How to Build a Better Investing Mind

The Investment Masters recognize the benefits of having mental models to help understand the key characteristics of a business, the factors driving it's success and the likelihood of maintaining a competitive advantage to drive future growth. In the book, the Psychology of Intelligence Analysis, Richards Heuer noted "little attention is devoted to improving how analysts think". In the book's opening chapter, entitled "Thinking about Thinking", he notes:

"[Analysts] construct their own version of "reality" on the basis of information provided by the senses, but this sensory input is mediated by complex mental process that determine which information is attended to, how it is organized, and the meaning attributed to it…To achieve the clearest possible image .. analysts need more than information ..They also need to understand the lenses through which this information passes. These lenses are known by many terms - mental models, mind-sets, biases or analytic assumptions."

Charlie Munger is a huge advocate of the need for a wide array of mental models for sound judgement. In a speech to Stanford Law School titled "A Lesson on Elementary, Wordly Wisdom, Revisited" he asserted:

"I've long believed that a certain system - which almost any intelligent person can learn - works way better than the systems that most people use… What you need is a latticework of mental models in your head. And you hang your actual experience and your vicarious experience (that you get from reading and so forth) on this latticework of powerful models.  And, with that system, things gradually get to fit together in a way that enhances cognition."

Charlie Munger recognized the need to take the big ideas from other faculties such as science, mathematics, psychology, history, behavioural economics and biology and have them at hand to draw inferences from in the investment process.

"If you want to be a good thinker, you must develop a mind that can jump the jurisdictional boundaries.  You don't have to know it all.  Just take the big ideas from all the disciplines. And it's not that hard to do."

“For some odd reason, I had an early and extreme multi-disciplinary cast of mind. I couldn’t stand reaching for a small idea in my own discipline when there was a big idea right over the fence in somebody else’s discipline. So I just grabbed in all directions for the big ideas that would really work. Nobody taught me to do that; I was just born with that yen.” 

"You must routinely use all the easy-to-learn concepts from the freshman course in every basic subject. Where elementary ideas will serve, your problem solving must not be limited, as academia and many business bureaucracies are limited, by extreme balkanisation into disciplines and sub disciplines, with strong taboos against any venture outside assigned territory."

Studying broadly and applying different models from outside the realms of finance can help an investor better understand a business. Concepts such as networks effects, non-linearity, economies of scale, psychological biases, winner-takes-all, leverage, first-mover-advantage, Darwinian evolution, complex adaptive systems, self-organised criticality, incentives/agency costs and autocatalysis are just a few.

Charlie Munger considers there are about one hundred mental models to learn and different models are relevant to different businesses.

"You've got to learn one-hundred models and a few mental tricks and keep doing it all your life. It's not that hard." Charlie Munger

"You have to learn the models so that they become part of your ever-used repertoire." Charlie Munger

"You need a different checklist and different mental models for different companies." Charlie Munger

It's more than likely if you studied a typical finance course, you missed a large part of what's important in investing [Columbia is a rare exception]. Most finance courses don't cover human psychology, philosophy, financial history nor do they spend the time teaching the lessons behind the Investment Masters success. In fact, most finance courses focus on building investment spreadsheet models, analyzing financial ratios and understanding the capital asset pricing model and efficient market theory. The latter two are mental models considered laughable by most of the Investment Masters.

It's important to continue the learning process and broaden your education to enhance multi-disciplinary thinking to increase the odds of investment success.

"As I look back on it now, it's obvious that studying history and philosophy was much better preparation for the stock market than, say, studying statistics."  Peter Lynch

"The neat theories I had learned at university didn't come close to describing the true complexities of the economy or financial markets." Guy Spier

“If I’ve learned anything over the past decade it is this: The art of stock picking is more about synthesizing information across disciplines and making decisions than a strict devotion to finance.” Allan Mecham

"If your professors won't give you an appropriate multi-disciplinary approach, if each wants to overuse his models and underuse the important models in other disciplines, you can correct that folly yourself." Charlie Munger

"Professor Newcomb taught [me] not only political economy, but philosophy, logic ethics, and psychology - all in one course.  Today these subjects would be fragmented among several professors.  I believe there was considerable advantages in being taught all these subjects by the same man.  Too many educators seem to have forgotten that you cannot teach good economics, good politics, good ethics, or good logic unless they are considered together as parts of one whole.  Colleges as a rule teach economics badly.  With over-specialisation has also come a tendency to mistake information for education, to turn out "quiz experts" who are crammed full of useful detail but who have not been trained how to think."  Bernard Baruch

The value of mental models are embraced by many of the world's greatest investors..

“You’ve got to learn everything. I started with physics and mathematics and I got into economics, history, law and politics. I like everything and that’s what you need. You might need models from biology.” Li Lu

“Our core philosophy starts with the belief that making intelligent, rational decisions requires a multi-disciplinary framework that informs broad and deep understanding.” Christopher Begg

"Some people think in words, some use numbers, and still others work with visual images.  I do all of these, but I also think using models."  Ed Thorp

“You’ve got to mesh many different disciplines into one. That’s our edge.” Marc Lasry

“When we have enticed the college graduate into our graduate schools, we at once encourage him to grow professional blinders which will confine his vision to the narrow research track, and we endeavour – often successfully – to make out of him a truffle-hound, or if you prefer, a race-horse, finely trained for a single small purpose and not much good for any other ... Jacob Viner, in 1950, argued that academic departments needed to encourage their students in broader intellectual fields since solving real world problems was likely to involve skills learned in several different disciplines. Charlie Munger, long-time Vice Chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, has encouraged a similarly multi-disciplinary approach to investment, a proposal which Marathon has consistently echoed.” Marathon Asset Management

“You have to realize the truth of biologist Julian Huxley’s idea that ‘Life is just one damn relatedness after another’ So you must have the models, and you must see the relatedness and the effects from the relatedness.” Charlie Munger

“I have been in the business since 1973, so I have been looking at companies for a long time.  There are a lot of things in my head. There are a number of different models of the kinds of business or situations that can work. It may be the local monopoly concept, the low-cost commodity producer concept, the consolidated industry that has come down to a few competitors, a basic essential service that isn’t going to stop growing, or an industry that may be growing too slowly to attract any competition. So, there are a lot of different models.” Glenn Greenberg

"We don’t really use screens. Instead, we use ‘mental models’ which help us find good investments. Some examples of these are the capital cycle, the power of incentives and insider ownership." James Seddon, Hosking Partners

A latticework of mental models improves creativity as Richards Heuer noted in the 'Psychology of Intelligence Analysis':

"Talking about breaking mind-sets, or creativity, or even just openness to new information is really talking about spinning new links and new paths through the web of memory. New ideas result from association of old elements in new combinations. Previously remote elements of thought suddenly become associated in a new and useful combination. When the linkage is made, the light dawns. This ability to bring previously unrelated information and ideas together in meaningful ways is what marks the open-minded, imaginative, creative artist."

The application of different mental models and multidisciplinary thinking can provide an edge by opening up investment insights that others haven't considered and hence are yet to be reflected in a security's price. 

"If you have the patience and if you have the interest to really dig deep, then what you're going to find is if it's commonly held information or known information, you may come up with insights that others have not.  This is what Charlie Munger talks about the latticework of mental models.  You look at things through a different lens to try to see what can be different."  Mohnish Pabrai

“You have to be naturally interested and curious about everything – any kind of businesses, politics, science, technology, humanities, history, poetry, literature, everything really effects your business. It will help you. And then occasionally you will find a few insights out of those studies that will give you tremendous opportunities that other people couldn’t think of.” Li Lu

"It's a multi- disciplinary habit that fosters some creative thinking. Throughout the week between conversations about business- specific objectives we will tend to revisit further questions and insights somebody has read on the subject. Subjects are typically in the large data sets of physics, biology, and human history." Christopher Begg

It's one of the reasons the Investment Masters spend more time thinking about businesses in preference to building huge spreadsheet models.  The most important thing is to identify the key factors that are going to drive the business in the future and establish where a business will be over the medium to long term as opposed to next quarter's earnings.  

“The best way to think about investments is to be in a room with no one else and just think. And if that doesn‘t work, nothing else is going to work.” Warren Buffett

“It’s not about the numbers.  For most investments the factors that will drive long term success don’t have much to do with spreadsheets.  They have to do with something other, either understanding human nature or understanding nuances about how certain aspects of how things work rather than running spreadsheets.”  Mohnish Pabrai

The ultimate investments arise when a multitude of big ideas combine to create what Charlie Munger refers to as 'Lollapalooza Effects'. Consider a business such as Facebook which has benefited from the combination of a multitude of factors: winner-takes-all, network effects, economies-of-scale, human psychology [classical conditioning [pavlov], reciprocation, virtual empathy, habit/addiction etc], tailwinds from increased internet penetration/improved global bandwidth to name just a few.

“The most important thing to keep in mind is the idea that especially big forces often come out of these one hundred models. When several models combine, you get lollapalooza effects; this is when two, three, or four forces are all operating in the same direction. And, frequently, you don’t get simple addition. It's often like a critical mass in physics where you get a nuclear explosion if you get to a certain point of mass - and you don't get anything much worth seeing if you don't reach the mass." Charlie Munger

“Investment decisions are more likely to be correct when ideas from other disciplines lead to the same conclusions. That is the top most payoff – broader understanding makes us better investors… True learning and lasting success come to those who make the effort to first build a latticework of mental models and then learn to think in an associative, multi-disciplinary manner.” Robert Hagstrom

One you've started to build a repertoire of mental models it's important to keep learning and refining your models. There will be times when old models need to be discarded. To do so you must remain open minded.

"There's no rule that you can't add another model or two even fairly late in life.  In fact, Ive clearly done that.  I got most of the big ones quite early [however]." Charlie Munger

"In a system of multiple models across multiple disciplines, I should add as an extra rule that you should be very wary of heavy ideology." Charlie Munger

"Minds are like parachutes. They only function when they are open." Richards Heuer

It's time to put some mental models on the latticework ….

Further Recommended Reading:

Media and the Market

The Investment Masters understand the need to maintain an independent thought process and not get swept up in the emotions of the market at any one point in time.

As humans have evolved to register pain more sensitively than any other emotion our fear of loss is much greater than our desire to gain. Peter Bevelin in 'Seeking Wisdom - from Darwin to Munger' noted:

"Research shows that we feel more pain from losing than we feel pleasure from gaining something of equal value and that we work harder to avoid losing than we do to win." 

"Our brain is wired to perceive before it thinks - to use emotions before reason. As a consequence of our tendency for fear, fast classifications come naturally. Limited time and knowledge in a dangerous and scarce environment make hasty generalisations and stereotyping vital for survival. Waiting and weighing evidence could mean death."

Newspapers embellish bad news to sell papers. It's no wonder investors panic when they read front page news stories about Brexit, Trade Wars, Double Dip Recessions, European collapse etc. The average investor gets caught up in the emotion of the crowd and sells in panic.

In the 'Psychology of Intelligence Analysis', Richards Heuer noted "Information presented in vivid and concrete detail often has unwarranted impact, and people tend to disregard abstract or statistical information that may have greater evidential value. Statistical data, in particular, lack the rich and concrete detail to evoke images, and they are often overlooked, ignored or minimized". It's often why investors act on negative news stories without considering the actual probability of an outcome, such as the historical probability of a market crash.

“People are always predicting the end of the world, but the only things that end are the people; the world keeps going.” Arnold Van Den Berg

"For 200 years pessimists have had all the headlines even though optimists have far more often been right. Arch-pessimists are feted, showered with honours and rarely challenged, let alone confronted with their past mistakes." Matt Ridley

The bias against fear is amplified when we have experienced losses or market declines in the recent past. Known as 'Recency Bias' humans have a better memory for recent events, events in which they were personally involved, events that had important consequences, and so forth. This fear of loss is one of the key reasons the average investor significantly under-performs the index - they sell at the bottom and they buy near the top when things feel comfortable again. 

