сряда, 30 декември 2009 г.

Buffett: It's simple, railroads are not pet rocks

CHICAGO (Reuters) - When Warren Buffett said last month that his Berkshire Hathaway Inc (BRKa.N) (BRKb.N) was buying Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp (BNI.N) for $26 billion, he characterized the deal as "an all-in wager on the economic future of the United States."

Now, the Oracle of Omaha has explained what he meant.

U.S. railroads are not like hula-hoops or pet rocks, businesses that "came and, you know, went," Buffett said in a transcript of a videotaped question-and-answer session earlier this month with Matthew Rose, BNSF's head

BNSF submitted the transcript on Thursday in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

"The rail business is not going to go anyplace," the billionaire investor told Rose, BNSF's chairman, president and chief executive officer.

"It's going to be right here in the United States.

There's going to be four big railroads that are moving more and more goods. So it's... a good business."

Buffett says the deal, his biggest acquisition in the 44 years he has run Berkshire, is driven by his belief that railroads have transformed themselves into highly efficient businesses whose networks will fill up with freight as the economy recovers.

"It has to do well if the country does well," Buffett said, "and the country is going to do well."

He also makes it clear that the purchase is a bet on the prospects for the U.S. economy over the next half century -- not a bet on a near-term recovery.

"I don't know about next week or next month or even next year, but if you look at the next 50 years, this country is going to grow, it's going to have more people, it's going to have more goods moving, and rail is the logical way for many of those goods to travel," he said.

While acknowledging the regulatory challenges the industry faces because of the essential service it provides, and the "tension between shippers and railroads" that can lead to political efforts to affect rates, Buffett said the industry's economic importance means railroad owners are practically guaranteed a reasonable rate of return.

"It can't be something like Coca-Cola (KO.N) or Google (GOOG.O), because it's, you know, it's a public service-type business, too, and it has, it has a fair amount of regulation that is part of the picture," Buffett said.

"But it'll be a good business over time.

It will make sense for this country to want railroads to continue to invest more and more money, in terms of expanding and becoming more efficient.

So you're on the side of society, and society will largely be on your side.

Not every day, but most of the time."

He assured Rose that BNSF will not be micromanaged.

"We've got 20 people in Omaha... and there isn't one of them that knows how to run a railroad," he said.

Asked if Berkshire plans to sell of any BNSF assets to pay debt used for the acquisition, Buffett replied: "Not a dime."

In the interview, Buffett provided a glimpse of the high-class problems that Berkshire, an increasingly diversified conglomerate, creates for itself by not paying dividends.

He said Berkshire, whose 80 units sell everything from Geico car insurance to Fruit of the Loom underwear, generates anywhere from $8 billion to $10 billion a year in cash as a result of its no-payout policy.

The money, Buffett told Rose, just "piles up."

Buffett’s Railroad Adventure: 12 Days and $26 Billion

In “Brewster’s Millions,” Richard Pryor struggled to spend $30 million in 30 days.


Maybe he could have gotten some tips from Warren Buffett.

Two months ago, the Oracle of Omaha spent $26 billion in just 12 days. All he had to do was buy a railroad.


Associated Press

It has been reported before that Berkshire Hathaway’s purchase of Burlington Northern came together quickly.

But an SEC filing late last week on the deal sheds light on just how quickly it came together.

Of course, it’s far easier to get a deal done when there are no rival bids and negotiations over prices are largely nonexistent.


Here’s quick breakdown of how the deal unfolded, as gleaned from that filing:

Oct. 22: Burlington Northern CEO Matthew Rose met with Buffett, who owns 22.6% stake in Burlington.

The pair discussed Burlington’s overall business among other general issues in the previously scheduled meeting.

Berkshire acquiring Burlington isn’t among the topics of conversation. 


Oct. 23: Buffett’s assistant sets up a another meeting with Rose for later that evening.

There, Buffett expresses his interest in acquiring Burlington for $100 a share, if the railroad’s board is receptive.


Oct. 24: Rose tells Ed Whitacre, Burlington’s lead director about the conversation.

Oct 24-26: Rose contacts board members, as well as bankers Goldman Sachs Group and Evercore Partners.

Oct. 26: Burlington holds a special meeting to discuss the proposal.

Oct. 27: Rose calls Buffett to inform him of the board meeting and to further discuss a deal.

Rose asks about Buffett’s investments in two other railroads.

Buffett says that if a deal is struck he would sell his stakes in the other railroad companies.

He also tells Rose he is willing to put a collar of the stock portion of the deal and would recommend 50-for-1 stock split for Berkshire’s class B shares so that Burlington investors could obtain more Berkshire common stock instead of cash for fractional shares. 


Oct. 28: Rose updates his board about the conversation with Buffett the previous day.

Board also reviews its various options and authorizes Rose to enter into discussions with Berkshire.

Later that day Rose calls Buffett to discuss the structure of the deal further.

During the conversation, Rose broaches the topic of Buffett raising his offer. Buffett says $100 a share was all he was willing to pay.

At the end of the conversation, Buffett says he will have Berkshire’s outside counsel draft a merger agreement.


Oct. 29: Berkshire’s outside counsel circulates a draft of a merger agreement.

Oct. 30: The two firms enter a confidentiality agreement.

Oct. 30- Nov. 2: Burlington, Berkshire and the firms’ legal advisers negotiate other terms of the deal.

Nov. 2: The boards of Berkshire and Burlington each meet and approve the merger.

Nov. 3: The deal is announced.

вторник, 29 декември 2009 г.

“Buy on the cannons, sell on the trumpets”
28 декември 2009
21 хил. души съкрати Уорън Бъфет през годината
INSURANCE.BG
 



Финансовият гуру чака трайното връщане на търсенето, за да увеличава работните места


Влиянието на глобалната икономическа рецесия принуди Berkshire Hathaway да затвори 21 хил. работни места тази година, заради намаляването на приходите от производствените и търговските си обекта.

В момента, Уорън Бъфет и неговата Berkshire, заедно с дъщерните дружества дават работа на около 225 хил. души, което е 8,6% по-малко отколкото през 2008 г., когато заетите в нея бяха 246 083 души. 

Berkshire предостави информацията заедно със съобщението за планираното придобиване на железница Burlington Northern Santa Fe за $26 млрд.

Бъфет не отговори на молбата за коментар на съкращенията, съобщи Bloomberg.

Главният изпълнителен директор Уорън Бъфет управлява група от над 70 дъщерни дружества, които продават най-разнообразни продукти - от полици за автомобилното застраховане до сладолед.

През първите девет месеца на 2009 г. печалбата от производство, услуги и търговия на дребно на дружеството намаля повече от наполовина.

Това накара Бъфет да смени шефовете на две поделения, чиито продажби намаляха значително. 

Наскоро, в речта си пред 37 хил. служителите на Burlington Northern, Бъфет каза: "Когато времената са добри, вие ще имате повече заети, отколкото когато времената са лоши."

През май Бъфет каза на акционерите, че очаква още съкращения в Berkshire, след направените предишната година в Clayton Homes, която е строи готови жилища, и в производителя на тухли Acme Building Brands. 

Berkshire отчете първата си тримесечна загуба от 2001 г. насам през първото тримесечие на 2009 г. Известното възстановяване на фондовите пазари върна компанията към печалба през второто и третото тримесечие.

"Ще увеличим заетостта в някакъв момент, но няма да го направим, докато не видим трайно възстановяване на търсенето," казва Бъфет в едно от последните си за годината интервюта.

понеделник, 28 декември 2009 г.

The Financial Lessons of 2009

As we close out 2009, it's a good time to reflect on the lessons we've learned (or at least reinforced) this year. Here are some of mine.

I hope you'll chime in with yours in the comments section.


Momentum is a cruel mistress 

March was eye-opening.

We try to keep perspective by studying the past, but there's nothing like actually living through something.

Remember the state we were in back then -- wholesale bank nationalization was still on the table, the Dow seemed bottomless, and we were dropping GDP faster than Accenture (NYSE: ACN) dropped Tiger.

Investor psyches were even worse off.

All of a sudden, that crazy neighbor stockpiling bottled water, soup, and guns didn't seem all that crazy.


Then we had the type of blistering rally that made us peek at our 401(k)s again.

Sub-lesson 1: Make your portfolio allocation decisions ahead of time -- preferably in good times, not bad. For example, the worst time to flee to from stocks to bonds is after your stocks have taken a beat-down and you're scared. 

Sub-lesson 2: Remember March when you do make your allocation mix among all the choices out there: cash, bonds, stocks (small cap, large cap, dividend payers, established foreign markets, emerging markets), real estate, etc.

Make sure it's an allocation your risk tolerance will allow you to stick with.


Sub-lesson 3: Just as stock returns got turbocharged in March, they could get throttled now. It's a good time to weed out stocks that have rallied without fundamentals.  

All serious value investors should make it out to the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting once 

In May, I attended the Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B) conference (i.e. the Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger love-in) with a few Fools (see some further thoughts here).

It was my first time. 


Yes, you can get most of their wisdom from the meeting dispatches, the annual letter, interviews, books, etc. And yes, from what I hear, it's similar every year.

But for value investors, it's the equivalent of seeing Michael Jordan in person. 


Buffett is 79, and Munger is turning 86 in a few days.

In all things finance, leverage is dangerous  

Even some folks who saved up, put 20% down, and took a 30-year fixed mortgage have seen their financial health ruined by the housing bubble.

Why? Leverage.


Companies that have viable businesses went under.

Why? Leverage.


A key driver of the banking mess?

You guessed it ... leverage. 


Why are folks concerned about runaway inflation?

The U.S. government's increased reliance on ... leverage.


You get it. What does this mean to you, an individual?

Takeaway 1: Do whatever you can to pare down your debt (especially stuff like high-interest credit cards).

Takeaway 2: Be very careful when you make a leveraged purchase like a house ... it can make a lot of sense to own a home (I do), but renting ain't a crime!

Takeaway 3: Be very, very careful when dealing with options.

They act as a non-debt form of leverage, allowing you to magnify gains in some cases and losses in others. Like renting, owning plain vanilla instruments like stocks, bonds, mutual funds, and ETF's ain't a crime!


Takeaway 4: Don't do anything financially that you don't fully understand. Learn first. Act second.

Er, what is value investing?

Where do you see this?


In financial books and websites.
 

What does it mean?

