No. of Recommendations: 6
Yeah. My theory is simpler. It’s the “Coke” theory: “I should have sold when Coca Cola was so high.” Both BAC and Apple are “so high”.
I think the reason for selling BAC is different than the reason for selling AAPL. I think the reason for selling BAC is mainly due to a belief that it isn't the best run bank [anymore] and when NIM starts to shrink, all banks will suffer, but BAC will suffer more than average because they aren't the best run kind of bank. And the reason for selling AAPL? I think it is as simple as it just became too large a portion of the portfolio, and that meant that Berkshire was too heavily levered to the price of Apple stock. And while Berkshire has never been afraid to put 10% of itself into a strong investment, I believe they (Buffett, Munger MHRIP, Abel, etc) all thought that 20+% is just too much.