Warren Buffett touched on the topic in his 2004 letter when he noted that investors should have earned juicy returns over the preceding 35 years just by piggy-backing corporate America's terrific results. Instead many investors had experiences ranging from mediocre to disastrous. In part, this was due to untimely entries after an advance had been long underway and exits after periods of stagnation or decline [looking in the rear-view mirror].

The Investment Masters recognize that the best time to buy stocks is when everyone is pessimistic as bargains are going to be more abundant. Buying quality businesses with good franchises and solid balance sheets should ensure long term success regardless of market volatility. It is weak markets that set the stage for high future returns. When the headlines are screaming SELL it's a good time to look for bargains.

"Because bad news sells, the media has a pessimistic bias. Over many years, a large percentage of the severe problems predicted by the media never materialised, or proved to be far less severe than predicted." Ed Wachenheim

"Media outlets are quick to present us with one crisis after another, along with constant economic and political worries. With the help of the Internet and many television stations, bad news circles the planet in no time. With the right twist, plain old bad news begins to look more and more like an imminent catastrophe and for many investors, the perfect reason to sell their stocks! Good news, on the other hand, remains largely unnoticed since it seems to represent a less valuable source for ratings and clicks." Francois Rochon

“I’d suggest you not read the newspaper [headlines].” William Browne

"Headlines lead to headaches for the unfamiliar." Frank Martin

"Opportunity is a result of people panicking based on news. News is random and it might not look good but it's not exactly easy to analyse how it's all going to work out at that moment. Changing your position because of news is usually not a great idea." Jim Leitner

"We look to value and we don’t look to headlines at all." Warren Buffett

"Ignore the latest dire predictions of the newscasters. Sell a stock because the company's fundamentals deteriorate, not because the sky is falling." Peter Lynch

"The media has an interest in translating the improbable into the believable. There is a difference between the real risk and the risk that sells papers. A catastrophe like a plane crash makes a compelling news story. Highly emotional events make headlines but are not an indicator of frequency. Consider instead all the times nothing happens.” Peter Bevelin

"Financial crisis are like thunder storms - you hear stomach-jolting thunder after lightening has struck; rarely do the media and masses telegraph financial catastrophes in advance." Allan Mecham

On most occasions the media commentary is just noise. Stocks move for all sorts of reasons and at times no reason at all. Humans have a bias to attribute reason to random phenomena. Richards Heuer noted:

"If no pattern is apparent, our first thought is that we lack understanding, not that we are dealing with random phenomena that have no purpose or reason.. Because of a need to impose order on their environment, people seek and often believe they find causes for what are actually random phenomena ... Events will almost never be perceived intuitively as being random; one can find an apparent pattern in almost any set of data or create a coherent narrative from any set of events.”

It's important to not be trapped into the blind belief that all price movements convey noteworthy news.

“Ignoring the maelstrom of the media – perhaps nothing is more preposterous than the explanations commentators give for price movements on Wall Street on any given day – makes it easier to focus on what is important.” Leon Levy

“Markets often do things that defy logical explanation – but people keep explaining them anyway. Why don’t we ever hear, “The market rose today, but no-one knows why?” Howard Marks

“No matter what happens in the market, people are always on the news spinning here’s why it did what it did. But the reality is I got to tell you, we see a lot of movements that we don’t really know why it moves.” Raife GIovinazzi

“It’s a rare day when a journalist says, “The market rose today for any one of a hundred different reasons, or a mix of them, so know one knows.” Philip Tetlock

"So much of what happens in the market, in the short run, is just random, but this is seldom acknowledged. There has to be a reason the market went up or down yesterday, so the Wall Street Journal and the other papers call up analysts and money managers and ask them why. What you usually read in the paper is simply a logical fallacy." Ralph Wanger

"It's important not to prioritise news stories, since they give my brain reasons to act, often without providing real substance." Guy Spier

Often, by the time the media are onto a story, it's already gone mainstream and the crowd is involved, the herd has already acted. It's important to not get caught up in groupthink and maintain an independent point of view.

“The idea that people affiliated with Wall Street know something. My mother is a classic example. She watches “Wall Street Week” and she takes everything they say with almost a religious fervour. I would bet that you could probably fade ‘Wall Street Week.’” Paul Tudor Jones

"Whenever something is really pounded or when something is skyrocketing and it is on the front page of the New York Times, no matter how much you agree with it in the long term, you have to reverse yourself for a while. The dollar for instance, was on the front page of the New York Times three or four time recently. I am terribly bearish on the dollar, as you have heard, but I have enough sense to know that when it is in the popular press, I should not be selling dollars." Jim Rogers

“The rest of the print and TV business press are notorious pilers on. A classic case was during 1979 and 1981 as oil prices and inflation surged. Numerous books were published by experts forecasting hyperinflation, depression, and a collapse of the dollar. At one point, 7 of the top 10 books on the bestseller list were about inflation and how to survive it. Even wise investors like John Templeton gave speeches saying 7% to 8% inflation was inevitable. Of course, decades of disinflation, not inflation, were about to occur, during which both stocks and bonds would soar.” Barton Biggs

You'll often see front page news about some analyst or fund manager predicting a market crash, out of control inflation or some other geopolitical event that will de-stabilise markets. Most forecasts are wrong. I'd always suggest checking the forecaster's track record of success before taking a further step. And it's worth remembering someone always predicted the last catastrophe - most likely not the same person who'll predict the next. Don't be fooled by randomness.

"One of my greatest complaints about forecasters is that they seem to ignore their own records. The amazing thing to me is that these people will go on making predictions with a straight face, and the media will continue to carry them." Howard Marks

"When I hear TV commentators glibly opine on what the market will do next, I am reminded of Mickey Mantle's scathing comment: "You don't know how easy this game is until you get into that broadcasting booth." Warren Buffett

Most of the Investment Masters do read the papers however they keep an independent mind and don't get caught up in the emotions of the media.

Were Munger, Dalio and Soros CIA Trained?

I was recently reading about Hertz, the rental car company in which the stock price had been decimated, falling 92% from its highs in 2014. I came across a note titled “How Hertz became the perfect contrarian short in 2014.” The article interviewed Tom Fogarty, an analyst, who had identified Hertz as a short. This was a very contrarian idea at the time given the rental car market was consolidating [from nine to three major competitors], a smart activist investor [Carl Icahn] had just bought a stake and the company was spinning-off a division. At the time of Mr Fogarty's report, of the Wall Street analysts that covered the stock, 8 had buys, 2 had holds and only 1 recommended selling. The average price target was around $118 and it was trading around $109. Today it trades at around $10.

Mr Fogarty noted “This Hertz call isn’t a situation I’d encountered before so I’d guess it’s a pretty unusual situation. I had a mentor who used to say “there’s no silver bullet in investing, you just have to think it through. Every time.” That was sort of preaching to the choir. Given the choice, I prefer to start from first principles and routinely check to make sure conventional wisdom has empirical support." 

Mr Fogerty cited “ The Psychology of Intelligence Analysis’ from the CIA’s website by Richards J. Heuer [CIA Book] as guiding his investment principles. Always interested in finding an edge I printed out a copy. I think Mr Fogarty has stumbled across one of the most useful guides an investment analyst could find on improving one's investment decisions. While the book deals with CIA intelligence analysis, most of the principles are applied by the Investment Masters.

Like intelligence analysts, investment analysts are dealing with incomplete and ambiguous information, often trying to connect the dots in a fluid environment where time is of the essence. The same human biases that impairs CIA agents' decision making process can impair an investment analyst. 

The book could have as easily been written by Munger, Soros, Dalio and Steinhardt. Daniel Kahneman, whose book 'Thinking Fast and Slow' is commonly referenced by the Investment Masters, is quoted throughout the book. There are also many commonalities with the work of Nassim Nicholas Taleb [Black Swan/Fooled by Randomness] and Philip Tetlock [Super-Forecasting]. 

The book highlights that "when analytical judgements are wrong, it usually was not because the information was wrong. It was because an analyst made one or more faulty assumptions that went unchallenged.”

One of my favourite sayings is “Make the assumption there can be no assumptions”. I had it written on a post-it note on my computer monitor through the Financial Crisis which itself had its origins in the mother of all false assumptions, “US house prices won’t fall on a national basis.” 

The book “aims to help intelligence analysts achieve a higher level of performance. It shows how people make judgements based on incomplete and ambiguous information, and it offers simple tools and concepts for improving analytical skills.” If it’s good enough for the CIA, it’s likely to be useful for the average investor.

You can download a copy of the CIA Book for free at their website here..

I've included some of the key points below .. the first quotes are from the CIA Book and following are quotes in italics from the Investment Masters. 

Be a Generalist

CIA: "To the extent that an experienced specialist may be among the last to see what is really happening when events take a new and unexpected turn. When faced with a major paradigm shift, analysts who know the most about a subject have the most to unlearn." 

Bruce Berkowitz: “We’re generalists, but we need to find the non-Wall Street people who have lived and breathed and suffered in the industries and business we’re now looking at.”

Have a Multi-disciplinary mindset

CIA: "If analysts’ understanding of events is greatly influenced by the mind-set or mental model through which they perceive those events, should there not be more research to explore and document the impact of different mental models?" 

Charlie Munger: “For some odd reason, I had an early and extreme multi-disciplinary cast of mind. I couldn’t stand reaching for a small idea in my own discipline when there was a big idea right over the fence in somebody else’s discipline. So I just grabbed in all directions for the big ideas that would really work. Nobody taught me to do that; I was just born with that yen.” 

Focus on Collecting Information that Matters

CIA: "The reaction of the Intelligence Community to many problems is to collect more information, even though analysts in many cases already have more information than they can digest. What analysts need is more truly useful information to help them make good decisions. Or they need a more accurate mental model and better analytical tools to help them sort through, make sense of, and get the most out of the available ambiguous and conflicting information."

David Dreman: “Investment experts continue to be convinced that their major problems could have been handled if only those extra few necessary facts had been available. They thus tend to overload themselves with information, which usually does not improve their decisions but only makes them more confident and more vulnerable to serious errors.” 

Seek out Other Information

CIA: "Relying only on information that is automatically delivered to you will probably not solve all your analytical problems. To do the job right, it will probably be necessary to look elsewhere and dig for more information." 

Phil Fisher: "Reading the printed financial records about a company is never enough to justify an investment. One of the major steps in prudent investment must be to find out about a company's affairs from those who have some direct familiarity with them." Phil Fisher

Julian Robertson: "I think the main thing is management, getting good management, and checking with their competitors, checking with their compatriots, their suppliers, and finding out, really, if they are good."

Ray Dalio: “I dealt with my not knowing by either continuing to gather information until I reached a point I could be confident or by eliminating my exposure to risks of not knowing.” 

Test your Investment Ideas

CIA: "Objectivity is achieved by making basic assumptions and reasoning as explicit as possible so that they can be challenged by others and analysts can, themselves, examine their validity."

Ray Dalio: “I stress tested my opinions by having the smartest people I could find challenge them so I could find out where I was wrong.”

Charles Koch: "I have a lot of ideas. Most of them are terrible. But what saved me – well, to the extent I’ve been saved – is that… I want to get people with the best knowledge and insights in each one of those key aspects and get a challenge from them." 

Remain Open Minded

CIA: "People form impressions on the basis of very little information, but once formed, they do not reject or change them unless they obtain rather solid evidence. Analysts might seek to limit the adverse impact of this tendency by suspending judgment for as long as possible as new information is being received."

Seth Klarman: "We strive to eliminate biases in our decision making that could cause us to reject new information or cling to erroneous beliefs." 