Value investing means buying a stock at less than its intrinsic value in the belief that its true worth will eventually be recognised

. A value investor is primarily attracted by stocks with low prices compared to their underlying book, replacement or liquidation values.

The discount of the market price to the intrinsic value is what legendary investor and author Benjamin Graham called the 'margin of safety'.


This method of investment has been encouraged by legendary investors such as Warren Buffett and Peter Lynch.

Why is it important?

Value investing focuses on firms that have been ignored by the markets.

Since value stocks sell at a discount, they generally experience less volatility and could potentially offer stronger future performance.


Still, just because a stock is cheap does not necessarily mean it has good value.

The risk is that a value stock may remain undervalued or overlooked by the market for a long time.


So you want to use the term. Just say...

'My resolution for the new year is to go into value investing.

Hopefully it'll make me rich in the long run.'

You're No Warren Buffett, Steak n Shake

Remember when Octomom tried to look like Angelina Jolie?

Steak n Shake (NYSE: SNS) is trying to do something similar, with its recent channeling of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B).

But instead of lip-puffing Botox and a new layered 'do, Steak n Shake is going for a reverse split and an insurance-company acquisition.


Steak n Shake, the company many of us associate with cheap burgers and creative milkshakes, wants to be more than just a restaurant company.

However, its Buffett envy was obvious when it engaged in a 1-for-20 reverse stock split over the weekend and offered to buy all of wee insurer Fremont Michigan InsuraCorp (OTC: FMMH) for $24.50 a share last night.


Let's go over the reverse split, a corporate move that has had several successful executions this year. Whether they occur after a chunky spin-off or as a reaction to a battered share price, reverse splits make perfect sense when a stock is trading for pocket change.

If Blockbuster (NYSE: BBI) and Sirius XM Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI) don't get their stock prices above a buck soon, they, too, will probably go for a reverse play.


Steak n Shake, on the other hand, didn't need a reverse split.

Its stock was trading in the double digits before it decided to swap out every 20 shares for a single share at a price that's 20 times higher.


Investors saw this coming. Chairman Sardar Biglari's letter to shareholders earlier this month spelled out the new strategy.

"Simply because profits are generated in the restaurant business doesn't mean the money must be reinvested there," he wrote.

"Steak n Shake is no longer a static business."


However, after a logical nibble on fellow restaurateur Western Sizzlin (Nasdaq: WEST), going for a small insurer is a head-scratcher, unless Biglari grew up with a Buffett poster in his room.

The reverse split just isn't necessar

y. Biglari credits the move as a way to "attract knowledgeable long-term owners," but savvy investors know that splits are zero-sum games.


Focus is what got Steak n Shake back on track.

Let's hope its new diversified dreams don't derail it again.

Common Stocks And Uncommon Profits: Chapter 3, Part 2

Warren Buffett has called himself "85% Graham and 15% Fisher". While the works of Graham are often cited, Fisher's book "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits" is not.

Here follows a summary of this work by Philip Fisher, known as one of the greatest investors of all time. 

Fisher continues to list off more of the 15 properties he believes investors should look for in order to identify the stocks with the potential for astronomical returns:
4) Does the company have an above-average sales organization?

Fisher calls the making of repeat sales to satisfied customers the first benchmark of success.

But investors pay far less attention to whether a sales staff is efficient than they do to research, finance, production or other corporate activities.

Fisher attributes the reason for this to the lack of financial ratios that can be applied in order to measure the quality of a sales staff.

But the information is available in a qualitative sense using the "Scuttlebutt" method Fisher described earlier in the book.

Competitors and customers know the efficiency of the sales staff, and they are often quite willing to express their views on the subject.


5) Does the company have a worthwhile profit margin?

Fisher believes that the greatest long-range investment profits are made by investing in the companies with the highest profit margins in the industry.

There are some caveats to look out for though.

Margins should be looked at over a period of many years, since temporary effects can abnormally lower or raise a company's margins.

Furthermore, fundamental changes may be occurring in a company (new product, increase in efficiency) with low margins that will turn it into a company with high margins;

these may be unusually attractive purchases.

Finally, some companies have low margins because they plow a lot of their profits into research and sales, so they are actually building for the future.

Investors counting on this to be the case must make absolutely certain that investing for the future is indeed the real reason for the low margins.

6) What is the company doing to improve margins?

Inflation will continue to increase the costs of most companies, but companies of different abilities will see varying results in their profit margins over time.

Some companies have the ability to increase price in order to maintain or increase margins.

Fisher argues that this only encourages new competitive capacity, and therefore only temporarily increases margins.

But some companies use far more ingenious means to increase margins.

Some corporations have departments whose sole function is to review procedures and methods in order to find savings.

"Scuttlebutt" will not work as well as speaking to company personnel directly about the amount of work being done by the company in this area.

Fisher argues that the investor is fortunate that most top executives are willing to talk in detail about such topics, however.

Burlington Northern's Tepid Outlook Is a Warning 


Burlington Northern warned of a weak economy and tepid recovery ahead of its merger with Berkshire Hathaway. Wall Street, take note.

A PESSIMISTIC BUSINESS FORECAST BY THE management of Burlington Northern Santa Fe as the railroad considered Berkshire Hathaway's merger proposal in late October may mean U.S. industrial activity will be less robust in 2010 than many on Wall Street anticipate.


Railroads, which transport more than 40% of the country's freight, are an excellent gauge of economic activity.

If Burlington's (ticker: BNI) outlook proves accurate, the nation's other major railroads -- CSX (CSX), Norfolk Southern (NSC) and Union Pacific (UNP) -- also could see subpar results.

Shares of all three have rallied since Burlington's Nov. 3 announcement of its acceptance of Berkshire's (BRKA) $34 billion proposal.


After Berkshire CEO Warren Buffett made what proved to be a successful $100-a-share bid to Burlington CEO Matthew Rose, Burlington management sent the railroad's board four potential financial scenarios to consider as it weighed Buffett's proposal.

The most optimistic -- that Burlington could earn $5.06 a share if the economy and the company's business recover in 2010 -- was at odds with Wall Street's far more upbeat 2010 consensus earnings estimate of $5.50 a share, according to the preliminary proxy for the merger.


View Full Image

Matthew Staver/Bloomberg




Management thought it more likely the economy wouldn't start to recover until 2011 and that the railroad would earn a depressed $4.40 a share in 2010.

The other two scenarios were even more bearish: Either there would be no recovery and unit growth would be flat for five years, or the economy would enter a "deeper recession."


These forecasts suggest Berkshire overpaid for Burlington.

Wall Street thinks Buffett paid a full but not excessive price, especially as 40% of the deal price will be paid in Berkshire shares.


At 99,000 each, Berkshire's Class A shares are little changed since the merger was announced Oct. 23.

The stock is up 2% this year and trades for 1.2 times our estimate of year-end 2009 book value of $84,000 a share, below an average multiple of 1.6 times book in the past decade.


Berkshire looks attractive, given its low valuation and the company's enhanced earnings power, which stems from several well-timed investments Buffett made during the financial crisis, including stakes in preferred stock and warrants of Goldman Sachs and General Electric.

IF BERKSHIRE IS UNDERVALUED, Burlington holders are getting a particularly good deal.

The Burlington board's quick approval of the transaction suggests it believed Buffett is paying a full price.

Besides, the board determined it had few other options; a merger with another big railroad would have raised antitrust issues.

It was told private-equity buyers were unlikely to bid because of the difficulty of financing such as a large purchase.


Burlington is an atypical Berkshire acquisition because it doesn't generate a lot of free cash flow, owing to the costs associated with maintaining its large rail network.

The company spent $3 billion last year on locomotives and other capital equipment, more than double its depreciation expense.

Burlington shares now trade at 98.40, a slight discount to Berkshire's purchase price.

The acquisition is expected to close in the first quarter of 2010.

 


Buffett takes a long view and he called the Burlington deal an "all-in wager on the economic future of the United States."

It also bespeaks his confidence in the American West. Burlington and Union Pacific are the dominant rail carriers west of the Mississippi, with Burlington a major hauler of coal from the Powder River basin of Wyoming and Montana.

It's also a big carrier of agricultural commodities.


WALL STREET IS PLAYING DOWN the importance of Burlington management's bearish 2010 forecast.

"We believe the Burlington board is probably conservative in its approach and economic outlook, which would encourage management to provide scenarios that are also somewhat muted," wrote JPMorgan railroad analyst Thomas Wadewitz in a report titled "Thoughts on BNI's proxy: Were 2010 Scenarios Conservative or Cause for Concern?"

Wadewitz thinks Burlington's forecasts "may not provide a good read for other railroads."


Burlington and other major railroads report weekly car loadings, and Burlington's performance has been the worst of the bunch in recent months.

Its shipment volume is down 14% in the fourth quarter, against a 7% drop for Union Pacific.

Coal traffic, which accounts for about a quarter of Burlington's revenue, has been weak because utilities, the major coal consumers, recently were sitting with 77 days of supply, compared with a normal level of 45 days at this time of year.

The Bottom Line

Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway is paying $100 a share in cash and stock for Burlington Northern. Because Berkshire looks cheap, Burlington holders ay do well.


"There is no V-shaped recovery at this point.

The recovery is shallow," Dan Keen, the assistant vice president of policy analysis with the Association of American Railroads, said in our D.C. Current column last week.


At a time when major market indexes are at or near 2009 highs and valuations on many industrial stocks are signaling a significant recovery, the cautious view of Burlington's management is worth heeding.

It could mean 2010 will be tougher for the markets and the economy than Wall Street expects.

Opinion: The war against the wannabe rich


 
 12/26/2009  


There is class warfare going on in this country — but it's not against the established rich. It's against those who are trying to become wealthy. 

President Barack Obama has declared that those who make over $200,000 will pay higher income taxes. Caps on payroll taxes are supposed to come off as well for the upper class.

Envisioned estate taxes will take 45 percent of individual inheritances valued over $3.5 million.

Many states have also hiked their income taxes on the upper brackets. 


Again, most of those targeted are not the already rich — a Warren Buffett or Bill Gates — but millions of the wannabe rich.

They may have achieved larger-than-average annual incomes, but they're not the multimillionaire speculators on Wall Street who nearly wrecked the American economy in search of huge bonuses and payoffs.

Most are instead professionals and small-business owners who take enormous risks in hopes of being well-off and passing their wealth on to their children. 


