WEB at the 2006 AM discussing KO: "The stock [KO] got to what, in retrospect, clearly was a ridiculous level, but you can't hold the present management, Neville Isdell, responsible for that...So it strikes us as a really wonderful business that sold at a very silly price some years back. And you can definitely fault me for not selling the stock. I always thought it was a wonderful business, but clearly, at 50 times earnings, it was a silly price on the stock. So we like it. We'll own it 10 years from now, in my view."

WEB always said there are only two reasons he would sell an equity from his portfolio: either because the investment thesis had changed, or because he needed the money for another potential opportunity. Holding KO was clearly a great decision. He also held AXP through some periods of high valuation and market volatility. Yet he sold APPL (another amazing company) without a plan for re-deploying the capital, presumably because of concerns over valuation and market conditions. In the case of KO and AXP, he held; in the case of AAPL, he sold (or at least lightened up considerably). Did he think KO and AXP were more durable than AAPL? Or did he just change his mind about being highly concentrated in an overvalued stock?

abromber