I thought that might have been what you meant, but wanted to get a point across in general about the importance of capital allocation.

I have a fairly big position in Berkshire Hathway at the moment, but it is more of a placeholder for cash. I believe Pabrai uses BRK for the same reason. It’s relatively undervalued, better than holding cash, but I would sell it should I have enough other opportunities.

What I was really meaning to state is my disagreement with those “investors [who] place 70% of their portfolio in a company like Berkshire Hathaway and then claim they have certain investing skills”

I’ve seen some people who will make a portfolio of BRK, WSZL, and FFH and consider that well rounded. To me, it comes off as someone trying to invest in good value investors, hoping they’ll put the float/capital they have access to to work. I feel that’s too much like a fund of funds. I’ve also seen another idea floating around about starting a hedge fund that only invests only in BRK and uses leverage to amplify the returns. Again, this doesn’t seem like *real* investing to me.

It’s my belief that if you really want to learn investing you should keep those kinds of allocations to a less than majority position of your portfolio so that you’ll go out and find your own undervalued well-managed companies.