Oddly, much of the populist rhetoric about the need to gouge the newly affluent is voiced by the entrenched wealthy, who don't have to care how high taxes go, given their own vast fortunes. 

Take Bill Gates Sr. who is clamoring for higher estate taxes on inheritances.

But such advocacy comes easy for him.

After all, he is the father of the richest man in the world — someone who clearly needs no inheritance. 


Billionaires also often set up 
Advertisement
 

charitable foundations to ensure their estates are channeled to their own preferences rather than simply given over to a needy U.S. Treasury.

In contrast, moderately affluent business owners or farmers often leave enough property for their heirs to pay death taxes, but not enough to set up tax-exempt charitable foundations. 



Warren Buffett also wants higher income taxes on the wealthy.

He once confessed that thanks to all sorts of write-offs, he had paid only about 17 percent of his gross income in federal taxes, a lower rate than many employees in his office. 


But Buffett, like Bill Gates Jr., is worth many billions of dollars.

In truth, he has so much money that no amount of taxes would affect him much.

A combined tax bite of 60 percent of his annual income would still leave Buffett each year with millions. 


Yet the same rate could cripple a business owner making $300,000 in annual income. 

Often those in government claim that their higher taxes proposals are simply targeting the affluent like themselves — proof of their own selflessness.

President Obama, for example, has complained that the well-off like himself could afford to pay more. 


But unlike politicians in Washington, most upscale Americans in private enterprise do not receive free government perks and lavish pensions.

Nor are they guaranteed lucrative post-political lobbying and speaking careers. 


Focusing tax hikes on those who in some years make between $200,000 and $500,000 makes no sense in a recession for a variety of reasons.

They are neither the speculators who caused the panic of 2008 nor the Washington politicians who are bankrupting the country. 


Instead, most are small-business owners who hire the majority of the nation's employees. 

But faced with the talk of higher taxes, more regulations and hostile rhetoric, they will remain confused, and so retrench rather than expand. 

With the proposed new income, payroll and health-care tax rates, along with increased state and local taxes, many business owners fear that 60 percent to 70 percent of their income will go to the government.

That does not seem a good way to convince small businesses to hire more workers in hopes of greater rewards. 


Income is also not the only barometer of affluence.

Two-hundred thousand dollars is quite a lot of annual money in Kansas, but does not always go so far in San Jose, where modest houses often cost well over half a million dollars. 


For those whose children do not qualify for need-based scholarships, a private liberal-arts education can easily set a parent back $200,000 per child over four years. 

Why the war against the productive classes who want to be rich? 

Maybe it is because they are not as numerous as the proverbial middle class.

Perhaps they do not earn our empathy that is properly accorded to the poor.

They surely lack the status and insider connections that accrue to the very rich. 


Yet continue to punish and demonize them, and the country will grind to a halt — as we are seeing now.


Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and editor, most recently, of "Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome."

неделя, 27 декември 2009 г.



Buffett is born August 30, 1930, in Omaha, Nebraska to Howard and Leila Buffett. Howard, a stock broker, is later elected to Congress.


Buffett has two sisters, Doris and Bertie.


Family history

The Buffetts had already been a business-focused family for generations.


According to The Snowball by Alice Schroeder, the only authorized biography, Warren's grandfather, Ernest, owned a lucrative grocery store; Warren's father started a successful stock brokerage firm amidst the turmoil of the free-falling U.S. economy in 1931.

The family motto is "Spend less than you make," a saying that becomes deeply ingrained in Buffett.

The young hustler

Buffett is a competitive businessman early.


According to The Snowball, he begins selling packs of gum and bottles of Coke at six-years-old to make money, putting the change in his favorite accessory: a nickel-plated money changer attached to his belt.

He also learns about the stock market at his father's brokerage office, where he spends much of his free time.

His favorite book? One Thousand Ways to Make $1,000.

Rebellious phase

At age 14, Buffett files his first tax return, having made $1,000 from his paper route, according to The Snowball.


Although succeeding at business, he is not doing as well in the other areas of adolescent life.

According to the biography, Buffett is rebellious: he and his friends regularly steal from the local department store, and he struggles in middle school for lack of interest.

When his father threatens to take away his source of income, the paper route, Buffett shapes up and starts applying himself.

High School

In 1944, Buffett joins the rest of his family in Washington, D.C., where his father had been elected to Congress. He begins attending Woodrow Wilson High School as a sophomore.


According to Schroeder, "He thought like a businessman but did not look like one.

He fit uncomfortably into the high school crowd, showing up with the same tattered sneakers and droopy socks peeking out from under baggy trousers day after day..."

Understanding that he needs to be liked in order to be more successful, his new favorite book becomes Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People.

Buffett's most lucrative endeavor during high school is a series of pinball machines that he and his friend set up in several barbershops, where they rake in the profits.

University

In 1947, Buffett graduates sixteenth out of 350 students.

Underneath his picture in the school yearbook is the self-awarded title of "future stockbroker," according to The Snowball.


He attends The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania that fall, but he is unenthused about undergraduate life.

"What was the point?"

Buffett remembers thinking in the book. "I was making enough money to live on.

College was only going to slow me down."

During his time at Wharton, Buffett pledges Alpha Sigma Phi, the fraternity to which his father and uncles belong as well.

In 1949, after his father loses a Congressional election and returns to Nebraska, Buffett also chooses to go home.

He transfers to the University of Nebraska, where he graduates in 1950 with a B.S. in Economics.

Graduation and marriage

After learning that two of his favorite investers, Benjamin Graham and David Dodd, teach there, Buffett applies to and is accepted by the Graduate School of Business at Columbia.

He graduates with a M.S. in Economics in 1951, and returns to Omaha to work as an investment salesman at his father's firm, Buffett-Falk & Co, according to The Snowball.


In 1953, Buffett marries Susan Thompson, and the next year, they welcome their first child -- Susan Alice Buffett.

Birth of Buffett Associates

In 1954, Buffett accepts a job with his idol, Benjamin Graham, at Graham-Newman Corp. in New York.

That same year, the Buffetts have their second child, Howard Graham Buffett (pictured with sister Susie).


In 1956, Graham decides to retire and offers Buffett the chance to become a general partner.

But according to Schroeder: "Without Ben there, it wasn't worth it to stay, not even to be thought of as Graham's intellectual heir."

He refuses the opportunity and instead returns to Omaha to start his own firm: Buffett Associates, Ltd.

Among the seven total partners, Buffett puts in the smallest share at only $100.

"I was brimming with ideas, but I was not brimming with capital," he remarks in The Snowball.

First partnerships

In 1957, Buffett buys a five-bedroom stucco house in Omaha, according to The Snowball, where he will continue to live through the present.

It costs $31,500 and totals about 6,000 square feet, according to Forbes.


The next year, he welcomes his third child, Peter Andrew Buffett.

Warren is introduced to Charlie Munger in 1959 (pictured), who becomes a close friend and ultimately Vice Chairman of Berkshire Hathaway.

Berkshire Hathaway

In 1962, Buffett is a millionaire for the first time and the Buffett Partnership, which began with $105,000, is worth $7.2 million, according to About.com.


Buffett also begins buying shares in a textile manufacturing firm, Berkshire Hathaway, at the same time as moving the partnership's operations to Kiewit plaza (above), where the company remains.

The minimum investment is raised from $25,000 to $100,000, according to About.com.

In 1967, Buffett is personally worth more than $10 million, according to About.com. He briefly considers leaving investing and pursuing other interests.

Growing success


In 1969, Buffett closes the partnership and liquidates its assets to his partners, according to The Snowball.

His personal stake now stands at $25 million;

he's only 39 years old, according to About.com.

In 1973, Berkshire began to acquire stock in the Washington Post Company, run by Katharine Graham, who becomes a lifelong friend (pictured).

Buffett also invests in other newspapers.

Accumulation of wealth

In 1977, wife Susie and Buffett separate, but remain married.

Warren is introduced to Astrid (pictured) by Susie a year later, who becomes his companion, according to The Snowball.


Professionally Buffett makes the Forbes 400 Richest Americans list for the first time in 1979 with a net worth of $620 million, according to About.com.

Warren continues to live on his annual salary of $50,000.

Cherry Coke

The stock market crashes in 1987, and Berkshire loses 25% of its value, dropping from $4,230 per share to around $3,170, according to About.com.

The day of the crash, Buffett loses $342 million personally.


A long-time fan of Coca-Cola -- especially Cherry Coke -- Buffett began buying its stock in 1988.

It proves to be one of Berkshire Hathaway's most profitable investments.

Buffett eventually purchases up to 7 percent of the company for $1.02 billion, according to About.com.


Lost touch?

Berkshire's stock price goes as high as $80,000 per share in the 1990s. 


Still, some wonder if Buffett had "lost his touch" during the dot-com bubble at the end of the decade, according to About.com.

"In 1999, when Berkshire reported a net increase of 0.5% per share, several newspapers ran stories about the demise of the Oracle," says the article.

"Confident that the technology bubble would burst, Warren Buffett continued to do what he did best: allocate capital into great businesses that were selling below intrinsic value."

Diverse holdings

By 2007, Buffett's holding company is well-diversified.


As Forbes notes, there's insurance (Geico, General Re), jewelry (Borsheim's), utilities (MidAmerican Energy), food (Dairy Queen, See's Candies), nearly 80 businesses in total.

Buffett is worth an estimated $62 billion in early 2008.

Gives fortune to charity

In June 2006, Buffett announces he will give away 85 percent of his fortune -- about $37.4 billion at the time -- all in Berkshire stock.


Most of it -- $31 billion -- goes to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, now the largest charitable foundation in the world.

Makes moves in financial crisis

Buffett uses the financial crisis to snap up what he considers undervalued stocks.


In September 2008, Berkshire Hathaway buys $5 billion worth of preferred Goldman Sachs stock and urges investors to "buy American" in a New York Times op-ed.

Buffett also resists some fire-sales, like a last ditch effort from AIG for a loan.

He also was asked to bailout Lehman Brothers, but does not after reviewing the firm's financial reports, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The bets continue

As America pulls out of the recession and the stock market comes back to life, Buffett continues making big bets.


Berkshire Hathaway helps Dow Chemical pay for its takeover of Rohm & Haas with a $3 billion investment in July 2008.

