I've heard Combs interviewed and have loosely followed his career path going back to when he was managing Gates money. Combs is 54, has considerable experience gained in multiple areas (insurance, investing, implementing organizational change at Geico, managing staff). He could be on track to take Jamie's job. He always struck me as a highly capable person.

Berkshire is a huge company comprised of many companies. Abel is a natural fit for managing the now dominant operational business units side of the company. Replacing Warren Buffett on the investment side is not likely to happen, at least not with the same level of proficiency. I wonder if there will be a new era where a Danaher type of splitting up of the companies will happen with the insurance companies spun out, the Marmon and related companies spun out, the energy companies and rail company spun out and the consumer facing companies spun out. The index could use some new company listings. None of us know anything, so this is pure conjecture. Over the years, Warren has repeatedly made a point of the drag created by the law of large numbers applied to company size and how this inevitably pushes results to average growth rates.

Like many of you, selling Berkshire would represent a 23.8% capital gains tax rate + my state's 4.25% for a total 28.05% discount on our personal holdings. Thus our choice going forward is to hold Berkshire despite its likely eventual growth decline to growing at whatever the average rate is seen across US businesses. As Warren's A shares and the A shares of many other long-term holders are sold during the next ten years, there will eventually be pressures to split up Berkshire. I think those of us continuing to hold Berkshire up to that point will go on to do quite well afterwards as the spin outs take place.

Thoughts?

Uwharrie