I hope Howard is even a fraction of the investor Warren is. I mean, don't get me wrong, Howard is probably great, but when your dad is considered one of the best investors ever, its hard to live up to that legacy.
And yes, I've read the article, thats a pretty long list of what Howard has achieved in his life thus far, its nothing to sneeze at.
I think you missed the first part, where it says that he is going to join as nonexecutive chairman. He's basically going to succeed WB only in terms of maintaining and guiding BRK's ethical standards, not its investment decisions.
Also, this is clearly a puff piece that was arranged by BRK's publicist. Having read Warren Buffet's biography a few years back, I do no believe "successful farmer" is how I remembered his son's career being described. The article does a decent job of painting a rosy picture, but looking at it from a more objective light: he grew up rich in a really weird family dynamic where his father and mother rarely had communication and the father's mistress lived with them; he never really was able to find much ambition in himself since he never wanted for anything, and his ability to believe he can succeed was explicitly shot down by his parents; he tried to go to college three times, failing each time until he finally had a mental break and decided to run away to a simpler life, like a cliched Happy Loman (Death of a Salesman). Given that this appointment is only about making sure the company maintains its ethics, that's not such a bad guy to put in that role. At least he's not obsessed with ROI at all costs.
In some ways this might be the ideal corporate setup. There are enough sharks in BRK to make sure the company continues to rake it in.
Maybe this is what we need in corporations today - a team of ruthless businessmen being reigned in by someone who has the moral perspective to make sure the business is a positive impact, but disconnected enough not to get drawn into the fray.
Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part, hoping someday that our banks would led by people with the moral fiber to reign in the abuse and concentrate on providing value.
True to some extent, but if the non-executive Chairman still has a board of directors vote, and (without looking at the other directors) assuming the rest of the board isn't strictly Berkshire execs, the setup could work.
Indeed, “In the world’s eyes, I could never be seen as successful as him. My dad and mom always made that clear that was okay,”
Howard was obviously not picked to succeed Warren on merit either, the chances of that are billions to one. Even though I would do the same, I can't help but feel that this kind of nepotism ultimately holds back progress. It's a shame that as humans we can't overcome paternal instincts.
Before this gets more views, let's establish that the headline is misleading and it's spelled "Buffett".
Howard Buffett is a NON-EXECUTIVE chairman. He will have little-to-no involvement in investment decisions at Berkshire. My guess based on the actual content of the article is that he is installed to have a vote at board meetings that will help maintain ethical and moral voting policies throughout the firm.
In some ways this is a break from Warren's publicly espoused values, but it seems to be a figurehead kind of thing and you can't really complain about a chairman who doesn't get paid.
8 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 26.4 ms ] threadAnd yes, I've read the article, thats a pretty long list of what Howard has achieved in his life thus far, its nothing to sneeze at.
Also, this is clearly a puff piece that was arranged by BRK's publicist. Having read Warren Buffet's biography a few years back, I do no believe "successful farmer" is how I remembered his son's career being described. The article does a decent job of painting a rosy picture, but looking at it from a more objective light: he grew up rich in a really weird family dynamic where his father and mother rarely had communication and the father's mistress lived with them; he never really was able to find much ambition in himself since he never wanted for anything, and his ability to believe he can succeed was explicitly shot down by his parents; he tried to go to college three times, failing each time until he finally had a mental break and decided to run away to a simpler life, like a cliched Happy Loman (Death of a Salesman). Given that this appointment is only about making sure the company maintains its ethics, that's not such a bad guy to put in that role. At least he's not obsessed with ROI at all costs.
Maybe this is what we need in corporations today - a team of ruthless businessmen being reigned in by someone who has the moral perspective to make sure the business is a positive impact, but disconnected enough not to get drawn into the fray.
Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part, hoping someday that our banks would led by people with the moral fiber to reign in the abuse and concentrate on providing value.
Howard was obviously not picked to succeed Warren on merit either, the chances of that are billions to one. Even though I would do the same, I can't help but feel that this kind of nepotism ultimately holds back progress. It's a shame that as humans we can't overcome paternal instincts.
Howard Buffett is a NON-EXECUTIVE chairman. He will have little-to-no involvement in investment decisions at Berkshire. My guess based on the actual content of the article is that he is installed to have a vote at board meetings that will help maintain ethical and moral voting policies throughout the firm.