In September 2008, Buffett invests $230 million in BYD, a Chinese electric car company, and seeks to increase the 10% stake less than a year later. In October, he puts $3 billion into General Electric.

Then Berkshire's biggest deal ever. In November 2009, Buffett buys railroad Burlington Northern Santa Fe for $34 billion and bets on the future of the U.S. economy.

Legacy secure

Buffett's legacy is secure.


At 79, he's worth $40 billion, according to Forbes, although that's part of the 85% of his fortune that's been pledged to charity.

He has no plans to retire and is already reaping the profits of his big financial crisis bets, like on Goldman Sachs.

He's remarried to long-time companion Astrid, whom he wed after the death of first-wife Susie in 2004.

Buffett uses the financial crisis to snap up what he considers undervalued stocks.

WARREN BUFFETT OFFICE-Kiewit plaza

ЛЮБИМА КНИГА -One Thousand Ways to Make $1,000.
Warren Buffett worship is taken to a new level in a striking example from the January 2010 edition of Harper's magazine. 

A cartoon of a God-like Buffett graces the cover of the latest edition of Harper's. Looking up in reverence are eight people who have come to worship at the foot of the Berkshire Hathaway master. 

The article's title is "The Church of Warren Buffett: Faith and Fundamentals in Omaha."

It's written by Mattathias Schwartz, who attended the 2009 Berkshire annual meeting.


During his reporting for the article in Omaha and beyond, Schwartz uncovers numerous examples of Buffett devotion.

The most memorable example comes in a barber's chair in the basement of the nondescript Kiewit Plaza office building -- where Berkshire Hathaway's fewer than two dozen employees toil at the company's global headquarters.


In that barber shop where Buffett gets his hair cut every other week, Schwartz finds Morgan Stanley senior vice president R.J. Meurer Jr.

Meurer had come to Stan the barber on the weekend of the annual meeting to sit where Buffett sits, and to place his head in the same spot where the brain of Berkshire Hathaway's chief thinker rests every other week. He peppers Stan for information on when Buffett last sat there and what he was reading.

Meurer, who has been to 10 Berkshire meetings, even keeps a framed piece of Buffett's hair on the wall of his office. 

Schwartz goes on in the article to tell the stories of numerous Buffett disciples.

He also gives a good description of what the annual meeting weekend is like, and how Buffett avoided most of the financial meltdown last year.

Teflon Buffett Has Fired 21,000 People This Year

Warren Buffett is a lovable, avuncular chap, not one of those axe-wielding CEOs who are feared by employees and idolized by the kind of red-claw capitalists who think that firing lots of people is a major leadership skill.

Yet somehow he seems to have fired 21,000 people — 8.6% of his workforce — over the past year. And the cuts are being felt hardest by Berkshire’s poorest employees: some 3,000 textile workers have lost their jobs at Fruit of the Loom in El Salvador.

Alice Schroeder, Buffett’s biographer, explains that Buffett is expert at hiring “bad cops” to fire employees and to insulate himself from any blowback:

Warren Buffett is a lovable, avuncular chap, not one of those axe-wielding CEOs who are feared by employees and idolized by the kind of red-claw capitalists who think that firing lots of people is a major leadership skill. Yet somehow he seems to have fired 21,000 people — 8.6% of his workforce — over the past year.

And the cuts are being felt hardest by Berkshire’s poorest employees: some 3,000 textile workers have lost their jobs at Fruit of the Loom in El Salvador.

Alice Schroeder, Buffett’s biographer, explains that Buffett is expert at hiring “bad cops” to fire employees and to insulate himself from any blowback:

At NetJets, Sokol has got an enormous challenge on his hands.

The changes he’s making at NetJets are so significant that Sokol’s angry employees apparently took their complaints about him to the press.

Try to imagine Berkshire employees doing that to Buffett.

It’s unthinkable, right?

Buffett could order animal sacrifices on his birthday and his employees probably wouldn’t complain to the New York Times…

No matter who succeeds Buffett (Sokol, if he pulls off the turnaround) this part of the franchise will be “lost” after Buffett is gone, because it is unique to the way Buffett has arranged his image over the years.

Buffett has gone to a lot of trouble to be universally liked.

I can’t think of anybody else qualified who can replicate that.

Schroeder explains that being universally liked is a major source of Buffett’s wealth: it makes it a lot easier for him to acquire any given business.

Absent Buffett, it’s going be much harder for Berkshire to acquire the privately-held companies that it specializes in buying.

And more generally, it’s going to be a practical impossibility for Berkshire to be run by someone as teflon-coated as Buffett.

Could anybody else fire 3,000 Salvadorean textile workers and receive essentially no bad press at all?

Buffett poised to pick up GM’s mortgage business

Warren Buffett is understood to be in talks to buy Residential Capital, the troubled mortgage business owned by GMAC, General Motor’s finance division. 


Berkshire Hathaway, the investor’s company is, along with Appaloosa Management and Avenue Capital, the hedge funds, a big holder of Res Cap’s debt. 

Res Cap was America’s fifth-largest mortgage origination and servicing company, but many of its loans were sold on interest-only terms to low income buyers, which meant that it was hit badly by the housing market crash. 

Mr Buffett could be interested in Res Cap’s servicing portfolio, the part of the business that collects mortgage payments, levies late payment fees and handles foreclosures.
This month, Berkadia Commercial Mortgage, Berkshire Hathaway’s part-owned subsidiary, bought a commercial mortgage servicing business from Capmark Financial Group for $468 million (£293 million). 

A GMAC spokesman declined to comment on the future of Res Cap. 

Appaloosa made headlines this week when it emerged that the fund manager had made a $7 billion profit this year by betting on the recovery of the US economy, putting David Tepper, its founder, in line for a $2.5 billion payday. 

Mr Tepper, a former Goldman Sachs bond trader, bought bank shares when they were cheap in February and March, gambling that the financial sector would recover from the credit crisis.

More recently he has bought into commercial mortgage-backed securities, despite fears elsewhere that the sector is going to make further losses next year. 


Michael Carpenter, GMAC’s new chief executive, said in an interview last month that his top priority was deciding the future of Res Cap, which has lost $9.2 billion over the past eight quarters.

Res Cap’s losses were one of the main drivers behind GMAC’s $12.5 billion government bailout. 


Mr Carpenter told American Banker, the newspaper, that he was looking at “every conceivable alternative” for Res Cap, including bankruptcy.

“What we want to do, to the best we’re able to, is draw a box around [Res Cap] and say that’s it contained,” he said. 


Meanwhile, Berkshire Hathaway has sparked fresh excitement over a successor for Mr Buffett by announcing Stephen Burke, Comcast’s chief operating officer, as a new director.

Berkshire’s board has been criticised in the past for being made of up too many elderly insiders — half of the board’s members are older than 70 and four are older than 80. 


Mr Burke, 51, has a long family connection to Mr Buffett. His father, Daniel, was one of the founders of Capital Cities/ABC, of which Berkshire was the biggest shareholder.

Berkshire Has Shed 8% of Workers

Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate run by Warren E. Buffett, reported 21,000 fewer employees than it had at the end of 2008 amid a slump at its manufacturing and retail units.

Berkshire and its subsidiaries have about 225,000 workers, the company said this week in regulatory filings, which is 8.6 percent lower than the 246,083 employees it reported in its 2008 annual report.

Berkshire provided the jobs information in a document tied to its planned $26 billion takeover of the railroad Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation.

Mr. Buffett did not reply to a request, left with an assistant, for comment on the cuts.


Mr. Buffett, Berkshire’s chief executive, oversees more than 70 subsidiaries, with brands like Geico, Fruit of the Loom and Dairy Queen.

The company is based in Omaha. 


Profit at Berkshire’s manufacturing, service and retail businesses plunged by more than half in the first nine months of the year, and Mr. Buffett replaced the chief executives of two operating units whose sales suffered in the recession.

“When times are good, you’re going to have more people employed than when times are bad,” Mr. Buffett, 79, said this month in a video address to the 37,000 railroad employees that Berkshire will take on next year with the completion of the Burlington Northern takeover.

Mr. Buffett told shareholders at the firm’s annual meeting in May that he expected more cuts at Berkshire after reductions last year at Clayton Homes, which builds manufactured housing, and Acme Building Brands, a brick maker.

In the first three months of this year, Berkshire reported its first quarterly loss since 2001.

The firm returned to profit in the second and third quarters, helped by an advance in the stock market.


The Buffalo News, which is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, started the year with about 846 employees and cut approximately 100 jobs through voluntary attrition, said Daniel Farberman, the newspaper’s vice president.

Most of the cuts came on the production side of the business, he said.

сряда, 23 декември 2009 г.

 
 

  WESCO FINANCIAL CORPORATION 
  LETTER TO SHAREHOLDERS 

  To Our Shareholders: 

  Consolidated ""normal'' net operating income (i.e., before irregularly occurring 
  items shown in the table below) for the calendar year 1999 increased to $45,904,000 
  ($6.44 per share) from $37,622,000 ($5.28 per share) in the previous year. 

  Consolidated net income (i.e., after irregularly occurring items shown in the 
  table below) decreased to $54,143,000 ($7.60 per share) from $71,803,000 
  ($10.08 per share) in the previous year. 

  Wesco had three major subsidiaries at yearend 1999: (1) Wesco-Financial 
  Insurance Company (""Wes-FIC''), headquartered in Omaha and engaged princi- 

  pally in the reinsurance business,

(2) The Kansas Bankers Surety Company (""KBS''), 

  owned by Wes-FIC and specializing in insurance products tailored to midwestern 

  banks, and

(3) Precision Steel, headquartered in Chicago and engaged in the steel   warehousing and specialty metal products businesses.

Consolidated net income for   the two years just ended breaks down as follows (in 000s except for per-share 

  (1) 
  amounts) : 

  Year Ended 
  December 31, 1999 December 31, 1998 
  Per Per 
  Wesco Wesco 
  Amount Share(2) Amount Share(2) 

  ""Normal'' net operating income of: 
  Wes-FIC and KBS insurance businesses IIIIIIIIIIII $43,610 $6.12 $34,654 $ 4.87 
  Precision Steel businessesIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 2,532 .35 3,154 .44 
  All other ""normal'' net operating income (loss)(3) IIII (238) (.03) (186) (.03) 

  45,904 6.44 37,622 5.28 
  Realized net securities gainsIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 7,271 1.02 33,609 4.72 
  Gain on sales of foreclosed properties IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 968 .14 572 .08 

  Wesco consolidated net incomeIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII $54,143 $7.60 $71,803 $10.08 

  (1) All Ngures are net of income taxes. 

