• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Per Sean Callahan, we can't afford to pay top linemen

AzHusker said:
I think it's possible that Mr. Buffett chooses other outlets for his philanthopy. Kinda hard to criticize a guy who built his own business to the extent he did.

Let's face it, donating to football programs does very little to effect real problems - e.g., starvation, lack of medical services, general poverty. I'm as much a Husker fan as anyone, but I don't expect people to donate to Husker football just because they have money they've earned.

Now, I'll say, if I had Warren Buffett money, I'd toss a few sheckles Nebraska's way. :Lol:
Click to expand...

Warren Buffett is one of the most overrated, protected figures in American finance, a “folksy” mascot for a system built on power, access, and exploitation, wrapped in a fake veneer of modesty and virtue. He did not build his empire from nothing; he leveraged his daddy’s wealthy connections, privileged access, and a cold blooded instinct for circling weak companies and profiting off their distress while hiding it behind the label of “value investing.”

The PR myth is that he is some humble, frugal grandfather who still lives like an ordinary Midwestern guy. In reality, the man who is constantly praised for living in his old Omaha house also owns luxury coastal property and enjoys a lifestyle only a mega billionaire can access, just away from the everyday spotlight. The McDonald’s and cheap car routine is a costume, a carefully scripted brand that lets him pose as “one of us” while sitting on obscene wealth and influence.

He built Berkshire by acting like a vulture, not a builder. He did not create companies; he waited for them to bleed, then moved in, bought them when they were broken, and squeezed value out of them once everyone else had absorbed the pain. That predatory strategy then got spun into “genius,” as if feeding on distressed assets and failed management somehow makes him morally superior rather than just more ruthless and patient than most.

Then there is his treatment of shareholders. He talks endlessly about compounding and long term value, but he refuses to pay dividends and keeps the money locked inside his empire under his control. Without those shareholders, he is nothing, yet they are supposed to be grateful for paper gains and his letters instead of actual cash in their hands. The arrangement is simple: they provide the capital and the worship, he keeps the power and liquid.

His moral posturing is just as hollow. He loves lecturing about how the rich should pay more and give more, while channeling massive sums into giant foundations and vehicles that push the causes and politics he prefers. He went to Nebraska, trades on the “Cornhusker” identity and heartland story, but does not turn his huge fortune into transformative support for his own alma mater or state in proportion to his wealth, tossing comparatively small gifts at Nebraska while directing far greater sums into national and global foundations.

His personal life and image are bizarrely curated: the same house, the same routines, the childlike junk food diet, the carefully repeated quirks and “aw shucks” lines. It is all theater. Behind that, there is an ultra rich power broker who understands that if he plays the part of the harmless, slightly eccentric old man, people will ignore the scale of his wealth, the ruthlessness of how he built it, and how little of it truly flows back to the ordinary people and communities his myth constantly leans on.

F Warren Buffett.
 
Husker1995 said:
Warren Buffett is one of the most overrated, protected figures in American finance, a “folksy” mascot for a system built on power, access, and exploitation, wrapped in a fake veneer of modesty and virtue. He did not build his empire from nothing; he leveraged his daddy’s wealthy connections, privileged access, and a cold blooded instinct for circling weak companies and profiting off their distress while hiding it behind the label of “value investing.”

The PR myth is that he is some humble, frugal grandfather who still lives like an ordinary Midwestern guy. In reality, the man who is constantly praised for living in his old Omaha house also owns luxury coastal property and enjoys a lifestyle only a mega billionaire can access, just away from the everyday spotlight. The McDonald’s and cheap car routine is a costume, a carefully scripted brand that lets him pose as “one of us” while sitting on obscene wealth and influence.

He built Berkshire by acting like a vulture, not a builder. He did not create companies; he waited for them to bleed, then moved in, bought them when they were broken, and squeezed value out of them once everyone else had absorbed the pain. That predatory strategy then got spun into “genius,” as if feeding on distressed assets and failed management somehow makes him morally superior rather than just more ruthless and patient than most.

Then there is his treatment of shareholders. He talks endlessly about compounding and long term value, but he refuses to pay dividends and keeps the money locked inside his empire under his control. Without those shareholders, he is nothing, yet they are supposed to be grateful for paper gains and his letters instead of actual cash in their hands. The arrangement is simple: they provide the capital and the worship, he keeps the power and liquid.