Bruce Berkowitz: "Facts change, we change." 

Beware Of Commitment/Confirmation Bias

CIA: "Once an observer thinks he or she knows what is happening, this perception tends to resist change. New data received incrementally can be fit easily into an analyst’s previous image. This perceptual bias is reinforced by organizational pressures favouring consistent interpretation; once the analyst is committed in writing, both the analyst and the organization have a vested interest in maintaining the original assessment."

Warren Buffett: “What the human being is best at doing is interpreting all new information so that prior conclusions remain intact.” 

Todd Combs: "I never liked talking to my limited partners about ideas I had, because you become somewhat wedded to it, it's harder to change your mind over time, you become pre-committed to your positions and so forth. That's always been my stance." 

Analysts Improve with Experience

CIA: "Substantive knowledge and analytical experience determine the store of memories and schemata the analyst draws upon to generate and evaluate hypotheses. The key is not a simple ability to recall facts, but the ability to recall patterns that relate facts to each other and to broader concepts—and to employ procedures that facilitate this process."

Ken Shubin Stein: "This is an accretive business. The longer you do it, the more you learn, the better you get at it because you see more things. We see more cycles, we see more industries, we learn more business models. We learn how more business models fail. And all of us in business tend to get better as we get older." 

Glenn Greenberg: “I have been in the business since 1973, so I have been looking at companies for a long time. There are a lot of things in my head. There are a number of different models of the kinds of business or situations that can work. It may be the local monopoly concept, the low-cost commodity producer concept, the consolidated industry that has come down to a few competitors, a basic essential service that isn’t going to stop growing, or an industry that may be growing too slowly to attract any competition. So, there are a lot of different models.” 

Deal with Change

CIA: "The intelligence analyst, however, must cope with a rapidly changing world."

John Burbank: "Markets change radically, every five years that I've seen. Markets aren't nearly as good at discounting the future as people think."

Stanley Druckenmiller: "Probably one of my greatest assets over the last 30 years is that I’m open-minded and I can change my mind very quickly."

Be Creative

CIA - "New ideas result from the association of old elements in new combinations. Previously remote elements of thought suddenly become associated in a new and useful combination. When the linkage is made, the light dawns. This ability to bring previously unrelated information and ideas together in meaningful ways is what marks the open-minded, imaginative, creative analyst." 

CIA: "Creativity is required to question things that have long been taken for granted."

CIA: "Creativity, in the sense of new and useful ideas, is at least as important in intelligence analysis as in any other human endeavour."

Leon Levy: "If intelligence is the ability to integrate, creativity is the ability to integrate information from seemingly unconnected sources, and a measure of both abilities is necessary for long-term success in the markets." 

Seth Klarman: “We put great emphasis on a consistent investment process that demands enormous creativity, energetic sourcing, outside-the-box thinking, intellectual honesty, and vibrant debate.”

Consider Alternate Hypothesis

CIA: "The simultaneous evaluation of multiple, competing hypotheses permits a more systematic and objective analysis than is possible when an analyst focuses on a single, most-likely explanation or estimate. The simultaneous evaluation of multiple, competing hypotheses entails far greater cognitive strain than examining a single, most-likely hypothesis. Retaining multiple hypotheses in working memory and noting how each item of evidence fits into each hypothesis add up to a formidable cognitive task."

CIA: "Research on hypothesis generation suggests that performance on this task is woefully inadequate. When faced with an analytical problem, people are either unable or simply do not take the time to identify the full range of potential answers. Analytical performance might be significantly enhanced by more deliberate attention to this stage of the analytical process."

CIA: "Exploring alternative hypotheses that have not been seriously considered before often leads an analyst into unexpected and unfamiliar territory."

George Soros: “The financial markets generally are unpredictable. So that one has to have different scenarios... The idea that you can actually predict what's going to happen contradicts my way of looking at the market."

Paul Singer: "What actually happens in markets is never the only scenario that could have taken place. Elliot's portfolio has been designed to maintain stability in a range of different outcomes, some more difficult than what actually occurs at various times in the ebb and flow of markets. Being set up for the broadest scope of market scenarios has been one of the principal reasons for Elliot's high level of stability in almost every period of adversity for the past 38 1/2 years."

Seek to Disprove Hypothesis Not Confirm Them

CIA: "Focus on developing arguments against each hypothesis rather than trying to confirm hypotheses."

Charlie Munger: "Constantly take your own assumptions and try to disprove them."  

Be Alert to Surprises

CIA: "A surprise or two, however small, may be the first clue that your understanding of what is happening requires some adjustment, is at best incomplete, or may be quite wrong."

Leon Levy: "Investors also have to be alert to changes in the market that could change their original assumptions." 

Warren Buffett: "Charlie and I believe that when you find information that contradicts your existing beliefs, you've got a special obligation to look at it - and quickly." 

Seek out Individuals who Disagree

CIA: "Analysts should try to identify alternative models, conceptual frameworks, or interpretations of the data by seeking out individuals who disagree with them rather than those who agree. Most people do not do that very often. It is much more comfortable to talk with people in one’s own office who share the same basic mind-set."

Bill Ackman: “One of the best ways to get confidence in an idea is to find a smart person who has the opposing view and listen to all their arguments. If they have a case that you haven’t considered, then you should get out. But they can also help give you more conviction.” 

Think Backwards

CIA: "One technique for exploring new ground is thinking backwards. As an intellectual exercise, start with an assumption that some event you did not expect has actually occurred. Then, put yourself into the future, looking back to explain how this could have happened."

CIA: "Thinking backwards changes the focus from whether something might happen to how it might happen. Putting yourself into the future creates a different perspective that keeps you from getting anchored in the present. Analysts will often find, to their surprise, that they can construct a quite plausible scenario for an event they had previously thought unlikely. Thinking backwards is particularly helpful for events that have a low probability but very serious consequences should they occur."

Leon Levy: "One of the virtues of envisioning the present from a different time is that it underscores the important role of the intangibles, such as mood and psychology, that govern the way we perceive and interpret the supposedly hard numbers on which investors base their decisions. My attempt to imagine the present as it would look from a different time helps me sort the real from the illusions that blind us to what is before our eyes." 

Charlie Munger: “Invert, always invert” Jacobi said. He knew that it is in the nature of things that many hard problems are best solved when they are addressed backwards.”

Appoint A Devils Advocate

CIA: "A devil’s advocate is someone who defends a minority point of view. He or she may not necessarily agree with that view, but may choose or be assigned to represent it as strenuously as possible. The goal is to expose conflicting interpretations and show how alternative assumptions and images make the world look different."

Lee Ainslie: "I play devil's advocate and make sure the level of analysis has been complete and thorough and that all the relevant resources have been brought to bear." 

Watch out for Unexpected events

CIA: "Analysts should keep a record of unexpected events and think hard about what they might mean, not disregard them or explain them away."

Bill Nygren: "Throughout the time we hold a stock, the analysts will challenge each other as to whether or not our sell target correctly incorporates all the new information we’ve seen subsequent to our purchase."

Leon Levy: "Investors have to be alert to changes in the market that could change their original assumptions." 

Keep Questioning

CIA: "A questioning attitude is a prerequisite to a successful search for new ideas. Any analyst who is confident that he or she already knows the answer, and that this answer has not changed recently, is unlikely to produce innovative or imaginative work."

CIA: "If you find yourself thinking you already know the answer, ask yourself what would cause you to change your mind; then look for that information."

Chris Mittleman: “If you allow yourself to start thinking you’ve got it all figured out, that’s probably the beginning of the end.” 

Consider the Interactions Between the Variables

CIA: "The number of possible relationships between variables grows geometrically as the number of variables increases."

Source: Psychology of Intelligence Analysis, CIA

CIA: "Serious analysis of probability requires identification and assessment of the strength and interaction of the many variables that will determine the outcome of a situation."

Warren Buffett: “Our failure here illustrates the importance of a guideline – stay with simple propositions – that we usually apply in investments as well as operations. If only one variable is key to a decision, and the variable has a 90% chance of going your way, the chance for a successful outcome is obviously 90%. But if ten independent variables need to break favorably for a successful result, and each has a 90% probability of success, the likelihood of having a winner is only 35%. In our zinc venture, we solved most of the problems. But one proved intractable, and that was one too many. Since a chain is no stronger than its weakest link, it makes sense to look for – if you’ll excuse an oxymoron – mono-linked chains.” 

Allan Mecham: "I’m reminded of a study which showed that as the number of variables requiring analysis increase, the odds of success decline, yet the confidence of participants soar due to extensive time and energy invested." 

Marty Whitman: “Based on my own personal experience – both as an investor in recent years and an expert witness in years past – rarely do more than three or four variables really count. Everything else is noise.” 

Understand Probability

CIA: "Most people do not have a good intuitive grasp of probabilistic reasoning."

Charlie Munger: "If you don' t get elementary probability into your repertoire, you go through a long life like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest." 

Identify Milestones Ahead of Time for Being Wrong

CIA: "Identify milestones for future observation that may indicate events are taking a different course than expected."

Craig Effron: "When one of my analysts comes up with an idea I say, “First of all, one to ten, how much do you like it?” If it's not at least a seven, I don’t do it. If it’s a nine or a ten I say, “Okay, I want to know right now at what price you’re selling it and at what price you’re admitting you’re wrong.” I want to do this when we are unemotional. Investors have a tendency, and so do I, to marry positions." 

Establish the Implications of being wrong

CIA: "Analyze how sensitive your conclusion is to a few critical items of evidence. Consider the consequences for your analysis if that evidence were wrong, misleading, or subject to a different interpretation."

Warren Buffett: “If we can’t tolerate a possible consequence, remote though it may be, we steer clear of plantings its seeds.” 

Ensure you Evaluate the Evidence

CIA: "Evaluation of evidence is a crucial step in analysis, but what evidence people rely on and how they interpret it are influenced by a variety of extraneous factors. Information presented in vivid and concrete detail often has unwarranted impact, and people tend to disregard abstract or statistical information that may have greater evidential value. We seldom take the absence of evidence into account."

CIA: "Case histories and anecdotes will have greater impact than more informative but abstract aggregate or statistical data."

Barton Biggs: "Be obsessive in making sure your facts are right and that you haven't missed or misunderstood something." 

Avoid Anchoring

CIA: "With the “anchoring” strategy, people pick some natural starting point for a first approximation and then adjust this figure based on the results of additional information or analysis. Typically, they do not adjust the initial judgment enough."

Charlie Munger: “We try and avoid the worst anchoring effect which is always your previous conclusion. We really try and destroy our previous ideas.” 

Study Your Mistakes

CIA - Analysts interested in improving their own performance need to evaluate their past estimates in the light of subsequent developments."

Charlie Munger: “One of the reasons Warren’s so successful is that he is brutal in appraising his own past. He wants to identify mis-thinkings and avoid them in the future.” 

Prepare for the Unexpected

CIA: "Analysts are often reluctant, on their own initiative, to devote time to studying things they do not believe will happen. This usually does not further an analyst’s career, although it can ruin a career when the unexpected does happen."

Seth Klarman: “Things that have never happened before are bound to occur with some regularity. You must always be prepared for the unexpected, including sudden, sharp downward swings in markets and the economy. Whatever adverse scenario you can contemplate, reality can be far worse.”

Occasionally Failures Must be Accepted

CIA "Occasional intelligence failures must be expected."

George Soros: “To others, being wrong is a source of shame; to me, recognizing my mistakes is a source of pride. Once we realize that imperfect understanding is the human condition there is no shame in being wrong, only in failing to correct our mistakes.” 

CIA Original Headquarters Building

You can see from the above examples the Investment Masters already implement the key recommendations of the CIA.