  (2) Per-share data is based on 7,119,807 shares outstanding. Wesco has had no dilutive capital stock equivalents. 

  (3) After deduction of interest and other corporate expenses, and costs and expenses associated with foreclosed real estate
previously charged against Wesco's former Mutual Savings and Loan Association subsidiary.

Income was from ownership   of the Wesco headquarters oCce building, primarily leased to outside tenants, interest and dividend income from cash   equivalents and marketable securities owned outside the insurance subsidiaries, and, in 1999, the reduction of loss   reserves provided in prior years against possible losses on sales of loans and foreclosed real estate. 


  This supplementary breakdown of earnings diAers somewhat from that used in
  audited Nnancial statements which follow standard accounting convention.

The   supplementary breakdown is furnished because it is considered useful to   shareholders. 


  Wesco-Financial Insurance Company (""Wes-FIC'') 

  Wes-FIC's normal net income for 1999 was $43,610,000, versus $34,654,000 for 
  1998. The Ngures include $6,415,000 in 1999 and $4,987,000 in 1998 contributed by 
Bowne Integrated Typesetting System 29-MAR-00 09:38 *A60558/004/5* 
Style: STYLE013.BST;118 BLA0001866 Fmt:V5.21:LAM31156/8 Vjust J1:1 
Seq:1 Free lead 120D*points, Next lead: 140D C:100 JB: A60558 PN: 004.00.00.00 SN: 5X  
WESCO FINANCIAL CORP BOWNE OF LOS ANGELES (213) 627-2200 
LAM_CPS BL/SM CURRENT 7-APR-2000 14:06 NEXT PCN: 005.00.00.00 -- Page is valid, no graphics 

  The Kansas Bankers Surety Company (""KBS''), owned by Wes-FIC since 1996. KBS 
  is discussed in the section, ""The Kansas Bankers Surety Company,'' below. 

  At the end of 1999 Wes-FIC retained about $21 million in invested assets, oAset   by claims reserves, from its former reinsurance arrangement with Fireman's Fund
  Group.

This arrangement was terminated August 31, 1989.

However, it will take a   long time before all claims are settled, and, meanwhile, Wes-FIC is being helped 

  over many years by proceeds from investing ""Ooat.'' 

  In addition, Wes-FIC has been engaged for several years in super-cat reinsurance, described in great detail in our pre-1999 annual reports, which Wesco
  shareholders should re-read each year.

Wes-FIC also engages in other reinsurance   business, including large and small quota share arrangements similar and dissimilar to   our previous reinsurance contract with Fireman's Fund Group. 


  In all recent reinsurance sold by us, other subsidiaries of our 80%-owning parent,   Berkshire Hathaway, sold four times as much reinsurance to the same customers on   the same terms, except that such subsidiaries usually take from us a 3%-of-premiums
  ceding commission on premium volume passed through them to Wes-FIC.

Excepting 

  this ceding commission, Wes-FIC has virtually no insurance-acquisition or insurance 
  administration costs. 

  Early in the current year (2000) Wes-FIC made an intracompany loan that funds 
  a large majority of the purchase price of CORT Business Services Corporation, 
  discussed below. 

  Wes-FIC remains a very strong insurance company, with very low costs, and, 
  one way or another, in the future as in the past, we expect to continue to Nnd and 
  seize at least a few sensible insurance opportunities. 

  On super-cat reinsurance accepted by Wes-FIC to date (March 3, 2000) there   has been no loss whatsoever that we know of, but some ""no-claims'' contingent   commissions have been paid to original cessors of business (i.e., cessors not 

  including Berkshire Hathaway).

Super-cat underwriting proNt of $1.4 million a year,   before taxes, beneNted earnings in 1999 and 1998.

The balance of pre-tax underwrit ing proNt amounted to $3.0 million for 1999 and $1.9 million for 1998.

These Ngures   came mostly from favorable revision of loss reserves on the old Fireman's Fund   contract. 


  Wesco shareholders should continue to realize that recent marvelous underwrit ing results are sure to be followed, sometime, by one or more horrible underwriting losses from super-cat or other insurance written by Wes-FIC. 

  The Kansas Bankers Surety Company (""KBS'') 

  KBS, purchased by Wes-FIC in 1996 for approximately $80 million in cash, 
  contributed $6,415,000 to the normal net operating income of the insurance   businesses in 1999 and $4,987,000 in 1998, after reductions for goodwill amortiza
tion under consolidated accounting convention of $782,000 each year.

The results of no graphics 


  KBS have been combined with those of Wes-FIC, and are included in the foregoing 
  table in the category, "" 'normal' net operating income of Wes-FIC and KBS insurance 
  businesses.'' 
  KBS was chartered in 1909 to underwrite deposit insurance for Kansas banks.

Its   oCces are in Topeka, Kansas. Over the years its service has continued to adapt to the   changing needs of the banking industry.

Today its customer base, consisting mostly   of small and medium-sized community banks, is spread throughout 25 mainly   midwestern states.

In addition to bank deposit guaranty bonds which insure deposits   in excess of FDIC coverage, KBS also oAers directors and oCcers indemnity policies, 

  bank employment practices policies, bank annuity and mutual funds indemnity 
  policies and bank insurance agents professional errors and omissions indemnity 
  policies. 

  A signiNcant change in KBS's operations occurred in 1998 and consisted of a
  large reduction in insurance premiums ceded to reinsurers.

The increased volume of   business retained (95% in 1999 and 94% in 1998 compares with 58% in 1997) 

  accompanied slightly higher underwriting income for 1999 after a reduction in the   amount for 1998.

KBS's combined ratio remained much better than average for 

  insurers, at 59.4% for 1999 and 62.2% for 1998, versus 37.2% for 1997, and we 
  expect volatile but favorable long-term eAects from increased insurance retained. 
  Part of KBS's continuing insurance volume is now ceded through reinsurance to 
  other Berkshire subsidiaries under reinsurance arrangements whereunder such other 
  Berkshire subsidiaries take 50% and unrelated reinsurers take the other 50%. 

  KBS is run by Donald Towle, President, assisted by 15 dedicated oCcers and 
  employees. 

  CORT Business Services Corporation (""CORT'')   In February 2000, Wesco purchased 100% of CORT Business Services Corpora-
  tion (""CORT'') for $384 million in cash.

In addition, CORT retains about $45 million 

  of previously existing debt. 

  CORT is a very long established company that is the country's leader in rentals
  of furniture that lessees have no intention of buying.

In the trade, people call CORT's   activity ""rent-to-rent'' to distinguish it from ""lease-to-purchase'' businesses that are, 

  in essence, installment sellers of furniture. 

  However, just as Hertz, as a rent-to-rent auto lessor in short-term arrangements,   must be skilled in selling used cars, CORT must be and is skilled in selling used   furniture. 

  In 1999, CORT had total revenues of $354 million. Of this, $295 million was
  furniture rental revenue and $59 million was furniture sales revenue.

CORT's pre-tax   earnings in 1999 were $46 million. 

 

  Thus, in essence, Wesco paid $384 million for $46 million in pre-tax earnings. 
  About 60% of the purchase price was attributable to goodwill, an intangible balance   sheet asset. 

  After the transaction, Wesco's consolidated balance sheet will contain about   $260 million in goodwill (including $29 million from Wesco's 1996 purchase of
  Kansas Bankers Surety).

On a full year basis, Wesco's future reported earnings will 

  be reduced by about $6 million on account of mostly-non-tax-deductible amortiza- 
  tion of goodwill. We do not believe, however, that this accounting deduction reOects 
  any real deterioration in earnings-driving goodwill in place. 

  More details with respect to the CORT transaction are contained in Note 8 to 
  the accompanying Nnancial statements, and on the last page of this annual report, to 
  which careful attention is directed. 

  CORT has long been headed by Paul Arnold, age 53, who is a star executive as is
  convincingly demonstrated by his long record as CEO of CORT.

Paul will continue as   CEO of CORT, with no interference from Wesco headquarters. We would be crazy 

  to second-guess a man with his record in business.

We are absolutely delighted to 

  have Paul and CORT within Wesco and hope to see a considerable expansion of 
  CORT's business and earnings in future years. 

  Precision Steel 

  The businesses of Wesco's Precision Steel subsidiary, headquartered in the   outskirts of Chicago at Franklin Park, Illinois, contributed $2,532,000 to normal net
  operating income in 1999, compared with $3,154,000 in 1998.

The $622,000 decrease in 1999 net income occurred despite a 2.5% increase in pounds of product sold, and reOects mainly the pounding which competition gave to prices as costs of  principal raw materials declined.

Fewer dollars of gross proNt were available to absorb operating expenses.

Precision Steel's operations for 1999 and 1998 also reOect after-tax expenditures of approximately $225,000 and $350,000, respectively, necessitated to upgrade computers and computer systems to ensure that Precision Steel's order-taking and other data processing systems continue to function accu rately beyond December 31, 1999. 


  It is with mixed emotions that we report that David Hillstrom, President and Chief Executive oCcer of Precision Steel for more than twenty years, retired in the
 latter part of 1999 and that Terry Piper was elected to replace him.

Terry is a very   able man and is no stranger to Precision Steel.

He joined it as a salesman approxi mately forty years ago, steadily advanced, and served as President and General Manager of Precision Steel's Precision Brand Products subsidiary for the last thirteen years.

Terry now has the responsibility of carrying on the leadership of his predeces sor;

and, under their combined skills, Precision Steel's businesses in 1999 continued to provide an excellent return on resources employed. 

 

  Tag Ends from Savings and Loan Days 

  All that now remains outside Wes-FIC but within Wesco as a consequence of Wesco's former involvement with Mutual Savings, Wesco's long-held savings and loan subsidiary, is a small real estate subsidiary, MS Property Company, that holds tag
  ends of assets and liabilities with a net book value of about $15 million.

MS Property 

  Company's results of operations, immaterial versus Wesco's present size, are included in the foregoing breakdown of earnings within ""all other 'normal' net operating income (loss).'' 

  Of course, the main tag end from Wesco's savings and loan days is an investment in Freddie Mac common stock, purchased by Mutual Savings for $72 mil lion at a time when Freddie Mac shares could be lawfully owned only by a savings
 and loan association.

