Warren Buffett is leaving the board of the Washington Post Company (WPO).  He continues to own a nearly 19% stake in the company and he states that he has no intentions of selling those shares.  The ostensible reason for leaving the board has to do with the time commitment.  This underlies the notion that Buffett is focusing more on transforming Berkshire Hathaway (BRKB) into a company that can thrive in his absence.  This point was driven home in his interview with Bethany McLean in the February 2011 edition of Vanity Fair (still summary-only).  In that article McLean writes:

The real point about Burlington is that it is a capstone in the transformation of Berkshire.  Indeed, today’s Berkshire Hathaway bears about as little resemblance to a hedge fund as General Electric does.  [p. 114]

That underlies the fact that Buffett is focused on the really long term, not the next year or so.  Buffett states:

There is no end point for Berkshire Hathaway.  The important thing is not this year or next year, but where Berkshire is 20 years after I die.  Not taking care of Berkshire would be like not have a will-cubed.  [p. 110]

It therefore makes sense to view Berkshire’s moves going forward through this lens.  If Buffett’s priorities are to create an ‘idiot-proof’ company expect more bench building, acquisitions and a lot less action on the stock front.

In the meantime a few more Buffett-related links:

Despite leaving the board, Warren Buffett has no intention of selling any Washington Post shares.  (Deal Journal, Dealbook, Washington Post)

Add Greg Abel to the list of contenders to “replace” Buffett.  (Fortune)

Former Buffett employee Louis Simpson is hanging out a money management shingle.  (Bloomberg)

UpdateA commenter wonders if Buffett is trying to disassociate himself from the Washington Post due to its for-profit education arm.  Joe Weisenthal at Money Game makes the same point.  This reputational risk could be playing a role in Buffett’s decision.  However if Buffett thought it was a mortal threat to the company, despite his very low tax basis, he would likely be looking for a way to reduce his economic interest in WPO.  At this point there is no indication that is happening.

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Please see disclosures here.

Please see the Terms & Conditions page for a full disclaimer.