Understanding psychology and human biases provides the opportunity for better decision making and better investment results. Having more mental models improves your perception. Getting back to Hertz … Tom Fogarty debunked the assumption that all investments where activists are involved are profitable and that consolidating industries always lead to improved profitability. This opened his eyes to the problems facing Hertz that the market had overlooked. He questioned assumptions in the search for the truth.

As the CIA motto states "And Ye Shall Know the Truth and the Truth Shall Make You Free." – John 8:32 

"In my judgment, all great traders are seekers of truth." Michael Steinhardt

It's time to implement some CIA tactics into your investment process ...

Investing Mentors

Many of the Investment Masters had the opportunity to work under great investors. Larry Robbins worked with Leon Cooperman, Warren Buffett and Walter Schloss with Benjamin Graham, Stanley Druckenmiller with George Soros, Lee Ainslie & Steve Mandel with Julian Robertson to name just a few.

When starting your professional life it's important you choose the right career and the right people to work with - where you can learn. It shouldn't be about the money. To be successful you're going to have to love what you do, and that's a lot easier if you enjoy who you're working with.

"If you're early on in your career and they give you a choice between a great mentor or higher pay, take the mentor every time. It’s not even close. And don't even think about leaving that mentor until your learning curve peaks." Stanley Druckenmiller

“Don’t worry about making the most money this week or next month. When I went and offered to work for Ben Graham, I said I’d work for nothing and I meant it. Just the idea of being turned on, look for the job that is going to turn you on.” Warren Buffett

“In terms of starting something right out of business school… I wouldn’t worry very much about how much money you make. I’d worry much less about compensation than I would about what you can learn.” Bill Ackman

“It is important to find a decent, successful person to mentor you. If you work with the right people and do what you like to do, then you’ve got it made.” Bruce Berkowitz

"For young people just getting started, I say apprentice yourself to somebody who's good and knowledgeable, and you'll learn the ropes much more rapidly." Ed Thorp

“In terms of career, take the job you would take if you weren’t getting paid. As Buffett says, go work for someone you like, admire, and trust. Those are the jobs you want. Don’t take the job with the most prestigious firm or offering the most money. Those are both very stupid things.” Mohnish Pabrai

“I think the most important thing [for young people] is to get themselves into a organization, it could be public markets, private markets, it doesn't really matter, where they are mentored by people who teach them really good fundamentals.” Steve Mandel

“I always say to young people that are trying to get jobs, the first job is your hardest job because once you get your first job, you get into the mix, you get to know people, other opportunities will open up to you. That’s the first thing. Then if you have choices, the most important thing is sizing up the very people you’ll be working with, the half a dozen, dozen people you’ll be working with. Those are the people who are going to influence you. That is the key thing. It’s not the prestige of the firm, it’s not whether your parents or your mother-in-law knows, has heard of the place that you work. It’s the people that you’re going to be working with. There are a lot of great people.” David Abrams

“Avoid working directly under somebody you don’t admire and don’t want to be like.”
Charlie Munger

“If you can’t see yourself working with someone for life, don’t work with them for a day.” Naval Ravikant

“.. one of the things about good mentors is you can learn on someone else's nickel. It's something you don't realize when you’re younger. But it struck me at a very early age to try to go find people that were the best in their particular businesses” John Phelan

“I had the benefit of working at three different places before I started Lone Pine. I learned a ton and had really good mentors at each of those three places.” Steve Mandel

“Try and find a mentor. Try and find a mentor, somebody who knows how it works and is prepared to take the time and effort and share that with you.” Terry Smith

“Look for people who have your interests and want to move you along – not somebody who thinks that they’re going to chew you up in two or three years and find some more ambitious person. I was determined in my career to have great mentors and I’ve been super fortunate in my life to find them.” Scott Bessent

If you can't land the exact job you want, you can continue your investing journey by learning from the Investment Masters. If you take the time to go through the Investment Masters Class tutorials you'll notice many common threads between the Investment Masters.  

Warren Buffett himself recognises the value of role-models:

“I’ve had half a dozen or so heroes in my life. I think it’s very important to have the right heroes. Now they call them role models or whatever, but you’re going to take your cues from somebody. So I say, choose your heroes carefully, and then figure out what it is about them you admire. Then figure out how to do the same thing. It’s not impossible.”

Many of the Investment Masters also find heroes outside of investing...

“I have a mentor wall that is the first thing you see in my small office. By identifying men who you really admire, you shortcut your learning curve tremendously.” Frank Martin

"It is important to have a mentor and/or great heroes. If you don't have the former, the latter is really important. Pick the right heroes in investing, and in life, and then learn as much as you can from them. Over my career, I have been lucky and grateful to have mentors, but heroes are available to everyone and the reservoir of their wisdom is infinite." Christopher Begg

One of the greatest investors of our age, Buffett’s partner, Charlie Munger, studied the great minds from history.:

"I am a biography nut myself, and I think when you’re trying to teach the great concepts that work, it helps to tie them into the lives and personal ties of the people who developed them. I think that you learn economics better if you make Adam Smith your friend. That sounds funny, making friends among the eminent dead, but if you go through life making friends with the eminent dead who had the right ideas, I think it will work better in life and work better in education. It’s way better than just giving the basic concepts." Charlie Munger

"I would say that you’re not restricted to living people when picking your mentors. Some of the very best people are dead." Charlie Munger

A great place to start is with the most successful investor of our time, Warren Buffett. Buffett shares his wisdom through his annual letters, Berkshire meetings and interviews. Many of the Investment Masters have studied him. Over the years I and many others have learnt a great deal from Buffett. I don't think there's much he and Charlie haven't worked out.

"I have read everything I could on Buffett. He is our business/investment role model." Frank Martin

“I think I have read almost everything Warren Buffett has written and I agree with more than 95% of his thinking.” Lee Ainslie

“You should read the Berkshire Hathaway ‘Letters to Shareholders’ which are on the Berkshire website so they are free. That will be a great start.” Mohnish Pabrai

"By far, the best investor of all time is Warren Buffett. I have read everything I could find (past and present) about him." Francois Rochon

"Going back and reading Berkshire Hathaway annual reports is worth the time." Arnold Van Den Berg

"Berkshire Hathaway annual reports - one has to not only read them, but re-read them." Charles de Vaulx

"In my opinion, Warren Buffett’s group of annual letters is the best teaching anyone could find in the history of business." Francois Rochon

"I started reading [Buffett’s shareholder letters etc.] and I’ve read over the years, just about everything, I think, Warren’s put out there." Ted Weschler

“I consider him [Buffett] a mentor, but while we see each other from time to time, I have learned mainly from watching what he does with Berkshire and reading his letters.” Wally Weitz

“Warren Buffett is one of my investing heroes... I admire Warren Buffett and would say if you are going to read about only one investor, pick him.” Bill Nygren

“Warren Buffett, he has been a wonderful role model even though I know him only a very tiny bit. He was a role model long before I ever met him. What I think he’s done wonderfully, in the tradition of Benjamin Graham, is he is a brilliant investor, and he’s a teacher. He teaches us through his writings, through his interviews, and through his behavour. I think some of the best things that any investor today can read are his early partnership letters. The world is totally different, but there’s wisdom in them for the ages.” Seth Klarman

"Over the years, I have been most significantly influenced by the writings of Warren Buffett." Chuck Akre

"Warren Buffett is a hero. Pick some good heroes and read everything you can about them." Thomas Gayner

“Warren Buffett [is] my hero.” Bruce Karsch

“I got into this business because someone tipped me off about Warren Buffett early on. So he’s certainly, he’s obviously a hero… A big part of my education as an investor came from reading everything Buffett’s written.” Bill Ackman

“I can’t say I walked with any individual investor who has mentored me, but obviously you learn a lot from reading Buffett. Anything Buffett has written is worth reading and re-reading.” Rajiv Jain

"Warren Buffett is in a league by himself, I would say, in terms of his business skills and so forth." David Rubenstein

"Warren Buffett influenced me tremendously. I'm an expert in his writings and his views." Leon Cooperman

"I started reading the now legendary Berkshire Hathaway annual chairman's letter in the 1980s.” Terry Smith

"Warren Buffett has been a major influence on my life because he's so brilliant and I've read a lot of what Buffett has said and memorized many of the things that he said." Ed Wachenheim

“Like millions of Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger admirers around the world, the teachings of these two teachers and Berkshire Hathaway’s amazing performance have shaped my investment career… I found all the books written about Buffett, including his annual letters to Berkshire shareholders and articles about him. I also learned that Charlie Munger was Buffett’s decades-long partner. I spent nearly two years studying them.” Li Lu

“About 20 years ago I began studying the lessons of the masters — both Benjamin Graham and his star student in the 1950s up at Columbia University, Warren Buffett — and through the study of the writings of and speeches by, and books that have been written by and about those two gentlemen, I was able to develop a certain investment philosophy.” David Polen

“I read an article in a newspaper and they talked about Warren Buffett and I had never heard of him. So pretty quickly, I wrote him a letter, so probably early ‘93, and I told him I was interested in investing, and I would like to read his Annual Letters, so that was before the internet. So he sent me a big package in the mail of all of the Annual Letters since I think 1977. And I read that, and had a vision of investing in the stock market change overnight.” Francois Rochon

"Like many other investors, Marathon never tires of quoting Warren Buffett." Marathon Asset Management

“Like so many others, Munger and Buffett have been the inspiration behind my general investment philosophy and the way I've structured my firm.” John Huber

"Another cornerstone of my re-education involved studying Buffett's investment strategy with even greater intensity.  There's no better way to do this than to read Berkshire Hathaway's annual reports... This wasn't a matter of idol worship. It was about choosing a teacher who had already discovered the truths that I still needed to learn." Guy Spier

“When people ask me, ‘I’d love to be an investor, who should I read? what are the books?’ I say go and get all the Buffett letters and read them because he has re-defined the way to think about investing for the world, for much more than this generation. He is our Benjamin Franklin. People don’t realise that. He has said so many things that have changed the way people think. He is a brilliant writer, but he is a much more brilliant thinker.” Tom Steyer

“I owe more gratitude to the two gentlemen running Berkshire as mentors than to any others by a country mile.” Christopher Bloomstran

“The lessons [Benjamin Graham taught] are fresh and pertinent every single day of our lives as investors — as is the philosophy of Warren Buffett. And you can’t leave out Mr. Charles Munger. What they’ve done and said and laid out for us over the years is all we really need.” David Polen

“As a young(ish) man there is something slightly depressing about thinking things through for a while, arriving at a somewhat reasoned conclusion only to find that others have been there before, and years earlier. In some respects we are fifty years behind Buffett, but that’s ok so long as the average investor is at least fifty-one years behind!” Nick Sleep

Start learning from your mentors..

Ten Years

Many of the Investment Masters focus on businesses with longevity and which are likely to be doing the same thing in ten years' time as they are doing today. Often these are simple and boring businesses that have some form of competitive advantage which makes it hard for other businesses to compete with them. What Warren Buffett would call a moat.  

"The number one idea is to view a stock as an ownership of the business and to judge the staying quality of the business in terms of competitive advantage." Charlie Munger

“The durability and strength of the franchise is the most important thing in figuring out [whether it’s a good business]. If you think a business is going to be around in ten or twenty years from now, and if they’re going to be able to price advantageously, that’s going to be a good business.” Warren Buffett

“The value of a company is derived from what it produces for owners over its lifetime – usually many years, often decades. This supports a mindset calibrated towards longevity, forcing us to hone in on variables related to durability; barriers to entry, technological obsolescence risk, bargaining power, value being provided to customers, and threats of all kinds." Allan Mecham

It is getting harder to identify businesses with longevity given the increasing pace of disruption to business models. What once were bullet-proof businesses - such as cable TV, low cost retailers, fixed-line telcos, newspapers and strong brand-name consumer goods companies are now experiencing eroding moats. The emerging field of artificial intelligence is likely to further disrupt once stable businesses.

