you cannot compare someone in USA and someone in RSA without converting to mutual ground, i would recommend you take buffett's USD starting value and ending value, take the starting date and get the USD-ZAR exchange, then take his value today and the USD-ZAR exchange today and get the compound growth of his portfolio in ZAR terms and it will be way more than 20%. then you can compare...
buying power of time is not the same, thats what really counts. same as money market rates here is higher than in USA but inflation here is also higher so ones end result could be the same even though % is different.
John, give it up, you're on the losing side of this argument. If you give me 100 billion Zim $, and I give you back 200 billion Zim $ after 1 year, have you made a 100% profit? No, you gave me a useful amount of cash, but, by the time I give you the 200bn, it is worth less than the paper it's printed on, because of the high inflation there. The prophets of Buffett are quite correct on this point. You'll have to try a different strategy against them, like character assasination.
LOL.. no I would have made a 100% return..the debate as to the time value and inflation is a seperate issue..one not to be overlooked but still seperate... the truth is buffoon is a hilbilly from the back waters who got lucky.. The fact that he has never invested outside of the states until recently is just a demonstration of his hillbilly approach.
If a simplistic approach is taken, not adjusting for the time value of money or opportunity costs, that would be "correct", but also entirely meaningless. Pension funds generally aim for a 5% real annual return over time. As for Buffett not investing outside of the US directly until relatively recently, there was no real imperative to do so. Stick to what you know best? I certainly won't call that a hillbilly approach...how much can essentially 2 people pretend to know and understand?