Berkshire Hathaway is a poor example to use for that. They famously contribute essentially nothing in overhead costs and instead make a fortune for the overall entity through smart capital allocation and investing.
Again though they don't have dividends yet are worth less than Apple which is a younger company that hands out dividends. BH's overhead is not direct costs but relatively poor asset allocation due to it's vast size making the overhead of smaller investments unwieldy and lacks focus to maximize gains on any component.
PS: You can argue about performance. But, in the last 20 years their stock has done slightly worse than the Dow when you include dividends. Meaning they could have done better investing their profits in an index fund.