Consider the case of the branded consumer goods company. Ten years ago, the TV companies, newspapers and magazines had a monopoly over information distribution. Those businesses with the scale and cost efficiency to access these channels had a huge competitive advantage in creating awareness and demand for their products.

Munger expanded on the benefits of television advertising in his lecture on 'Wordly Wisdom as it relates to Investment Management and Business' in 1994:

"You can get advantages of scale from TV advertising. When TV advertising first arrived - when talking colour pictures first came into our living rooms - it was an unbelievably powerful thing. And in the early days we had three networks that had whatever it was - say ninety percent of the audience.

Well if you were Proctor & Gamble, you could afford to use this new method of advertising. You could afford the very expensive cost of the network television because you were selling so damn many cans and bottles. Some little guy couldn't. And there was no way of buying it in part. Therefore, he couldn't use it. In effect, if you didn't have big volume, you couldn't use network TV advertising - which was the most effective technique.”

"So when TV came in, the branded companies that were already big got a huge tailwind."

Contrast that situation with today, where information and entertainment has been massively fragmented. Young people spend time watching home-made Youtube videos, Facebook, Snapchat and Instagram on their mobile phones. What was previously an impossibility - an individual or small company reach the masses - nowadays anyone can set up a website for almost no cost and/or attract followers to an Instagram page.

Consider the following recent comments by Snap's Chief Strategy Officer, Imran Khan:

“… Nielsen found that 45% of 18- to 34-year-olds in the U.S. are reached by Snapchat on any given day. This is nine times more than the average daily reach of the top 15 TV networks and nearly 5 times more than the top TV network. 87% of our U.S. daily active users between the ages of 18 and 34 cannot be reached by any top 15 TV network.” 

In one of the best notes I've read on disruption, Ben Thompson from Stratechery, explains how Dollar Shave Club disrupted Gillette with the help of Amazon.

"AWS and Amazon itself, having both normalized e-commerce amongst consumers and incentivized the creation of fulfilment networks, made the creation of standalone e-commerce companies more viable than ever before. This meant that Dollar Shave Club, hosted on AWS servers, could neutralize P&G’s distribution advantage: on the Internet, shelf space is unlimited. More than that, an e-commerce model meant that Dollar Shave Club could not only be cheaper but also better: having your blades shipped to you automatically was a big advantage over going to the store." Ben Thompson

I recently read a quote from Jeff Bezos of Amazon where he discusses change...

“I very frequently get the question: ‘What’s going to change in the next 10 years?’ And that is a very interesting question; it’s a very common one. I almost never get the question: ‘What’s not going to change in the next 10 years?’ And I submit to you that that second question is actually the more important of the two — because you can build a business strategy around the things that are stable in time. … [I]n our retail business, we know that customers want low prices, and I know that’s going to be true 10 years from now. They want fast delivery; they want vast selection. It’s impossible to imagine a future 10 years from now where a customer comes up and says, ‘Jeff I love Amazon; I just wish the prices were a little higher,’ [or] ‘I love Amazon; I just wish you’d deliver a little more slowly.’ Impossible. And so the effort we put into those things, spinning those things up, we know the energy we put into it today will still be paying off dividends for our customers 10 years from now. When you have something that you know is true, even over the long term, you can afford to put a lot of energy into it.” Jeff Bezos

A business's value is derived from the free cash flow it earns over its lifetime. If its lifetime is uncertain it maybe impossible to reasonably estimate future cash flows to calculate a value so it can be purchased with a margin of safety. If a company's lifetime is shortened by deteriorating industry dynamics or technological disruption it's likely to lead to poor returns.

“Business value is rooted in long-term earnings.” Allan Mecham

“It’s no surprise that the best returning stocks over time have been in areas like consumer goods where change is relatively incremental.” Marathon Asset Management

“Making predictions about the future is also very difficult. Investing is the ability to predict the future. You really need to understand a company and its industry and assess their outlook for the next five or ten years. It isn’t easy. Before investing, we need to know at a minimum what a company will look like in ten years and how it will behave in a downturn. Otherwise, how can you judge that the value of this company won’t decline? To know what a company’s future cash flows are worth today, we must know approximately what those cash flows will be in ten or twenty years.” Li Lu

The Investment Masters try to invest in business which will look similar in ten or more years.  

“At Berkshire we will stick with businesses whose profit picture for decades to come seems reasonably predictable. Even then, we will make plenty of mistakes.” Warren Buffett

“We look for simple businesses that we can understand and where we believe the companies ten years from now will be selling the same basic products and services they are today.” Francois Rochon

"We focus on very basic things. Is the business model understandable and is it likely to be essentially the same ten years from now?" Francisco Garcia Parmes

“I am not going to be able to figure what the moat is going to look like for Oracle, Lotus or Microsoft, ten years from now. Gates is the best businessman I have ever run into and they have a hell of a position, but I really don‘t know what that business is going to look like ten years from now. I certainly don‘t know what his competitors will look like ten years from now. I know what the chewing business will look like ten years from now. The Internet is not going to change how we chew gum and nothing much else is going to change how we chew gum.” Warren Buffett

“You’ve got to make sure that the business will be around for the longer-term. If you’re not sure how the business is going to look like five years out, you probably shouldn’t be investing. It doesn’t mean you own it for five years, but you’ve got to be careful because markets anticipate a turn in fundamentals a lot faster than we like to think.” Rajiv Jain

“When we are looking at these businesses before we decide to purchase one, we’re trying to figure out what this businesses is going to look like five years from now and ten years from now, not what’s going to happen in the next quarter or the next year. Our ability to focus on the long-term strategy and growth of the business allows us to eliminate a lot of the noise that’s in the marketplace that causes a lot of short-term stock price swings. This allows us to keep our turnover low and allows the companies’ earnings growth to do the investment compounding for us.” Daniel Davidowitz

“Of course, most companies will not survive for 30 years or more. Most companies fail. So just applying this filter -'will such and such a company likely be around in 30 years?' - savagely reduces the universe of potential investments for me. But every so often you come across a business with a brand or a franchise that has survived and thrived over many decades and where it doesn't seem totally absurd to expect it to continue to do so.” Nick Train

Most businesses with longevity require a culture of innovation.

"Severe change and exceptional returns usually don't mix. Most investors, of course, behave as if just the opposite were true. That is, they usually confer the highest price-earnings ratios on exotic-sounding businesses that hold out the promise of feverish change. That prospect lets investors fantasize about future profitability rather than face today's business realities. For such investor-dreamers, any blind date is preferable to one with the girl next door, no matter how desirable she may be. Experience, however, indicates that the best business returns are usually achieved by companies that are doing something quite similar today to what they were doing five or ten years ago. That is no argument for managerial complacency. Businesses always have opportunities to improve service, product lines, manufacturing techniques, and the like, and obviously these opportunities should be seized. But a business that constantly encounters major change also encounters many chances for major error. Furthermore, economic terrain that is forever shifting violently is ground on which it is difficult to build a fortress-like business franchise. Such a franchise is usually the key to sustained high returns." Warren Buffett

"Not only individual firms, but also entire industries must be judged as to their ability to keep pace with the needs of the future. The investor has to be certain that neither the products of the company in which he invests nor the particular industry itself will become obsolete in a few years." J Paul Getty

Businesses change, but companies which sell essential items that are unlikely to undergo significant change have more durability than products with short life cycles.

“I define risk as the probability that a business trajectory will change dramatically for the worse. First of all, you choose your businesses carefully. By picking businesses that have very few competitors and that are basic, essential-type businesses, you mitigate the possibility of that happening. It tends to be a more boring business.” Glenn Greenberg

"A computer company can lose half its value overnight when a rival unveils a better product, but a chain of donut franchises in New England is not going to lose business when somebody opens a superior donut franchise in Ohio. It may take a decade for the competitor to arrive, and investors can see it coming." Peter Lynch

"I stick to businesses we understand and for which there is an ongoing need." Christopher Browne

"We share a passion to buy, build, and hold large businesses that satisfy basic needs and desires." Warren Buffett

“We’d like to believe any business is analysable, but when you have product cycles of only twelve months, as an investor you’re very reliant on the company hitting that window exactly right. If they don’t and somebody else does, you can buy low all you want, but you find out pretty quickly that you were buying a future income stream that was a mirage. We haven’t sworn off technology entirely, but we’ve essentially sworn off investing in short-product-cycle technology.” Larry Robbins

“I like businesses with long product cycles – say, cornflakes as opposed to cell phones – where there’s less risk of technological obsolescence.” Murray Stahl

It's important to understand the business, the need for which the business is solving and the qualitative characteristics of the business. How will technology influence the business? Will there always be demand for the product? Does the business have characteristics that make it hard for competitors to compete with - brand name, culture, scale, network effects, patents, regulation, switching costs etc?

"If you focus on near-term growth above all else, you miss the most important question you should be asking: will this business still be around a decade from now? Numbers alone won’t tell you the answer; instead you must think critically about the qualitative characteristics of your business.” Peter Thiel

While any business with a long term track record can be at risk from change, the longer the track record the more likely the business has been stress-tested by adverse conditions.

"In addition to the comfort provided by a long history of corporate survival and growth, performance during the most recent crisis may prove something of a touchstone for investors seeking security as well as income. Nowadays, one doesn't have to guess what happens when the wheels of capitalism briefly stop turning; one can check empirically. In reality, despite the stock market panic, many companies continued to see revenues and profits rise, or decline only modestly, during the breakdown of 2009; Coca-Cola grew organic sales by 5%, McDonalds by 4%, P&G by 2%. Even amongst the cyclicals, 3M's revenues fell by only 8% and margins were stable." Marathon Asset Management

It's one of the reasons many of the Investment Masters avoid turnarounds, tech companies and newly minted businesses.

How will the companies you own look in ten years?

Great Investors Sleep Well

The Investment Masters recognise the need to be well rested which means correctly structuring a portfolio and not taking on too much risk…

"Lack of sleep.. causes stress.  The more stress we experience, the more we tend to make decisions that are short term.” Peter Bevelin

“The financial calculus that Charlie and I employ would never permit our trading a good night’s sleep for a shot at a few extra percentage points of return.” Warren Buffett

"Conservative investors sleep well.” Phil Fisher

"If you want to sleep well at night, do your own homework. Don't be hasty.” John Neff

“When it comes to investing, my suggestion is to first understand your strengths and weaknesses, and then devise a simple strategy so that you can sleep at night!" Walter Schloss

“It is important for a portfolio manager to sleep well at night.” Ed Wachenheim

“In my younger days I heard someone, I forgot who, remark “sell to the sleeping point”. This is a gem of wisdom of the purest ray serene. When we are worried it is because our subconscious mind is trying to telegraph us some message of warning. The wisest course is to sell to the point where one stops worrying.” Bernard Baruch

“Wealth management, the markets in their own perverse way occasionally remind us, is not just about eating well, it’s also about sleeping well.” Frank Martin

“Investors should always keep in mind that the most important metric is not the returns achieved, but the returns weighed against the risks incurred. Ultimately, nothing should be more important to investors than the ability to sleep soundly at night.” Seth Klarman

“We are fundamental investors and we tend to worry more than most. As a result, are willing to trade some upside during good times for the ability to sleep better at night. Holding cash in the absence of compelling opportunities helps us sleep. At the right price, and under certain conditions, hegding a portion of our risk through the purchase of put options helps us sleep even better.” Christopher Parvese

"We sleep better at night knowing that we are focused on investing in true bargains." Bruce Berkowitz

“Our ‘sleep-at-night test’ is a critical risk management tool.” Bill Ackman

“Successful investing goes hand in hand with productive worrying. Worried that a stock you hold might fall sharply? Reduce your holdings or buy some puts. Concerned that interest rates may rise or the dollar fall? Establish an appropriate hedge. Worried that the stock you bought on a tip might be a bad idea? Sell it and move on. Worry enough during the day and you can, in fact, sleep justifiably well at night.” Seth Klarman

“I think it may have been JP Morgan that someone asked this question -  they said ‘I’m worried about how high things are, should I sell? The advice he gave was ‘sell down to the sleeping point.” Ed Thorp

“Our approach to risk management at Pershing Square relies in part on what I have deemed the 'Sleep at Night Test.” Bill Ackman

Sleeping well at night requires constructing a portfolio that can tolerate unexpected adverse events and isn't going to result in the permanent loss of capital. It requires deep thought as opposed to relying on a risk model.