The 28,800,000 shares owned by Wes-FIC at yearend 1999 had 

  a market value of $1.4 billion. 

  All Other ""Normal'' Net Operating Income or Loss All other ""normal'' net operating income or loss, net of interest paid and general corporate expenses, amounted to after-tax losses of $238,000 in 1999 and $186,000
  in 1998.

Sources were

(1) rents ($2,862,000 gross in 1999) from Wesco's Pasadena 

  oCce property (leased almost entirely to outsiders, including California Federal Bank 

  as the ground Ooor tenant), and

(2) interest and dividends from cash equivalents 

  and marketable securities held outside the insurance subsidiaries, less

(3) costs and expenses of liquidating tag-end foreclosed real estate.

The loss widened in 1999 because fewer dividends were received during the year after forced conversion of 

  preferred stock of Citigroup Inc. (""Citigroup'') into lower-dividend-paying common  stock.

The ""other 'normal' net operating income or loss'' Ngures for 1999 and 1998 also include intercompany charges for interest expense ($353,000 and $102,000 after taxes, respectively) on borrowings from Wes-FIC.

This intercompany interest expense does not aAect Wesco's consolidated net income inasmuch as the same 

  amount is included as interest income in Wes-FIC's ""normal'' net operating income. 

"Other 'normal' net operating income or loss'' beneNted in 1999 by about $800,000 caused by reversals of reserves for possible losses on sales of loans and tag-end real estate, expensed in prior years. 


  Net Securities Gains and Losses Wesco's earnings contained securities gains of $7,271,000, after income taxes, for 1999, versus $33,609,000, after taxes, for 1998. 

  Although the realized gains materially impacted Wesco's reported earnings for
  each year, they had a very minor impact on Wesco's shareholders' equity.

Inasmuch as   the greater portion of each year's realized gains had previously been reOected in the   unrealized gain component of Wesco's shareholders' equity, those amounts were  merely switched from unrealized gains to retained earnings, another component of  shareholders' equity. 

 

  Consolidated Balance Sheet and Related Discussion 

  As indicated in the accompanying Nnancial statements, Wesco's net worth 
  decreased, as accountants compute it under their conventions, to $1.90 billion 
  ($266 per Wesco share) at yearend 1999 from $2.22 billion ($312 per Wesco 
  share) at yearend 1998. 

  The $328.4 million decrease in reported net worth in 1999 was the result of 

  (1) $54.1 million from 1999 net income;

less

(2) a $374.1 million decrease in the 

  market value of investments after provision for future taxes on capital gains;

and   (2) $8.4 million in dividends paid. 


  The foregoing $266-per-share book value approximates liquidation value assum- 
  ing that all Wesco's non-security assets would liquidate, after taxes, at book value. 

  Probably, this assumption is too conservative.

But our computation of liquidation 

  value is unlikely to be too low by more than two or three dollars per Wesco share, 

  because

(1) the liquidation value of Wesco's consolidated real estate holdings 

  (where interesting potential now lies almost entirely in Wesco's equity in its oCce 
  property in Pasadena containing only 125,000 net rentable square feet), and 
  (2) unrealized appreciation in other assets (primarily Precision Steel) cannot be 
  large enough, in relation to Wesco's overall size, to change very much the overall 
  computation of after-tax liquidating value. 

  Of course, so long as Wesco does not liquidate, and does not sell any 
  appreciated assets, it has, in eAect, an interest-free ""loan'' from the government 
  equal to its deferred income taxes on the unrealized gains, subtracted in determining 

  its net worth.

This interest-free ""loan'' from the government is at this moment   working for Wesco shareholders and amounted to about $99 per Wesco share at   yearend 1999. 


  However, some day, perhaps soon, major parts of the interest-free ""loan'' must
  be paid as assets are sold.

Therefore, Wesco's shareholders have no perpetual 

  advantage creating value for them of $99 per Wesco share. Instead, the present   value of Wesco's shareholders' advantage must logically be much lower than $99 per   Wesco share.

In the writer's judgment, the value of Wesco's advantage from its   temporary, interest-free ""loan'' was probably about $20 per Wesco share at yearend   1999. 


  After the value of the advantage inhering in the interest-free ""loan'' is estimated, 

  a reasonable approximation can be made of Wesco's intrinsic value per share.

This   approximation is made by simply adding

(1) the value of the advantage from the 

  interest-free ""loan'' per Wesco share and

(2) liquidating value per Wesco share. 

  Others may think diAerently, but the foregoing approach seems reasonable to the 
  writer as a way of estimating intrinsic value per Wesco share. 

  Thus, if the value of the advantage from the interest-free tax-deferral ""loan'' was 
  $20 per Wesco share at yearend 1999, and after-tax liquidating value was then about 
  $266 per share (Ngures that seem rational to the writer), Wesco's intrinsic value per 
  share would become about $286 per share at yearend 1999, down 16% from intrinsic 
 (04/07/2000 14:06) 

  value as guessed in a similar calculation at the end of 1998.

And, Nnally, this   reasonable-to-this-writer, $286-per-share Ngure for intrinsic per share value of   Wesco stock should be compared with the $245 per share price at which Wesco   stock was selling on December 31, 1999.

This comparison indicates that Wesco   stock was then selling about 14% below intrinsic value. 


  Wesco's investment portfolio suAered more than its commensurate share of 
  decline in market value in 1999. Last year, we said ""as Wesco's unrealized apprecia- 
  tion has continued to grow in frothy markets for securities, it should be remembered 
  that it is subject to market Ouctuation, possibly dramatic on the downside, with no
  guaranty as to its ultimate full realization .''

The stock of several of our largest   investees lagged the market in 1999 by a large margin.

It's no sure thing that the   value of our marketable securities will quickly recover.

Unrealized after-tax appreciation represented 69% of Wesco's shareholders' equity at 1999 yearend, versus 76%   and 73% one and two years earlier. 


  Business and human quality in place at Wesco continues to be not nearly as
  good, all factors considered, as that in place at Berkshire Hathaway.

Wesco is not an equally-good-but-smaller version of Berkshire Hathaway, better because its small   size makes growth easier.

Instead, each dollar of book value at Wesco continues   plainly to provide much less intrinsic value than a similar dollar of book value at  Berkshire Hathaway.

Moreover, the quality disparity in book value's intrinsic merits 

  has, in recent years, been widening in favor of Berkshire Hathaway. 

  All that said, we make no attempt to appraise relative attractiveness for invest- 
  ment of Wesco versus Berkshire Hathaway stock at present stock-market quotations. 

  The Board of Directors recently increased Wesco's regular dividend from 
  29Y cents per share to 30Y cents per share, payable March 8, 2000, to shareholders 
  of record as of the close of business on February 9, 2000. 

  This annual report contains Form 10-K, a report Nled with the Securities and 
  Exchange Commission, and includes detailed information about Wesco and its 

  subsidiaries as well as audited Nnancial statements bearing extensive footnotes.

As   usual, your careful attention is sought with respect to these items. 


  Charles T. Munger 
  Chairman of the Board 

  March 3, 2000 
  WESCO FINANCIAL CORPORATION 
  LETTER TO SHAREHOLDERS 

To Our Shareholders: 

  Consolidated ""normal'' net operating income (i.e., before irregularly occurring 
items shown in the table below) for the calendar year 1998 decreased to 
$37,622,000 ($5.28 per share) from $38,262,000 ($5.38 per share) in the previous 
year. 

  Consolidated net income (i.e., after irregularly occurring items shown in the 
table below) decreased to $71,803,000 ($10.08 per share) from $101,809,000 
 ($14.30 per share) in the previous year. 

  Wesco has three major subsidiaries: (1) Wesco-Financial Insurance Company 
 (""Wes-FIC''), headquartered in Omaha and engaged principally in the reinsurance 
business, (2) The Kansas Bankers Surety Company (""KBS''), owned by Wes-FIC 
and specializing in insurance products tailored to midwestern banks, and (3) 
Precision Steel, headquartered in Chicago and engaged in the steel warehousing and 
specialty metal products businesses. Consolidated net income for the two years just 
  (1) 
ended breaks down as follows (in 000s except for per-share amounts) : 

  Year Ended 
  December 31, 1998 December 31, 1997 
  Per Per 
  Wesco Wesco 
  Amount Share(2) Amount Share(2) 

""Normal'' net operating income of: 
  Wes-FIC and KBS insurance businessesIIIIIIIIIII $34,654 $ 4.87 $ 33,507 $ 4.71 
  Precision Steel businesses IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 3,154 .44 3,622 .51 
All other ""normal'' net operating income (loss)(3) III (186) (.03) 1,133 .16 

  37,622 5.28 38,262 5.38 
Realized net securities gains IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 33,609 4.72 62,697 8.80 
Gain on sales of foreclosed propertiesIIIIIIIIIIIIII 572 .08 850 .12 

Wesco consolidated net income IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII $71,803 $10.08 $101,809 $14.30 

(1) All Ngures are net of income taxes. 

(2) Per-share data is based on 7,119,807 shares outstanding. Wesco has had no dilutive capital stock equivalents. 

(3) After deduction of interest and other corporate expenses, and costs and expenses associated with foreclosed real estate 
  previously charged against Wesco's former Mutual Savings and Loan Association subsidiary. Income was from ownership 
  of the Wesco headquarters oCce building, primarily leased to outside tenants, interest and dividend income from cash 
  equivalents and marketable securities owned outside the insurance subsidiaries, and, in 1997, the reduction of loss 
  reserves provided in prior years against possible losses on sales of foreclosed real estate. 

This supplementary breakdown of earnings diAers somewhat from that used in 
audited Nnancial statements which follow standard accounting convention. The 
supplementary breakdown is furnished because it is considered useful to 
shareholders. 
Wesco-Financial Insurance Company (""Wes-FIC'') 

  Wes-FIC's normal net income for 1998 was $34,654,000, versus $33,507,000 for 
1997. The Ngures include $4,987,000 in 1998 and $6,044,000 in 1997 contributed by 
The Kansas Bankers Surety Company (""KBS''), owned by Wes-FIC since 1996. KBS 
is discussed in the section, ""The Kansas Bankers Surety Company,'' below. 

