Log in or Register
You are here: Home  /  Companies Analyzed (Generals)  /  Is there value in Berkshire Hathaway?

Is there value in Berkshire Hathaway?

July 13, 2007  |  Joe Ponzio

You can’t argue Warren Buffett’s past. The man is an investing genius and has made millions upon millions of dollars for his investors over his 50+ year investing career. As he continues to discuss his retirement, make plans to pass on his fortune, and search for a replacement, one must wonder whether or not Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) is a buy today.

I’m not going to give Berkshire Hathaway any special consideration here. When you buy a stock, you are essentially becoming a silent partner in the business. Partner because you become an owner. Silent because you have little or no say over the daily operations of the business.

While I would love to be a partner with Warren Buffett and the brilliant minds with which he surrounds himself, I have to realize that I want to hold my business forever. A wonderful business can grow regardless of management. So, can Berkshire do that when Buffett and his pal Charlie Munger are no longer at the helm?

Berkshire’s Net Worth

Shareholder Equity for Berkshire has grown roughly 8.8% a year over the past ten years. If Berkshire were to close its doors tomorrow and sell off its individual pieces, as a silent partner, you’d be entitled to your fair share of its $108.4 billion net worth-and that is the basis for our calculation.

The Value As An Ongoing Business

No business can survive long if it can’t generate excess cash. In the case of Berkshire, free cash flow has been growing at about 21.4% a year for the past ten years. Remember: We can’t judge a business based on single-year performance. Instead, we have to focus on multi-year timeframes.

We don’t expect Berkshire to close up shop tomorrow. Instead, we expect it to stay in business for twenty or more years. As such, as an ongoing business, Berkshire is worth more than its $108.4 billion net worth. As a silent partner, you are also entitled to any excess cash that it can generate-cash that can be paid out to partners or, as has been the case with BRK, plowed back into the business for growth.

Is Management Rational?

Berkshire only generates about $0.04 of cash for every dollar invested in the business. This is due largely in part to the size of its swelling asset base. We know that Buffett and Munger are rational and can assume that any successor management they choose will also be rational. In that light, and because we know that it is a fundamental tenant of Buffett’s to only carry debt when it can be used as an asset to generate cash, we can safely say that Berkshire’s 4% CROIC is acceptable.

I know what you’re thinking: He’s cutting Berkshire some slack. I’m not. Still, I know Buffett and Munger as managers because I have become familiar with them as people through their 50 years of writing and speaking. I believe they are rational, good managers and that they will hold the same standard for their successors. But, when Joe Blow manager takes the helm at a company and I don’t know anything about him and his style, I have to be more skeptical and base my decision on the raw numbers. Stick with me for a few more paragraphs.

Putting It Together

Berkshire’s intrinsic value with Buffett and Munger at the wheel comes is about $245.6 billion, or roughly $159,478 a share for Class A stock (BRK.A). We know the company is jammed with great investments and subsidiaries, so there is definitely a wide moat. With a 25% discount, a purchase could be justified at $119,609.

Don’t Open Your Wallet Yet

All of this assumes that it will be business as usual at Berkshire. The problem, one that is unique to this and a few other companies, is that its excess cash is tied directly to the special abilities of Buffett and/or Munger. Part of Berkshire’s excess cash comes from its successes in arbitrage and trading. Will the new management have the same gambling-savvy as current management? Will they be better? Worse?

Let’s assume that they’re worse, and that Berkshire can only grow its excess cash at 16%-three quarters of its historical rate. (After all, the majority of the cash comes from subsidiary companies and dividends). Remember: If we’re wrong and it is business as usual, we simply end up making more money.

The “New Management” Value

With free cash flow growing at 16% instead of 24.1%, Berkshire has an intrinsic value of $206 billion. With a margin of safety of 25%, the purchase price comes in at $100,387.

The Summary

Do I think that Berkshire’s silent partners will make money in the future? There’s not a doubt in my mind. Do I think it is a fairly safe bet, even sacrificing the 25% margin of safety and settling on the 16% MOS that Berkshire is currently offering? Yep. Would I buy it? No.

When you start finding excuses to buy businesses even though they don’t meet your criteria, you become a gambler, not an investor. I have nothing but confidence in the abilities and talents of Buffett and Munger. As Buffett himself has said, “You are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees with you. You are right because your data and reasoning are right.”

In this case, my data does not give me the confidence I need to reasonably expect at 15% or more return for the next twenty years.

Buffett’s Take

I don’t know what goes on in the brilliant mind of the world’s greatest investor. Still, I know that Berkshire hasn’t announced that it would be repurchasing its stock. Considering that Buffett is in the business of growing money rapidly, he is likely looking for the greatest value for his silent partners’ dollars…and he isn’t finding it in Berkshire Hathaway stock.

So, no-I’m not cutting Buffett any slack. Then again, neither is he.

Joe Ponzio

By Joe Ponzio

July 13, 2007

Print or Share With Friends

The Discussion
sam
sam
July 16, 2007 at 4:32pm

Joe,

you haven’t read quite enough of Bufett’s writing because he has said that he will never buy back stock because It favors short term owners over long term owners.

