CalPERS, the largest U.S. public pension fund, on Tuesday said it will vote for a shareholder proposal that Berkshire Hathaway Inc replace Warren Buffett as chairman, though he would remain chief executive officer.
The fund, whose full name is the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, disclosed its vote in a regulatory filing ahead of Berkshire’s scheduled April 30 annual meeting in Omaha, Nebraska.
CalPERS said it invests more than $450 billion, including more than $2.3 billion in Berkshire shares.
CalPERS has hundreds of billions of dollars in unfunded long term liabilities. And their track record of investing returns is bad. As a source of advice, they are barely above a meth addict trying to get you to buy a fast food gift card for cash.
WOW “moron”, “meth addict”… There are better words to disagree.
calpers returns
5 years 10.8%
10 years 9.7%
20 years 7.3%
If a “meth addict” can produce such returns, you better have some respect for “meth addict”.
As a shareholder they have a right to vote anyway they like. Hence the voting rights. Let us not forget that Berkshire has dual class of voting rights. Someone who claims to champion “partnership”, respect shareholders, Berkshire B shareholders rights are not at par with A shareholders.
I see no reason but to retain control in the hands of few. The reason the stock is not split is also against small shareholders. If you want shareholding then you can have it with lesser rights is not exactly championing small, individual shareholders.
“Someone who claims to champion “partnership”, respect shareholders, Berkshire B shareholders rights are not at par with A shareholders.”
WEB has been very open and honest and consistent since the Bs were created in ‘96 about the difference in voting rights between the As and Bs. It does not bother me and I’d rather Buffett and Long-term loyal and the most informed shareholders have more influence on BRK’s future than CalPERS, Fink, activists, technicians and market timers. WEB has done a masterful job over the decades imo of attracting long term owners who care deeply about the businesses. Look forward to engaging with these folks of similar spirit in Omaha next weekend.
WEB has been very open and honest and consistent since the Bs were created in ‘96 about the difference in voting rights between the As and Bs
So is all the dual class issuers.
It does not bother me and I’d rather Buffett and Long-term loyal and the most informed shareholders have more influence on BRK’s future than CalPERS, Fink, activists, technicians and market timers.
Well, every dual class issuer uses similar logic. Mark Zuckerberg knows what is best of FB…
Just because WEB does it, it doesn’t mean it is okay. In fact, when people like WEB does it, it legitimizes others too.
Sometimes people bring up not splitting the shares but the stock price is under $400 a share and we are in times where there is $0 commissions and you don’t have to buy round 100 share lots. So as long as you have ~$400 you can buy a share and if you don’t have at least that much you’d be better off in an index fund.
It may not matter for equity ownership, since you can buy single shares and even fractional shares without commission. But it matters for options, since a single contract is for 100 shares and you can’t trade a fractional contract.
Some are suggesting the recent spate of stock splits by Amazon, Alphabet, Shopify and Tesla are driven by desire to attract small retail investors (RobinHood) who prefer options trading to owning stock. I doubt Buffett would like to encourage that.
However, I did buy several call option contracts on BRK during 2018-2020. The cheap uncallable leverage did allow me to sharply increase my holdings. Even sold some of my holdings to fund the contracts. So there is a place for using options contracts even for retail investors.
WOW whatz up with all these abusive behavior. There are many who feels CEO and Chairman of board roles should be separate. If you don’t agree that is your view and you can vote. Calling names just shows your character.
The reason behind the B shares are because people cannot afford to buy A-shares. It is not the commission. It is Buffett’s way of eliminating small individual investors from his shareholder base.
