stock price. OTOH, with AIG you kinda/sorta get what you pay for: a superior long-term track record and huge and dominant insurer. Can't recall the Barron's (?) article wherein the author suggested AIG's Greenberg had a better long-term record for delivering stockholder value than BRKa's Buffett. Stock charts for both look pretty good to me: finance.yahoo.com Paul Senior