Avoiding the '7 Deadly Sins of Portfolio Management' will go a long way to ensuring a portfolio's longevity.  

"We try to ‘reverse engineer’ our future at Berkshire, bearing in mind Charlie's dictum: "All I want to know is where I'm going to die so I'll never go there" Warren Buffett

"If we can't tolerate a possible consequence, remote though it may be, we steer clear of planting it's seeds" Warren Buffett

Make sure you can sleep well at night!

Pricing Power? Milk and Bread!

Buffett considers the best businesses to buy are the ones with pricing power.  His experience with Berkshire Hathaway's textile business and then See's Candies provided him with a significant contrast in the value of pricing power. In a lecture to students at Notre Dame Facility in 1991, Buffett explained the differences between the two businesses...

"Our textile business - That's a business that took me 22 years to figure out it wasn't very good. Well, in the textile business, we made over half of the men's suit linings in the United States.  You wore a men's suit, chances were that it had a Hathaway lining. And we made them during World War II, when customers couldn't get their linings from other people. Sears Roebuck voted us "Supplier of the Year." They were wild about us. The thing was, they wouldn't give us another half a cent a yard because nobody had ever gone into a men's clothing store and asked for a pin striped suit with a Hathaway lining. You just don't see that. As a practical matter, if some guy's going to offer them a lining for 79 cents, [it makes no difference] who's going to take them fishing, and supplied them during World War II, and was personal friends with the Chairman of Sears. Because we charged 79½ cents a yard, it was "no dice."

See's Candies, on the other hand, made something that people had an emotional attraction to, and a physical attraction you might say. We're almost to Valentine's Day, so can you imagine going to your wife or sweetheart, handing her a box of candy and saying "Honey, I took the low bid." Essentially, every year for 19 years I've raised the price of candy on December 26. And 19 years goes by and everyone keeps buying candy. Every ten years I tried to raise the price of linings a fraction of a cent, and they'd throw the linings back at me. Our linings were just as good as our candies. It was much harder to run the linings factory than it was to run the candy company. The problem is, just because a business is lousy doesn't mean it isn't difficult."

See's Candies was a phenomenal investment for Berkshire. See's cost Berkshire $25m in 1972, and Berkshire invested an additional $32m between 1972 and 2007. The volume of chocolate See's sold grew at just a 2% annual rate between 1972 and 2007, however See's pre-tax earnings grew from less than $5m in 1972 to $82m in 2007, and over the period from 1972 to 2007 they totalled $1.35b. By today, that number is close to $2b. 

“When we bought See’s Candy, we didn’t know the power of a good brand. Over time, we just discovered that we could raise prices 10% a year and no one cared. Learning that changed Berkshire. It was really important.” Charlie Munger

Buffett expanded on the thought process to determine pricing power...

"One of the interesting things to do is walk through a supermarket sometime and think about who's got pricing power, and who's got a franchise, and who doesn't. If you go buy Oreo cookies, and I'm going to take home Oreo cookies or something that looks like Oreo cookies for the kids, or your spouse, or whomever, you'll buy the Oreo cookies. If the other is three cents a package cheaper, you'll still buy the Oreo cookies. You'll buy Jello instead of some other. You'll buy Kool Aid instead of Wyler's powdered soft drink. But, if you go to buy milk, it doesn't make any difference whether its Borden's, or Sealtest, or whatever. And you will not pay a premium to buy one milk over another. You will not pay a premium to buy one of frozen peas over another, probably. It's the difference between having a wonderful business and not a wonderful business. The milk business is not a good business."

In an interview in 2011 Buffett said “The single most important decision in evaluating a business is pricing power..  If you’ve got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you’ve got a very good business. And if you have to have a prayer session before raising the price by 10 percent, then you’ve got a terrible business.”

Buffett expanded on product differentiation in his 1982 letter ..

"We need to look at some major factors that affect levels of corporate profitability generally. Businesses in industries with both substantial over-capacity and a “commodity” product (undifferentiated in any customer-important way by factors such as performance, appearance, service support, etc.) are prime candidates for profit troubles. If .. costs and prices are determined by full-bore competition, there is more than ample capacity, and the buyer cares little about whose product or distribution services he uses, industry economics are almost certain to be unexciting. They may well be disastrous. Hence the constant struggle of every vendor to establish and emphasize special qualities of product or service. This works with candy bars (customers buy by brand name, not by asking for a “two-ounce candy bar”) but doesn’t work with sugar (how often do you hear, “I’ll have a cup of coffee with cream and C & H sugar, please”). In many industries, differentiation simply can’t be made meaningful.  A few producers in such industries may consistently do well if they have a cost advantage that is both wide and sustainable. By definition such exceptions are few, and, in many industries, are non-existent."

It's important to think about how differentiated a company's products are or at least how differentiated they are perceived to be. Why do people buy the product? Is it an essential item? Are there substitutes? Is the price regulated? Is competition increasing or decreasing? Is it a small part of a larger purchase? Are there risks of obsolescence? Are the buyers consolidated or fragmented? What are the barriers to entry? Whether it's milk, bread or some other item, you need to consider what the buyer's psychological motivations are, their habits and their considerations around price? 

"Early in the process.. [we're] making sure we understand how business is really done in the space.  How do customers make purchase decisions? What’s the differentiation between companies’ products? Who, if anyone, has pricing power? What are the key secular trends? What’s going on at competitors? To really understand all this you have to talk to people in the industry.” Ricky Sandler

".. among other factors it is about pricing power. You have something that is so attractive to the consumer that they pay a premium to walk into your store and do something." Ted Weschler

“We want to own businesses with pricing power vis-à-vis their customers and suppliers – those that sell unique, highly valued products or services to customers who have little desire to switch to a competitor.” Brian Vollmer

“Buy businesses with pricing flexibility. For several years our investment philosophy has been based on the assumption that inflation over the next ten years will be the major enemy of capital. We assume that inflation may equal or exceed 7%. If this proves to be wrong, we will be delighted as the lower rate will lead to a much healthier stock market. If our assumption is borne out, the pricing flexibility of companies with dominant market positions will provide an important hedge against inflation.” Bill Ruane

“Nothing makes the job of a portfolio manager easier & happier than owning a basket of companies with untapped pricing power at discounted prices. If he is patient, he needs no other virtue.” Li Lu

In his book "Common Stocks and Common Sense," Ed Wachenheim discusses the bakery industry … 

"I knew that the bakery business is a miserable business, among the worst. Most shoppers do not have a strong preference for one brand of bread over another. White bread pretty much is white bread.  Whole wheat bread pretty much is whole wheat bread. This relative lack of brand preference gives stores bargaining power over bakeries. A store can threaten a bakery that, if it cannot purchase bread at a certain price, it will seek another supplier. Thus, stores can play one bakery off against another, and they do. Warren Buffett likes businesses that are protected by moats. There are no moats surrounding the bakery business. There are not even any fences or "beware of dog" signs. Therefore, the prices received by the bakeries often are driven to levels so low that it is difficult for the bakeries to earn a decent profit, if any profit at all. This is a key reason why the bread business is a miserable business."

Think about it…  milk and bread tend to be commodity products, like Berkshire Hathaway's linings. When you have a commodity product you need to be the low cost producer as commodity products tend to get priced by the marginal producer's cost of production. They also tend to be susceptible to over-capacity. Conversely, a differentiated, essential or unique product's price isn't based on the cost to produce in the absence of competition.  

"The ability to raise prices – the ability to differentiate yourself in a real way, and a real way means you can charge a different price – that makes a great business." Warren Buffett

There are of course exceptions. I know of a milk company with pricing power. The company's milk contains different proteins produced from a certain breed of cow and people pay more than twice the price of standard milk. People will pay more for organic milk. The question to ask is, how sustainable is the premium? and how easy is it for other producers to replicate?

More recently Buffett expanded on his decision to buy Apple. Buffett saw a product with pricing power and a product intimately integrated into people's lives ....

“It’s amazing where Apple’s ended up with consumers. I can very easily determine the competitive position of Apple now and who’s trying to chase them and how easy it is to chase them. We happen to be well situated in terms of having these massive Home Furnishing stores. I can learn very easily how consumers react to different things there, probably easier than I can try and pick out what is really happening at Amazon at any given time. If you come in to buy a TV set at the Furniture Mart, price is extremely important. Obviously picture is, but they are all good pictures. You can have Samsung and all these different ones. If you put on a sale and you drop the price of Samsung ten percent you can fill that department with people who come out for it. You can’t move people by price in the smart phone market remotely like you can move them in appliances and all kinds of things. People want the product they don’t want the cheapest product. The loyalty is huge. That doesn’t mean somebody can’t come with a product that just jumps the field in some way. And then once you have the product the degree to which it sort of controls your life, it’s a very very very valuable product to the people that build their life around it. That’s true of 8 year olds and its true of 80 years olds.”

“So far you’ve had smart phones and big differences in price categories and if you had an Apple before you can have a much cheaper smart phone selling right next to it and they don’t look at it. If you have a cheaper TV [in the store] with pictures looking at you and you say what’s the difference, you buy the cheaper TV. Most items are price sensitive. That’s not to say an Apple has no price sensitivity, it’s very limited. Someone could come along and leapfrog the technology, and add benefits that would be the more competitive threat than price competition. It would be benefit competition.”

Notwithstanding the above, it’s untapped pricing pricing power that’s most valuable. Companies that abuse pricing power ordinarily end up attracting competition or regulatory backlash [eg. Valeant].

“We like to find businesses with pricing power. But to say that something has pricing power and to leave it there is really an incomplete line of thinking because nobody has unlimited pricing power.” David Abrams

“Growth in profits from increasing prices can simply build an umbrella beneath which competitors can flourish. We are more interested in companies which have physical growth in the merchandise or service sold than simple pricing power, although that’s nice too.” Terry Smith

Do the businesses you own have pricing power?

Some insights from Ted Weschler and Todd Combs

Ted Weschler and Todd Combs have been anointed to manage Berkshire's equity portfolio when Warren hands over the reigns.  Warren's decision to hire Todd and Ted was based on what they'd done, how they had done it and their character. Both now manage c$10b each of Berkshire capital.  

In a recent rare interview with Yahoo News, Warren, Ted and Todd talk about how they spend their days and how they think about investing.  

I've outlined below my key takeaways from the interview.. 

Reading:  Buffett spends most his day reading. So to does Ted Weschler and Todd Combs. In fact Warren said in the interview "These are the only two guys we could find that read as much as we did". So what do they read? 

Ted Weschler spends half the day reading random things like newspapers and trade periodicals. In a 2016 interview Ted pointed out "Being a successful investor you need to be hungry, intellectually curious, interested, read all the time. Read a lot of newspapers. You need a certain level of randomness in order to connect things that might give you an insight into where a business is going in five years that somebody else might not see." 

Todd Combs reads about 12 hours a day - newspapers, quarterly reports, SEC filings, transcripts and trade magazines. 

