That wasn't the point. The response isn't pro-model model or anti-model. The point is the author is saying things that are factually, obviously incorrect. If they'd done even a marginal amount of homework, they wouldn't be claiming "Buffet does this or Buffet does that" when all public information and statements about this exact topic point to the contrary. It signals intellectual laziness at best and willful lying at worst.
I've read multiple biographies of Buffett, I've read criticisms of his approach, and I've read Hagstrom's book on Focused Portfolios (which Munger said was the most representative of what they were doing).
I have attempted to emulate Buffett in the past. It is difficult. Hagstrom failed as well, rather publicly, with his mutual funds.
I've begun to see Buffett not as a stock picker, as he hasn't really done such plays over the past decade or so. Rather, he is a capital allocator in the true sense of the word: he buys companies with high FCF, and reinvests the FCF in either stock if he finds an underpriced opportunity, or ownership of private companies if he does not. In the previous decade, he has mostly done the latter, as it has become more and more difficult to generate alpha in the former. He has also been willing to enter into advantageous contracts (warrants, etc) in times of economic turmoil.
I have demonstrated some understanding of the topic.
Now my question to you is this: are you as well read on this as I am? If so, point me to a chapter in one of the biographies and I will self correct.
That's all very interesting and does show that you're well familiar with the topic at hand. Which only makes me more skeptical of the fact that you have said nothing to back up your original assertion.
