[FatOtt]

Ok, back in town.

I don't think there's any argument here. My point was that Buffett/Munger agree with the bulk of what goes on with EVA (specifically talking about the idea of economic, rather than accounting, profits), just not some of the specifics put into place by Stern Stewart. So I agree with Evan if he means that Berkshire doesn't use EVA as implemented by Stern Stewart, but I disagree if he means that Berkshire doesn't use the idea of economic profit and a cost of equity/hurdle rate that makes up 90% of what goes into EVA.

The problem that I have is that many people (and, again, I've met a few) will listen to the Buffett/Munger comments and throw out the baby with the bathwater. They hear, "EVA is twaddle" and interpret that as "Calculating economic profits after deducting a cost of equity is twaddle". They hear, "Beta is stupid" and interpret that as "Attempting to calculate a cost of equity or even recognizing the cost of equity as a concept is stupid."

I agree with Evan - it seems we're all in agreement here. Having read prior posts from both Evan and DesertCat, I'm pretty sure we think alike on this.