Like Buffett, they're hoping to find or confirm an edge - a thought, an idea, insight or trend that's not being recognized by the market. 

Hard Work: Ted and Todd spend most of their day reading.  Successful investing is hard work.  As Peter Lynch noted "The person that turns over the most rocks wins the game. And that's always been my philosophy."

Learning: It's important to be a life long learner. Ted Weschler notes the last 5 years have been the steepest learning curve of his life. Which is a pretty powerful statement at 50 years old. In a large part he believes this is due to the data set from the businesses he's been exposed to at Berkshire [and no doubt learning from Buffett].

Speaking to Corporates: Buffett believes he is a better investor because he has experience in business and a better businessman because he has had experience in investments. Buffett notes that Berkshire is about as good a place as you can find to really understand competitive dynamics. Both Ted and Todd have Berkshire businesses that report into them. As Berkshire owns dozens and dozens of businesses and touches almost every type of industry in one form or another it gives the portfolio managers the opportunity to speak to operating managers who know more about their businesses than an investor can learn in a lifetime. 

Generalists:  There are no rules of any kind on diversification or industries in which Todd and Ted can invest in.

Click here for link to the Yahoo News Interview. 

Click on the yellow links above to link to the Investment Masters Class Tutorials.

The Keys To Successful Equity Investments

Francois Rochon initially graduated as an electrical engineer, but he quickly developed a passion for investing when he came across the book 'One up on Wall Street' by Peter Lynch in 1992.  From this book he became interested in Warren Buffett, 'the greatest investor of all', in Peter Lynch's words.  Francois started managing his own money the next year and by 1996 he had left the engineering profession to work at a mutual fund.  Two years later, in 1998 he left to start Giverny Capital which focuses on 'owning outstanding companies for the long term'.

Mr Rochon's US portfolio has compounded at an average rate of 14.8% pa since 1993 versus 9.2% pa for the S&P500. The 5.6% out-performance over such a period has a large impact on returns, with a $100,000 investment in Mr Rochon's portfolio in July 1993 worth $2.6m as at December 2016 whereas if it were invested in the S&P500 it would be worth just $790,000.

I've always enjoyed reading Mr Rochon's investment letters which are available on the Giverny Capital website.   Giverny Capital has produced a paper titled "The Keys to Successful Investing" which contains eight keys which could help you in increasing your likelihood of success.  

Many of these are common to the Investment Masters.  The links provided in the key topics below connect to the relevant Investment Masters Class Tutorials.

1) Consider stocks as fractional ownership in real businesses

"When we study the great masters of investing and the many decades of available data, we find  a critical point in common: these investors behave like businessmen. When they buy a company’s stock, they first and foremost are buying part of an enterprise. Whether they are purchasing a hundred shares of Johnson & Johnson or several million  shares, these investors consider it no  different than if they were buying the company in its entirety."

2) Being present

"One of the flaws of many investors in trying to play the market is to attempt to time the market.  To experience returns on the markets, one must first and foremost be present with the market. "

3) Profit from market fluctuations rather than suffer from them

"The  metaphor  of  “Mr.  Market”,  as  taught  by  Warren  Buffett’s  mentor  Benjamin  Graham, illustrates the attitude that the rational investor must adopt when facing the market. In fact, the irrational attitude of Mr. Market is the source of investment opportunities for the investor who knows how  to stay rational and unemotional. This investor knows that stock market prices will reflect the fair value of the underlying enterprise in the long term. So, from this perspective, market fluctuations are your allies and not a source of suffering. "

4) Leaving yourself a margin of safety

"The concept of “margin of safety” is borrowed from the world of engineering. When an engineer is building a bridge that  has a capacity to support a five-ton truck, he will build it so that it can support a truck of eight or ten tons. This represents a margin of safety. When we use this concept within the context of investing in a company’s stock, it is the difference between what we think the company is worth versus the value of its stock price.   

The starting point is the intrinsic value of the company, which we determine theoretically by calculating the current value of the future cash flows generated by the company over the course of its life. Since this is a highly subjective analysis, we must consider a wide margin of error.    

The more the market is irrational about the value of a company during a selloff, the lower the  price we can pay for the company’s shares, thus increasing our margin of safety. 

Furthermore, one should consider that the margin of safety also exists with more qualitative factors as well. For example, the quality of the company’s management team, its competitive  advantages, and its intellectual property to name a few. Finding solid companies at attractive prices is the keystone to our approach.  

5) Stay within your circle of competence

"When it comes to selecting businesses to invest in, Warren Buffett is guided by what he calls his “circle of competence”. What is critically important, he says, is to know the limits of your circle  of competence.   For example, if you don’t know the difference between the atomic number of
Titanium and the one for Uranium, you should probably steer clear of this sector.  
 
To wander outside of your circle of competence significantly increases your probably of making a poor decision.  In the market, to realize better returns than others, you must have better knowledge regarding the value of the businesses in which you invest (the others are the market).  

To succeed, it is important to stay close to companies that one can understand well and evaluate well."

6) Know when to sell

"Philip Fisher, the famous investor, once said: “if you’ve done your work well when you’re  buying,  the time to sell is... almost  never”. Ideally, we would love to keep our outstanding companies forever, but life is not ideal and a realistic approach is necessary. 

We believe that the reasons for selling a stock should be harmonized with the reasons for buying it. We should consider selling if these reasons are no longer valid. In other words, once the investor becomes aware that he made an error in his analysis or the prospects of the business have deteriorated, it is the time to sell. Our firm evolves and companies evolve just as much, for better or for worse. Our investment approach must be aligned to the nature of the capitalist world within which it participates.   

Another more pragmatic reason for selling is that the majority of investors do not have unlimited sources of capital at their disposal and they may, quite simply, sell in order to invest in another company whose potential seems brighter. "

7) Learn from your mistakes

"Mistakes are inevitable in the investing world.  The key is to recognize them quickly and learn from them.  There are two categories of mistakes: mistakes of commission and mistakes of omission.  The first consists of failing in what you decided to buy, whereas the second consists of  failing to buy a stock that met all your purchasing criteria. Generally speaking, mistakes of omission are often the most costly. To miss a stock that climbed 1000% is ten times more costly than losing 90% of you  capital in a stock that did poorly. 

Other mistakes fall into the category of “psychological biases”, with anchoring and overconfidence being good examples. Anchoring is related to the fact that our human nature is such that we often remain anchored on first impressions or first data points, even when those perceptions become detached with reality.  For example, an investor bought stock ABC at $50 two years ago and it is now trading at $25 following news about the loss of a significant contract and/or lower profits. The investor remains anchored to the notion that his stock is worth $50 simply because this was the purchase price. In reality, there is no link whatsoever between the price paid for a stock and the value of the company. What matters is the future prospects of the company. 

Finally, overconfidence manifests itself often and under different forms. Its only remedy is humility."

8) A constructive attitude

What differentiates successful investors from others is not related to intelligence, but rather related to attitude.  

Warren Buffett often uses the adjective RATIONAL to describe good investors. Rational investors do not let themselves be influenced by fads or crises.  Aside from a rational attitude, another important quality (and one apparent in Warren Buffett) is the capacity to always want to learn and progress.    

The world is in a perpetual state of evolution and it is not easy to for someone to also constantly  evolve. To be in a constant state of learning, one must not only be passionate for their art, but also humble.

Without humility, there is no opening for something new. Therefore, paradoxically, successful  investors must be able to combine both a high confidence in their judgment while also remaining  constantly humble. A difficult and fragile equilibrium." 

An Earnings Miss?

"Estimates miss earnings, not vice versa." Market Veteran

An opportunity to purchase a quality business at an attractive prices often presents when a company misses a quarterly number and analysts downgrade their numbers to reflect the lower new estimate. This seems to have become more prevalent in recent times with investors and analysts having an increasing focus on short time periods, leading to an over-reaction in the share price. Fear, herding and other behavioural factors come into play. However, the key is to remain unemotional and analyse the situation in a calm and rational manner to form a view as to whether the earnings dip is simply a temporary blip in the business, or is symptomatic of issues that significantly impair the intrinsic value of the business.

“I am particularly interested in buying companies when their long term prospects are intact but they are cheap because they face short term issues.” Robert Vinall

"Companies that "miss" the analysts' consensus estimates can see their stock price decimated. Is the quarter-to-quarter earnings target really more important than a company's ability to increase shareholder value long term.” Christopher Browne

“If you are selling because of a missed earnings report or the trend of the market or something, you’ve stopped looking at the rate of return the company can achieve over time.” Chuck Akre

“You rarely get to purchase high quality businesses at cheap prices unless there is a ‘glitch’ which provides an opportunity to do so.” Terry Smith

“Usually company specific issues provide opportunities.” Chris Bloomstran

Common causes of an earnings miss include a poor product mix, a lost contract, weather impacts, higher than expected costs, new management re-basing earnings, investment in the business or more aggressive pricing from a competitor.  

It is important to remember, the intrinsic value of a company reflects the present value of the cash that can be taken out of the company over its lifetime. On this basis, one quarter, or even one years' earnings are unlikely to have a major impact on the long term value of the company.   

“A couple of bad years of earnings shouldn’t determine the intrinsic value of those companies.” Matthew McLennan

“It seems to us that one quarter’s missed earnings target rarely has a significant impact on the intrinsic value of companies. Warren Buffett makes no comment on the quarterly earnings of Berkshire Hathaway because he finds it ‘difficult to say anything new or meaningful each quarter about events of long-term significance.’” Marathon Asset Management

“The value of a business is determined by the present value of the cash it generates over its lifetime, not based on what next year’s earnings are going to be.  While the first year’s cashflows in a discounted cash flow valuation carry the most weight in the calculation, years two through 20 and thereafter contribute many multiples of year one’s value in determining the present value.” Bill Ackman

I am amazed at the number of analyst reports that focus on the upcoming earnings release as opposed to the longer term drivers of a business and its intrinsic value.  

“Information with a long shelf life is far more valuable than advance knowledge of next quarter’s earnings.  We seek insights consistent with our holding period.” Marathon Asset Management

"Look beyond the next quarter and the next year and search, instead, for very long term trends." Ralph Wanger

“We are usually asking much longer term questions as we want to understand long term strategy. We don’t care about this quarter or next quarters earnings. We care about where the company is going over the long term.” Jeff Mueller

When the analysts are talking about 'lower sales due to fewer days in a quarter', 'recent weather impacts' or 'poor share price momentum' it can be an opportunity for the long term investor to find mis-priced securities.  

“It’s often a good sign when investors and analysts agree that ‘the stock is extremely cheap, but we shouldn’t buy it yet because there might be another bad quarter coming.”  Wally Weitz

Many of the Investment Masters spend their time thinking about the longer term business value. Remember a share is a part ownership of a business. Would a business owner sell a company on the basis of a poor quarter?

“In a time when financial television keeps score of quarterly “beats” (meaning a company beats estimates) we ignore financial models and are oblivious to consensus estimates. We don’t think quarterly “beats” are germane to intrinsic value. We prefer betting on company fundamentals, not investor psychology.” Allan Mecham

Finding mis-priced securities due to short term issues is referred to as 'Time Arbitrage' and is one of the most profitable edges employed by the Investment Masters.  

The next time a company you like, understand and think is high quality misses an earnings estimate, rather than run away it might be worth running towards it. The share prices of high quality companies will recover to reflect the longer term value residing in the company. It's just that the timing of any such recovery is unknowable.

Remember it's just an estimate. And estimates miss earnings - not vice versa.