IE. Keeps the share price up so short termers can get a favorable price, but prevents long term owners from getting shares at a favorable price.

He has said a couple of times over the years that the share price was cheap at times, but that by and large, the price tracks intrinsic value fairly well in his opinion.

that doesn’t detract from your thesis, which I think is relatively right on.

the last big discount I saw was during the 2005 hurricane season.

July 16, 2007 at 4:47pm

Hi Sam,

You are absolutely correct – Berkshire would never buy back stock to support its price. This article was based on Buffett’s comments in the Berkshire 1999 Letter To Shareholders. In it he stated:

Please be clear about one point: We will never make purchases with the intention of stemming a decline in Berkshire’s price. Rather we will make them if and when we believe that they represent an attractive use of the Company’s money.

If I didn’t make that clear in the above post, I appologize. I certainly didn’t mean to state that Buffett would give way to the managerial imperative of buying back shares drive the company’s price up to its intrinsic value.

John
John
July 20, 2007 at 2:58pm

Liked your work on JNJ. Wondering if you’ve had a chance to look at another fairly recent Buffett pick – BUD. Just ran BUD’s financials through your model and came up with a value well below current price (and well below Buffett’s purchase price). Issue (as I see it) is minimal FCF growth past few years. Any thoughts?

Mike
Mike
July 20, 2007 at 4:42pm

John,

I did the same thing with BUD and got the same results. So I too am interested in Joe’s take.

Another BRKA holding that looks priced close to a 25% discount to intrinsic value to me is PG.

Mike

July 23, 2007 at 8:59am

Hi John & Mike,

I’m having a hard time getting into the SEC’s database to look at BUD’s annual reports. With seemingly weak free cash flow, my first thought would be that BUD has been using a lot of its cash to fuel growth – much like Walmart has been doing. (See this comment)

I am pretty sure that Buffett bought some 70 million shares of BUD, but has sold almost half his position. I can’t say for sure, but maybe there wasn’t as much value as he’d like, decided to make an educated gamble (as he tends to do from time to time), and it didn’t work out.

Take a look at Matt Stichnoth’s notes from the Berkshire 2005 annual meeting (free, but you have to click that you accept the terms of the site). Buffett and Munger (WB & CM) talk briefly about the purchase. They both seem very tenative – not the joking boys that playfully discussed other major purchases.

I can’t be certain, but I don’t feel like Buffett saw a “fat pitch.” I think he saw a potential opportunity for a calculated gamble.

paolo
paolo
September 17, 2007 at 12:45pm

Hi Joe:

I new to the site and really like what I’ve seen here. I especially like that you walk through calculations of specific companies and explain your thought process and conclusions – even if you conclude that you would NOT buy something WB recently bought.

(Members in some other value investing sites conclude that something is a good value but don’t discuss WHY in much / any detail. Or, analysis is: “Buffett bought at $50 and it’s at $40 now so it MUST be a good value.” I’m really trying to develop my own evaluation skills so that line of thinking isn’t that helpful.)

I know you have a number of articles on value investing concepts, IV, MOS, etc. but do you have a “start to finish” example? I have a few companies I want to evaluate further and like your approach and wanted to use a complete example as a road map or checklist for coming to my own conclusions.

PS. The companies are MCO and MHP – both are solid performers whose share prices took a major hit in the recent credit crunch. It could be an excellent buying opportunity but I want to do my due diligence.

September 17, 2007 at 1:16pm

Hi Paolo,

Check out the series of posts on Calculating The Value Of A Business. Also, take a look at the various posts under Valuing A Business and Stock Analysis. There are a number of start-to-finish examples and I’ll be adding more as I go.

Hope that helps!

MikeR
MikeR
September 17, 2007 at 2:13pm

paolo,

MHP looks like it warrants further research. Quick calculation and it appears to be about 35% undervalued.

I would be carefull with MCO. Jim Chanos has been shorting MCO.

MikeR
MikeR
September 17, 2007 at 2:20pm

Paolo,

Of course the reason Chanos is shorting MCO may be the same reason effecting MHP’s share price recently. Obviously I need to do a lot more investigating.

Jerry Gunn
Jerry Gunn
December 21, 2007 at 11:58am

Does anyone care to comment on the BRKA run-up since mid August. What is driving it?…maybe a flight to safety?

E
E
May 18, 2008 at 3:42am

Hi Joe,

I have a guestion about the calculation of Berkshire Hathaway’s free cash flow. How did you come up with the numbers, did you take “Cash flow from operating activities” and then subtract “Additions to property, plant and equipment”, or did you change some part in the calculation to come up with free cash flow?

If there’s somebody else out here having a good answer to my question I’d be happy if you’d like to share it.

Thanks for a great blog!

/E

May 27, 2008 at 12:52pm

E — it’s the old “owner earnings” vs. “free cash flow” question. I’m going to post about it this week.

Join The Discussion