His moral posturing is just as hollow. He loves lecturing about how the rich should pay more and give more, while channeling massive sums into giant foundations and vehicles that push the causes and politics he prefers. He went to Nebraska, trades on the “Cornhusker” identity and heartland story, but does not turn his huge fortune into transformative support for his own alma mater or state in proportion to his wealth, tossing comparatively small gifts at Nebraska while directing far greater sums into national and global foundations.

His personal life and image are bizarrely curated: the same house, the same routines, the childlike junk food diet, the carefully repeated quirks and “aw shucks” lines. It is all theater. Behind that, there is an ultra rich power broker who understands that if he plays the part of the harmless, slightly eccentric old man, people will ignore the scale of his wealth, the ruthlessness of how he built it, and how little of it truly flows back to the ordinary people and communities his myth constantly leans on.

F Warren Buffett.
Click to expand...
the whole 1st wife, 2nd wife thing is a bit creepy too.....
 
Husker1995 said:
Warren Buffett is one of the most overrated, protected figures in American finance, a “folksy” mascot for a system built on power, access, and exploitation, wrapped in a fake veneer of modesty and virtue. He did not build his empire from nothing; he leveraged his daddy’s wealthy connections, privileged access, and a cold blooded instinct for circling weak companies and profiting off their distress while hiding it behind the label of “value investing.”

The PR myth is that he is some humble, frugal grandfather who still lives like an ordinary Midwestern guy. In reality, the man who is constantly praised for living in his old Omaha house also owns luxury coastal property and enjoys a lifestyle only a mega billionaire can access, just away from the everyday spotlight. The McDonald’s and cheap car routine is a costume, a carefully scripted brand that lets him pose as “one of us” while sitting on obscene wealth and influence.

He built Berkshire by acting like a vulture, not a builder. He did not create companies; he waited for them to bleed, then moved in, bought them when they were broken, and squeezed value out of them once everyone else had absorbed the pain. That predatory strategy then got spun into “genius,” as if feeding on distressed assets and failed management somehow makes him morally superior rather than just more ruthless and patient than most.

Then there is his treatment of shareholders. He talks endlessly about compounding and long term value, but he refuses to pay dividends and keeps the money locked inside his empire under his control. Without those shareholders, he is nothing, yet they are supposed to be grateful for paper gains and his letters instead of actual cash in their hands. The arrangement is simple: they provide the capital and the worship, he keeps the power and liquid.

His moral posturing is just as hollow. He loves lecturing about how the rich should pay more and give more, while channeling massive sums into giant foundations and vehicles that push the causes and politics he prefers. He went to Nebraska, trades on the “Cornhusker” identity and heartland story, but does not turn his huge fortune into transformative support for his own alma mater or state in proportion to his wealth, tossing comparatively small gifts at Nebraska while directing far greater sums into national and global foundations.

His personal life and image are bizarrely curated: the same house, the same routines, the childlike junk food diet, the carefully repeated quirks and “aw shucks” lines. It is all theater. Behind that, there is an ultra rich power broker who understands that if he plays the part of the harmless, slightly eccentric old man, people will ignore the scale of his wealth, the ruthlessness of how he built it, and how little of it truly flows back to the ordinary people and communities his myth constantly leans on.

F Warren Buffett.
Click to expand...
MiniDisk said:
the whole 1st wife, 2nd wife thing is a bit creepy too.....
Click to expand...
I will forgive it all if he starts forking over $75million a year for NU football :Koolaid2:
 
Boji Husker said:
I will forgive it all if he starts forking over $75million a year for NU football :Koolaid2:
Click to expand...

ESPN College Sports Radio talk show yesterday was bouncing around the debate on whether the portal and NIL was going to be the demise of college football, using Mark Cuban and Indiana as a the case study (not negative toward either of those in particular...).

Let's say a school has a multi-billionaire donor who decides they can set aside an even Billion total for ongoing support of their school.

If a top QB gets $5 million per year, that billionaire can fund a 4 year-starter at that price for 50 quarterbacks (200 years) before the funds run out. (not including any interest or growth in the $$$).

The amounts are staggering. Will ordinary fans be willing to support this in the long-term?
 
BlueTurfHusker said:
This nattering nabob of negativism notwithstanding, Warren Buffett's accomplishments are clear and unique in the world of investing and worthy of admiration. And he's a Husker. How does slamming him on a football board benefit anyone? Shesh. GBR!
Click to expand...
It's what we do. No one is immune from the football board, not even the Pope, who is a Villanova fan!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

GET TICKETS





Back
Top