The fact that Abel is highly constrained by law as to making sure he publicizes his share purchases and highly motivated to avoid prosecution by having it be by a mechanistic pre-announced plan, is it really fair to call this virtual signalling? Is there another way he could buy BRK stock that does less signalling, or at least signals less virtue?

My point is merely making the distinction between an insider buying stock because they think it's a good deal at the current asking price (the way a lot of people interpret insider purchases), and those that are done more for the impression of support and confidence in the company they engender among observers: signalling.

This is unarguably the latter, since it was announced that the buying program won't be price sensitive. There is nothing wrong with that, and I expect the confidence is entirely genuine, but it shouldn't be interpreted in the first way as a buy signal. Particularly as the $15 million purchase, even if annual, is not exactly an "all in" wager for someone with a net worth probably not all that far from a billion.

You can do something entirely reasonable because of the optics, which is fine--we should just be aware of that, and not interpret it any other way.

Jim