  At the end of 1998 Wes-FIC retained about $24 million in invested assets, oAset 
by claims reserves, from its former reinsurance arrangement with Fireman's Fund 
Group. This arrangement was terminated August 31, 1989. However, it will take a 
long time before all claims are settled, and, meanwhile, Wes-FIC is being helped 
over many years by proceeds from investing ""Ooat.'' 

  We previously informed shareholders that Wes-FIC had entered into the busi- 
ness of super-cat reinsurance through retrocessions from the Insurance Group of 
Berkshire Hathaway, Wesco's ultimate parent. Wes-FIC's entry into the super-cat 
reinsurance business early in 1994 followed the large augmentation of its claims- 
paying capacity caused by its merger with Mutual Savings, the former savings and 
loan subsidiary of Wesco. In 1994, in recognition of Wes-FIC's sound Nnancial 
condition, Standard and Poor's Corporation assigned to Wes-FIC the highest possible 
claims-paying-ability rating: AAA. 

  The super-cat reinsurance business, in which Wes-FIC is engaged, continues to 
be a very logical business for Wes-FIC. Wes-FIC has a large net worth in relation to 
annual premiums being earned. And this is exactly the condition rationally required 
for any insurance company planning to be a ""stand alone'' reinsurer covering super- 
catastrophe risks it can't safely pass on to others sure to remain solvent if a large 
super-catastrophe comes. Such a ""stand alone'' reinsurer must be a kind of Fort 
Knox, prepared occasionally, without calling on any other reinsurers for help, to pay 
out in a single year many times more than premiums coming in, as it covers losses 
from some super catastrophe worse than Hurricane Andrew. In short, it needs a 
balance sheet a lot like Wes-FIC's. 

  In connection with the retrocessions of super-cat reinsurance to Wes-FIC from 
the Berkshire Hathaway Insurance Group, the nature of the situation as it has 
evolved is such that Berkshire Hathaway, owning 100% of its Insurance Group and 
only 80% of Wesco and Wes-FIC, does not, for some philanthropic reason, ordinarily 
retrocede to Wes-FIC any reinsurance business that Berkshire Hathaway considers 
desirable and that is available only in amounts below what Berkshire Hathaway 
wants for itself on the terms oAered. Instead, retrocessions occur only occasionally, 
under limited conditions and with some compensation to Berkshire Hathaway. Such 
retrocessions ordinarily happen only when (1) Berkshire Hathaway, for some reason 
(usually a policy of overall risk limitation), desires lower amounts of business than 
are available on the terms oAered and (2) Wes-FIC has adequate capacity to bear 
the risk assumed and (3) Wes-FIC pays a fair ceding commission designed to cover 
part of the cost of getting and managing insurance business. 

 Generally, Berkshire Hathaway, in dealing with partly owned subsidiaries, tries 
to lean over a little backward in an attempt to observe what Justice Cardozo called 
""the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive,'' but it cannot be expected to make 
large and plain giveaways of Berkshire Hathaway assets or business to a partially 
owned subsidiary like Wes-FIC. 

  Given Berkshire Hathaway's unwillingness to make plain giveaways to Wes-FIC 
and reductions in opportunities in the super-cat reinsurance market in recent years, 
prospects are often poor for Wes-FIC's acquisition of retroceded super-cat 
reinsurance. 

  Moreover, Wesco shareholders should continue to realize that super-cat rein- 
surance is not for the faint of heart. A huge variation in annual results, with some very 
unpleasant future years for Wes-FIC, is inevitable. 

  But it is precisely what must, in the nature of things, be associated with these 
bad possibilities, with their huge and embarrassing adverse consequences in occa- 
sional years, that makes Wes-FIC like its way of being in the super-cat business. 
Buyers (particularly wise buyers) of super-cat reinsurance often want to deal with 
Berkshire Hathaway subsidiaries (possessing as they do the highest possible credit 
ratings and a reliable corporate personality) instead of other reinsurers less cautious, 
straightforward and well endowed. And many competing sellers of super-cat reinsur- 
ance are looking for a liberal ""intermediary's'' proNt, hard to get because they must 
Nnd a ""layoA'' reinsurer both (1) so smart that it is sure to stay strong enough to pay 
possible losses yet (2) so casual about costs that it is not much bothered by a liberal 
proNt earned by some intermediary entity not willing to retain any major risk. Thus 
the forces in place can rationally be expected to cause acceptable long-term results 
for well-Nnanced, disciplined decision makers, despite horrible losses in some years 
and other years of restricted opportunity to write business. And, again, we wish to 
repeat that we expect only acceptable long-term results. We see no possibility for 
bonanza. 

  It should also be noted that Wes-FIC, in the arrangements with the Insurance 
Group of Berkshire Hathaway, receives a special business-acquisition advantage 
from using Berkshire Hathaway's general reputation. Under all the circumstances, 
the 3% ceding commission now being paid seems more than fair to Wes-FIC. 
Certainly and obviously, Berkshire Hathaway would not oAer terms so good to any 
other entity outside the Berkshire Hathaway aCliated group. 

  Finally, we repeat an important disclosure about Wes-FIC's super-cat-reinsur- 
ance-acquisition mechanics. It is impractical to have people in California make 
complex accept-or-reject decisions for Wes-FIC when retrocessions of reinsurance 
are oAered by the Berkshire Hathaway Insurance Group. But, happily, the Berkshire 
Hathaway Insurance Group executives making original business-acquisition deci- 
sions are greatly admired and trusted by the writer and will be ""eating their own 
cooking.'' Under such circumstances, Wesco's and Wes-FIC's boards of directors, on 
the writer's recommendation, have simply approved automatic retrocessions of 
reinsurance to Wes-FIC as oAered by one or more wholly owned Berkshire 
Hathaway subsidiaries. Each retrocession is to be accepted forthwith in writing in 
Nebraska by agents of Wes-FIC who are at the same time salaried employees of 
wholly owned subsidiaries of Berkshire Hathaway. Moreover, each retrocession will 
be made at a 3%-of-premiums ceding commission. Finally, two conditions must be 
satisNed: (1) Wes-FIC must get 20% or less of the risk (before taking into account 
eAects from the ceding commission) and (2) wholly owned Berkshire Hathaway 
subsidiaries must retain at least 80% of the identical risk (again, without taking into 
account eAects from the ceding commission). 

  We will not ordinarily describe individual super-cat reinsurance contracts in full 
detail to Wesco shareholders. That would be contrary to our competitive interest. 
Instead, we will try to summarize reasonably any items of very large importance. 

  Will more reinsurance be later available to Wes-FIC through Berkshire 
Hathaway subsidiaries on the basis and using the automatic procedure we have 
above described? Well, we have often proved poor prognosticators. We can only say 
that we hope so and that more reinsurance should come, albeit irregularly and with 
long intermissions. No new contracts became available to Wes-FIC in 1998. As of 
1998 yearend, the one remaining super-cat contract, plus one other contract, not a 
super-cat contract, represented Wes-FIC's active reinsurance business. 

  We continue to examine other possible insurance-writing opportunities, and 
also insurance company acquisitions, like and unlike the purchase of KBS. 

  Wes-FIC is now a very strong insurance company, with very low costs, and, one 
way or another, in the future as in the past, we expect to continue to Nnd and seize at 
least a few sensible insurance opportunities. 

  On super-cat reinsurance accepted by Wes-FIC to date (March 8, 1999) there 
has been no loss whatsoever that we know of, but some ""no-claims'' contingent 
commissions have been paid to original cessors of business (i.e., cessors not 
including Berkshire Hathaway). Super-cat underwriting proNt of $1.4 million, before 
taxes, beneNted 1998 earnings, versus $2.3 million in 1997. The balance of pre-tax 
underwriting proNt amounted to $1.9 million for 1998 and $2.8 million for 1997. 
These Ngures came mostly from favorable revision of loss reserves on the old 
Fireman's Fund contract. 

The Kansas Bankers Surety Company (""KBS'') 

  KBS, purchased by Wes-FIC in 1996 for approximately $80 million in cash, 
contributed $4,987,000 to the normal net operating income of the insurance 
businesses in 1998 and $6,044,000 in 1997, after reductions for goodwill amortiza- 
tion under consolidated accounting convention of $782,000 each year. The results of 
KBS have been combined with those of Wes-FIC, and are included in the foregoing 
table in the category, "" 'normal' net operating income of Wes-FIC and KBS insurance 
businesses.'' 

  KBS was chartered in 1909 to underwrite deposit insurance for Kansas banks. Its 
oCces are in Topeka, Kansas. Over the years its service has continued to adapt to the 
changing needs of the banking industry. Today its customer base, consisting mostly 
of small and medium-sized community banks, is spread throughout 25 mainly 
midwestern states. In addition to bank deposit guaranty bonds which insure deposits 
in excess of FDIC coverage, KBS also oAers directors and oCcers indemnity policies, 
bank employment practices policies, bank annuity and mutual funds indemnity 
policies and bank insurance agents professional errors and omissions indemnity 
policies. 

  The principal change in KBS's operations in 1998 was a large reduction in 
insurance premiums ceded to reinsurers, eAective January 1, 1998. The increased 
volume of business retained (94% in 1998 versus 58% in 1997) accompanied 
reduced underwriting income during 1998. However, KBS's combined ratio re- 
mained much better than average for insurers, at 62.2% for 1998, versus 37.2% for 
1997 and 29.3% for 1996, and we expect volatile but favorable long-term eAects 
from increased insurance retained. Part of KBS's continuing insurance volume is now 
ceded through reinsurance to other Berkshire subsidiaries under reinsurance arrange- 
ments whereunder such other Berkshire subsidiaries take 50% and unrelated reinsur- 
ers take the other 50%. 

  KBS is run by Donald Towle, President, assisted by 15 dedicated oCcers and 
employees. 

Precision Steel 

  The businesses of Wesco's Precision Steel subsidiary, headquartered in the 
outskirts of Chicago at Franklin Park, Illinois, contributed $3,154,000 to normal net 
operating income in 1998, compared with $3,622,000 in 1997. The decrease in proNt 
occurred as revenues decreased 2%, despite a 5% increase in pounds of product 
sold, and was attributable mainly to expenditures necessitated to upgrade computers 
and computer systems to ensure that Precision Steel's order-taking and other data 
processing systems continue to function accurately beyond December 31, 1999. 

  Under the skilled leadership of David Hillstrom, Precision Steel's businesses in 
1998 continued to provide an excellent return on resources employed. 

