While Buffett has long advertised his allegiances to his businesses, his actions suggest an
allegiance perhaps more aligned with individuals. The textile operation is just one example. The textile operation was - and would have been - discontinued a short but respectful time after Ken Chace’s retirement, whether Chace elected to retire some years earlier or many years later (although the company’s operations might have seen some adjustment). Berkshire acquisitions like Diversified Retailing turned out to have similar personal aspects. While Diversified may have been purchased for its Blue Chip and insurance holdings, its Associated Retail kept its position and identity as long as Ben Rosner decided he wanted to run it. While it’s not a point one would explicitly say in the “Owner’s Manual’, many of Buffett’s commitments to businesses seem to be very personal. Beyond that – as they say - there’s more than one way to skin a cat.
While Berkshire lists 70 or so operating company ‘names’ let’s not forget that there is already – granted mostly by historical accident – some sub-groupings in the hierarchy. While we think of World Book and Kirby as Berkshire brands, they are Scott Fetzer companies. Dexter is HH Brown. Dexter is of course now a specialty brand of bowling shoe. Looking forward, I would not be the least surprised if the next fellow in charge perhaps draws more (and perhaps more formal) reporting lines on the organizational chart, along natural business lines. That’s not to say brands or operations (or employees) would lose their identity (or jobs), but they may have different scale or product emphasis, or positions in the hierarchy – formal or not.
As the cadre of founder/owner/managers fade away and professional managers become even more predominant, it’s only natural that some world-class hired talent will emerge in the various business categories: insurance; retail; precision manufacturing; building products; transportation, etc. Buffett’s successor won’t need 70 Sokol’s under him, but he may well need one in each industry group. One concern I’ve had is that I’ve known a couple of otherwise ok managers who have risen beyond what I’ve observed as their past performance levels under Buffett. That’s impressive, but also worrisome. With some strong uber-peers like Sokol in-house, that’s less of a concern.
Btw - I would not be concerned that Berkshire’s occasional disposition or dissolution (or fading away) of a clearly obsolete or untenable business would deter future sellers of private businesses from ever selling to Berkshire. That doesn’t give credit to the types of people who are able to build businesses that Berkshire would buy (they'd expect good business judgment from Berkshire, as they'd expect it from themselves). They more likely notice that even the truest of orphans at least gets respectable treatment in being discarded from the fold (when Berkshire closed the textile mill there was an orphan textile ‘mill’ subsidiary in Canada – already just a niche textile importer, but still viable – that Buffett gave it to the manager as his severance when that manager eliminated his own job in New Bedford). As long as the company continues use common sense and perhaps some creativity, nobody will fault it.
allegiance perhaps more aligned with individuals. The textile operation is just one example. The textile operation was - and would have been - discontinued a short but respectful time after Ken Chace’s retirement, whether Chace elected to retire some years earlier or many years later (although the company’s operations might have seen some adjustment). Berkshire acquisitions like Diversified Retailing turned out to have similar personal aspects. While Diversified may have been purchased for its Blue Chip and insurance holdings, its Associated Retail kept its position and identity as long as Ben Rosner decided he wanted to run it. While it’s not a point one would explicitly say in the “Owner’s Manual’, many of Buffett’s commitments to businesses seem to be very personal. Beyond that – as they say - there’s more than one way to skin a cat.
While Berkshire lists 70 or so operating company ‘names’ let’s not forget that there is already – granted mostly by historical accident – some sub-groupings in the hierarchy. While we think of World Book and Kirby as Berkshire brands, they are Scott Fetzer companies. Dexter is HH Brown. Dexter is of course now a specialty brand of bowling shoe. Looking forward, I would not be the least surprised if the next fellow in charge perhaps draws more (and perhaps more formal) reporting lines on the organizational chart, along natural business lines. That’s not to say brands or operations (or employees) would lose their identity (or jobs), but they may have different scale or product emphasis, or positions in the hierarchy – formal or not.
As the cadre of founder/owner/managers fade away and professional managers become even more predominant, it’s only natural that some world-class hired talent will emerge in the various business categories: insurance; retail; precision manufacturing; building products; transportation, etc. Buffett’s successor won’t need 70 Sokol’s under him, but he may well need one in each industry group. One concern I’ve had is that I’ve known a couple of otherwise ok managers who have risen beyond what I’ve observed as their past performance levels under Buffett. That’s impressive, but also worrisome. With some strong uber-peers like Sokol in-house, that’s less of a concern.
Btw - I would not be concerned that Berkshire’s occasional disposition or dissolution (or fading away) of a clearly obsolete or untenable business would deter future sellers of private businesses from ever selling to Berkshire. That doesn’t give credit to the types of people who are able to build businesses that Berkshire would buy (they'd expect good business judgment from Berkshire, as they'd expect it from themselves). They more likely notice that even the truest of orphans at least gets respectable treatment in being discarded from the fold (when Berkshire closed the textile mill there was an orphan textile ‘mill’ subsidiary in Canada – already just a niche textile importer, but still viable – that Buffett gave it to the manager as his severance when that manager eliminated his own job in New Bedford). As long as the company continues use common sense and perhaps some creativity, nobody will fault it.