Tag Ends from Savings and Loan Days 

  All that now remains outside Wes-FIC but within Wesco as a consequence of 
Wesco's former involvement with Mutual Savings, Wesco's long-held savings and 
loan subsidiary, is a small real estate subsidiary, MS Property Company, that holds tag 
ends of assets and liabilities with a net book value of about $13 million. MS Property 
Company's results of operations, immaterial versus Wesco's present size, are in- 
cluded in the foregoing breakdown of earnings within ""all other 'normal' net 
operating income (loss).'' 

  Of course, the main tag end from Wesco's savings and loan days is 
28,800,000 shares of Freddie Mac, purchased by Mutual Savings for $72 million at a 
time when Freddie Mac shares could be lawfully owned only by a savings and loan 
association. This holding, with a market value of $1.9 billion at yearend 1998, now 
reposes in Wes-FIC. 

All Other ""Normal'' Net Operating Income or Loss 

  All other ""normal'' net operating income or loss, net of interest paid and general 
corporate expenses, decreased to an after-tax loss of $186,000 in 1998 from an after- 
tax proNt of $1,133,000 in 1997. Sources were (1) rents ($2,921,000 gross) from 
Wesco's Pasadena oCce property (leased almost entirely to outsiders, including 
California Federal Bank as the ground Ooor tenant), and (2) interest and dividends 
from cash equivalents and marketable securities held outside the insurance subsidi- 
aries, less (3) costs and expenses of liquidating tag-end foreclosed real estate. 
Income in 1998 was lower because (1) reversals of reserves for possible losses on 
sales of such tag end real estate, expensed in prior years, beneNted earnings by about 
$1.1 million in 1997, and (2) lower dividends were received in 1998 after forced 
conversion of preferred stock of Citigroup Inc. (""Citigroup'') into lower-dividend- 
paying common stock. The 1998 and 1997 ""other 'normal' net operating income or 
loss'' Ngures also include intercompany charges for interest expense ($102,000 and 
$172,000 after taxes, respectively) on borrowings from Wes-FIC. This intercompany 
interest expense does not aAect Wesco's consolidated net income inasmuch as the 
same amount is included as interest income in Wes-FIC's ""normal'' net operating 
income. 

Net Securities Gains and Losses 

  Wesco's earnings contained securities gains of $33,609,000, after income taxes, 
for 1998, versus $62,697,000, after taxes, for 1997. The entire 1998 Ngure resulted 
from sales of marketable securities. Of the 1997 Ngure, only $93,000 was realized 
through the sale of securities; the balance, $62,604,000, resulted from the exchange 
of the preferred and common shares of Salomon Inc (""Salomon'') owned by Wesco 
for preferred and common shares of The Travelers Group Inc. (""Travelers'') late in 
1997 in connection with the merger of Salomon with a subsidiary of Travelers. 
Accounting standards require that the fair (market) value of shares received in such 
an exchange be recorded as the new cost basis as of the date of the exchange, with 
the diAerence, after appropriate reserves for future income tax on the gain, recog- 
nized in the Nnancial statements as a realized after-tax gain. For income tax purposes 
the exchange is recorded at the original cost of the securities exchanged; no gain is 
reported on the tax return until the securities are sold. 

  Although the realized gains materially impacted Wesco's reported earnings for 
each year, they had a very minor impact on Wesco's shareholders' equity. Inasmuch as 
the greater portion of each year's realized gains had previously been reOected in the 
unrealized gain component of Wesco's shareholders' equity, those amounts were 
merely switched from unrealized gains to retained earnings, another component of 
shareholders' equity. 
Convertible Preferred Stockholdings 

  At the end of 1998, Wesco and its subsidiaries owned $20,000,000, at original 
cost, in convertible preferred stock which by merger of Travelers and Citicorp late in 
1998 became convertible preferred stock of Citigroup. The Travelers preferred stock, 
itself, was received in 1997 (see the preceding section) in exchange for the Wesco 
group's remaining shares of Salomon preferred stock, which originally cost 
$20,000,000, and whose cost was adjusted upwards to $45,000,000 as of the date of 
the exchange. The issue requires redemption at par value of $20,000,000 on 
October 31, 1999, if not converted to 892,105 shares of common stock before that 
date. The investment is carried on Wesco's consolidated balance sheet at fair value 
of $44,000,000 as of December 31, 1998, the approximate market value of the 
common shares at that date, with the $1,000,000 diAerence between its adjusted cost 
and market value deducted from shareholders' equity, net of income tax eAect, 
without aAecting reported net income, according to accounting convention. The 
convertible preferred stock was obtained at the same time Wesco's parent corpora- 
tion, Berkshire Hathaway, obtained additional amounts of the same stock at the same 
price per share. 

  Through yearend 1997, Wesco's consolidated Nnancial statements reOected an 
investment in 9.25% convertible preferred stock of US Airways Group, Inc., acquired 
by Wesco at par of $12,000,000 in 1989; that Ngure was adjusted down to 
$3,000,000 when we decided in 1994 that an other-than-temporary decline in the 
value of its stock had occurred. Early in 1998, US Airways called the preferred stock 
for redemption. Prior to the eAective date, Wesco converted its preferred stock 
investment to 309,718 shares of US Airways common stock and sold the latter for 
$21,738,000, realizing a gain of $18,738,000 for Nnancial statement purposes 
($12,180,000 after taxes). For tax return purposes, however, only $9,738,000 of gain 
($6,330,000 after taxes) will be realized, because the $9,000,000 writedown in 1994 
was not deductible. 

Consolidated Balance Sheet And Related Discussion 

  As indicated in the accompanying Nnancial statements, Wesco's net worth 
increased, as accountants compute it under their conventions, to $2.22 billion ($312 
per Wesco share) at yearend 1998 from $1.76 billion ($248 per Wesco share) at 
yearend 1997. 

  The $459.5 million increase in reported net worth in 1998 was the result of three 
factors: (1) $395.8 million resulting from continued net appreciation of investments 
after provision for future taxes on capital gains; plus (2) $71.8 million from 1998 net 
income; less (3) $8.1 million in dividends paid. 

  The foregoing $312-per-share book value approximates liquidation value assum- 
ing that all Wesco's non-security assets would liquidate, after taxes, at book value. 
Probably, this assumption is too conservative. But our computation of liquidation 
value is unlikely to be too low by more than two or three dollars per Wesco share, 
because (1) the liquidation value of Wesco's consolidated real estate holdings 
(where interesting potential now lies almost entirely in Wesco's equity in its oCce 
property in Pasadena) containing only 125,000 net rentable square feet, and 
(2) unrealized appreciation in other assets (primarily Precision Steel) cannot be 
large enough, in relation to Wesco's overall size, to change very much the overall 
computation of after-tax liquidating value. 

  Of course, so long as Wesco does not liquidate, and does not sell any 
appreciated assets, it has, in eAect, an interest-free ""loan'' from the government 
equal to its deferred income taxes on the unrealized gains, subtracted in determining 
its net worth. This interest-free ""loan'' from the government is at this moment 
working for Wesco shareholders and amounted to about $127 per Wesco share at 
yearend 1998. 

  However, some day, perhaps soon, major parts of the interest-free ""loan'' must 
be paid as assets are sold. Therefore, Wesco's shareholders have no perpetual 
advantage creating value for them of $127 per Wesco share. Instead, the present 
value of Wesco's shareholders' advantage must logically be much lower than $127 
per Wesco share. In the writer's judgment, the value of Wesco's advantage from its 
temporary, interest-free ""loan'' was probably about $30 per Wesco share at yearend 
1998. 

  After the value of the advantage inhering in the interest-free ""loan'' is estimated, 
a reasonable approximation can be made of Wesco's intrinsic value per share. This 
approximation is made by simply adding (1) the value of the advantage from the 
interest-free ""loan'' per Wesco share and (2) liquidating value per Wesco share. 
Others may think diAerently, but the foregoing approach seems reasonable to the 
writer as a way of estimating intrinsic value per Wesco share. 

  Thus, if the value of the advantage from the interest-free tax-deferral ""loan'' 
present was $30 per Wesco share at yearend 1998, and after-tax liquidating value 
was then about $312 per share (Ngures that seem rational to the writer), Wesco's 
intrinsic value per share would become about $342 per share at yearend 1998, up 
25% from intrinsic value as guessed in a similar calculation at the end of 1997. And, 
Nnally, this reasonable-to-this-writer, $342-per-share Ngure for intrinsic per share 
value of Wesco stock should be compared with the $354? per share price at which 
Wesco stock was selling on December 31, 1998. This comparison indicates that 
Wesco stock was then selling about 4% above intrinsic value. 

  As Wesco's unrealized appreciation has continued to grow in frothy markets for 
securities, it should be remembered that it is subject to market Ouctuation, possibly 
dramatic on the downside, with no guaranty as to its ultimate full realization. 
Unrealized after-tax appreciation represents 76% of Wesco's shareholders' equity at 
1998 yearend), versus 73% and 70% one and two years earlier. 

  Business and human quality in place at Wesco continues to be not nearly as 
good, all factors considered, as that in place at Berkshire Hathaway. Wesco is not an 
equally-good-but-smaller version of Berkshire Hathaway, better because its small 
size makes growth easier. Instead, each dollar of book value at Wesco continues 
plainly to provide much less intrinsic value than a similar dollar of book value at 
Berkshire Hathaway. Moreover, the quality disparity in book value's intrinsic merits 
has, in recent years, been widening in favor of Berkshire Hathaway. 

  All that said, we make no attempt to appraise relative attractiveness for invest- 
ment of Wesco versus Berkshire Hathaway stock at present stock-market quotations. 

  We are not now pessimists, on a long-term basis, about business expansion. 
Despite present super-ebullient markets for entire businesses, making it hard for 
Wesco to Nnd attractive opportunities, we do not believe that such opportunities will 
never come. 

  On January 13, 1999 Wesco increased its regular dividend from 28Y cents per 
share to 29Y cents per share, payable March 10, 1999, to shareholders of record as 
of the close of business on February 10, 1999. 

  This annual report contains Form 10-K, a report Nled with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission, and includes detailed information about Wesco and its 
subsidiaries as well as audited Nnancial statements bearing extensive footnotes. As 
usual, your careful attention is sought with respect to these items. 

  Charles T. Munger 
  Chairman of the Board 
March 8, 1999