“We think short-term earnings should be treated like appetizers at dinner: avoid overindulging or you’ll miss the main course.” Allan Mecham

The Buffett Series - The Science of Hitting

"Everybody knows how to hit - but very few really do." Ted Williams

Warren Buffett has long recognised the importance of exercising patience and sticking within your circle of competence when investing. Buffett regularly uses the analogy of the baseball player who only strikes the ball when it's in his or her sweet-spot. Unlike baseball there are no called strikes in investing. An investor can wait for the day a good pitch comes along.

Buffett often refers to the Hall-of-Fame slugger Ted Williams who played for the Boston Red Sox and is arguably the greatest batter of all time. 

Ted Williams approached batting in a methodical way, he worked out his optimal strike zone where the odds were in his favour and he maintained the discipline to only swing if the ball was in that zone. By the time Ted Williams retired he had a .344 batting average, 521 home runs, and a 0.482 on-base percentage, the highest of all time. 

Buffett referred to Ted Williams in his 1997 letter .... "We try to exert a Ted Williams kind of discipline. In his book The Science of Hitting, Ted explains that he carved the strike zone into 77 cells, each the size of a baseball. Swinging only at balls in his "best" cell, he knew, would allow him to bat .400; reaching for balls in his "worst" spot, the low outside corner of the strike zone, would reduce him to .230. In other words, waiting for the fat pitch would mean a trip to the Hall of Fame; swinging indiscriminately would mean a ticket to the minors.

If they are in the strike zone at all, the business "pitches" we now see are just catching the lower outside corner. If we swing, we will be locked into low returns. But if we let all of today's balls go by, there can be no assurance that the next ones we see will be more to our liking. Perhaps the attractive prices of the past were the aberrations, not the full prices of today. Unlike Ted, we can't be called out if we resist three pitches that are barely in the strike zone; nevertheless, just standing there, day after day, with my bat on my shoulder is not my idea of fun."

In the recent HBO Documentary 'Becoming Warren Buffett', Buffett notes ..

"The trick in investing is just to sit there and watch pitch after pitch go by and wait for the one right in your sweet spot, and if people are yelling, 'Swing, you bum!' ignore them."

Having recently read "The Science of Hitting" I was fascinated by the common threads between a baseball great and the world's Investment Masters. Below I've collated quotes from the book with the Investment Masters Class Tutorials.

Ted Williams noted ‘Everybody knows how to hit—but very few really do.’ I think the same can be said for investing.

The Profit is in the Buying

"Hitting is the most important part of the game, it is where the big money is."

Thinking is Key

"Something you must always take up there with you: proper thinking."

Patience is Critical to Successful Investing

"The longer a batter can wait on pitch, the less chance there is that he will be fooled."

Stick within your Circle of Competence

"You can see in the strike zone picture what I considered my happy areas, where I consistently hit the ball hard for high averages, and the areas graded down to those spots I learned to lay off, especially that low pitch on the outside 3½ inches of the plate. Ty Cobb once said, ‘Ted Williams sees more of the ball than any man alive—but he demands a perfect pitch. He takes too many bases on balls.’”

"I gave the pitcher the outer 2 or 3 inches of the plate on pitches over the low-outside corner"

Continue to Learn

"Hitting is self-education—thinking it out, learning the situations, knowing your opponent, and most important, knowing yourself."

Work Hard

"Practice, practice, practice. I said I hit until the blisters bled, and I did, it was something I forced myself to do to build up those hard, tough calluses."

Its not an Exact Science

"If there is such a thing as a science in sport, hitting a baseball is it. As with any science, there are fundamentals, certain tenets of hitting every good batter or batting coach could tell you. But it is not an exact science."

Control your Emotions

"Hitting a baseball—I’ve said this a thousand times, too—is 50 per cent from the neck up."

Understand Psychology

"Most hitting faults came from a lack of knowledge, uncertainty and fear—and that boils down to knowing yourself. You, the hitter, are the greatest variable in this game, because to know yourself takes dedication."

Find your Edge

"Now, you can sit on the bench, pick your nose, scratch your bottom, and it all goes by, and you’re the loser. The observant guy will get the edge. He’ll take advantage of every opening."

Stick with your Own Style

"Now, there are all kinds of hitting styles. The style must fit the player, not the other way around. It is not a Williams or a DiMaggio or a Ruth method. It is a matter of applying certain truths of hitting to a player’s natural makeup."

Be a Generalist

"They had an article in one of the magazines one year, quoting pitchers on how they pitched to Mantle and me. Billy Pierce said he hoped for “minimum damage” and that he varied his pitches as much as possible—sliders, fast balls, slow-breaking stuff and prayers... What they all were saying was that there was no accurate ‘book’ on me, and that’s what a batter strives for."

Love what you do

"I feel in my heart that nobody in this game ever devoted more concentration to the batter’s box than Theodore Samuel Williams, a guy who practiced until the blisters bled, and loved doing it, and got more delight out of examining by conversation and observation the art of hitting the ball."

Understand History

"I honestly believe I can recall everything there was to know about my first 300 home runs—who the pitcher was, the count, the pitch itself, where the ball landed. I didn’t have to keep a written book on pitchers—I lived a book on pitchers."

Human Nature Doesn't Change

"After two years of managing the Washington Senators, the one big impression I got was that the game hasn’t changed. It’s the same as it was when I played. I see the same type pitchers, the same type hitters."

Keep it Simple

"It’s not really so complicated. It’s a matter of being observant, of learning through trial and error, of picking up things."

Understand Batting Average

"... you are going to fail at your job seven out of ten times."

Learn from your Mistakes

"A great hitter isn’t born, he’s made. He’s made out of practice, fault correction and confidence.”

Focus on the Factors that Matter

"Have you done your homework? What’s this guy’s best pitch? What did he get you out on last time?"

Speak to People in the Know

"Where was the pitch that Frank Howard hit? What was it? Curve ball? Slider? Ask the guys on the bench, the pitchers, everybody. Get in the game, know what’s going on, know the reason when that pitcher takes the bread out of your mouth. That makes sense to me."

Test Investment Ideas

"I was a pain in the neck asking the older guys about pitchers. I was always asking about pitchers: What kind of pitcher is Bobo Newsom? What kind of pitcher is Red Ruffing? What about Tommy Bridges? Ted Lyons? Lefty Gomez? Schoolboy Rowe? I wanted the information, and I wanted to put it to use."

Stick to What you Know

"My strike zone, almost to the inch, was 22 by 32, or 4.8 square feet. Add two inches all around and it becomes 26 by 36, a total of 6.5 square feet—35 per cent more area for the pitcher to work on. Give a major league pitcher that kind of advantage and he’ll murder you."

Buy with a Margin of Safety

"The single most important thing for a hitter was ‘to get a good ball to hit.’”

Avoid Permanent Loss

"Now, if a .250 hitter up forty times gets 10 hits, maybe if he had laid off bad pitches he would have gotten five walks. That’s five fewer at-bats, or 10 hits for 35, or .286. And he would have scored more because he would have been on base more." 

Stick with a Process

"What I had more of wasn’t eyesight, it was discipline, and isn’t it funny? I took so many “close” pitches I wound up third in all-time bases-loaded home runs, among the top five in all-time home runs, in the top three in runs batted in per time at bat, and I drove in more than a fifth of the Red Sox’ runs in my twenty years in Boston. I averaged .344 for a career."

Buy Quality Companies

"There isn’t a hitter living who can hit a high ball as well as he can a low, or vice-versa, or outside as well as inside. All hitters have areas they like to hit in. But you can’t beat the fact that you’ve got to get a good ball to hit."

Avoid Value Traps

"More often than not, you hit a bad pitch in a tough spot and nothing happens."

"The greatest hitter living can’t hit bad balls good."

Watch Others

"I was forever trying a new stance, trying to hit like Greenberg or Foxx or somebody."

How Big to Position

"Well, it was obvious to me the first time I saw him play, when he was with the Dodgers in a World Series in 1963. I knew then exactly what I would say to him if I ever got the chance: the value of knowing the strike zone. The value of proper thinking at the plate. The importance of getting a good ball to hit. Of knowing when not to be too big with his swing."

Concentrate

"Ideally, for maximum power and efficiency, you want your stronger hand closer to the point of impact."

Be Adaptable

"The reason hitting a baseball is so tough is that even the best can’t hit all the balls just right. To do so is a matter of corrections every minute, in practice as well as in the game."

Dealing with Losses

"There is no question that some strikes are called balls, and some balls are called strikes, but you’re far better off forgetting the calls that hurt you and concentrating on that next pitch, or that next turn at bat."

"If you’ve struck out on a ball you thought was bad, don’t argue. Talk to a teammate, somebody you know pays as much attention to the game as you do. Ask him if the ball was low or outside or wherever you thought it was, and if he agrees with the umpire, file it in your memory. You’ve got some work to do on that particular pitch. You might even make a diagram for yourself to pinpoint the problem areas. Paul Waner did that, and I did it."

Using Intuition

"Guess? Yes! “Proper thinking” is 50 per cent of effective hitting, and it is more than just doing your homework on a pitcher or studying the situation in a game. It is “anticipating,” too, when you are at the plate, and a lot of hitters will say that is college talk for “guessing” and some will be heard to say in a loud voice, “don’t do it!” They’re wrong. Guessing, or anticipating, goes hand in hand with proper thinking."

"Well, you’ve got to guess, you’ve got to have an idea. All they ever write about the good hitters is what great reflexes they have, what great style, what strength, what quickness, but never how smart the guy is at the plate, and that’s 50 per cent of it. From the ideas come the ‘proper thinking,’ and the ‘anticipation,’ the ‘guessing.’”

"I had 20-10 vision. A lot of guys can see that well. I sure couldn’t read labels on revolving phonograph records as people wrote I did. I couldn’t “see” the bat hit the ball, another thing they wrote, but I knew by the feel of it. A good carpenter doesn’t have to see the head of the hammer strike the nail but he still hits it square every time."

Improving with Age

"I think there are things you learn growing older in the game which practice brings out."

"At eighteen I might not have been quite as strong as I was at twenty-eight or thirty-eight, but I had better eyesight, better reflexes, could run faster, etc. But at seventeen or eighteen I wasn’t thinking as clearly at the plate as I was later on. When I came up with San Diego in 1937, I hit .271, then .291. My average went up steadily thereafter because in those formative years I was exposed to experienced players who knew the game between the pitcher and batter."

Be Aware of the Macro

"The batter who is alert will consider the environment, the park, the background. What kind of a day is it? Is the wind blowing a gale from centerfield? If so, it will be silly to try to hit the ball 480 feet... Is it damp and rainy? The ball you hit won’t go as far because on a damp day the air is heavier. A curve-ball pitcher will be even more effective on a heavy day. Be alert to these things."

Balancing Confidence with Humility

"Oh, I can’t say I never had that little fear at the plate, especially in those early days when I’d be hitting against some guy who was a little out of my class. But I remember the time in Minneapolis, my third year as a professional, when a pitcher named Bill Zuber hit me in the head with a pitch. Knocked me out and put me in the hospital for two days. When I got back in the lineup, I dug in as hard as I could and said to myself, ‘Boy, this isn’t going to stop me. Not a bit.’”

"I know there are hitters who can be intimidated, and pitchers who believe in keeping you loose. Jimmy Piersall told me he was afraid at the plate when he was with the Red Sox, and I tried to needle him out of it. ‘If you’re afraid, you might as well go sell insurance. But why be afraid?’ He worked himself out of it. His confidence grew. If you stay intimidated, you’re done."

Investment Misconceptions - Volatility is Risk - Efficient Markets

"Much of it has been poorly defined, or not defined at all, and some things have been told wrong for years. The consequence is a collection of mistaken ideas that batters parrot around."

Goal is to Make Money

"I think that every player should have goals, goals to keep his interest up over the long haul, goals that are realistic and that reflect improvement. For me, if I couldn’t hit 35 home runs, I was unhappy. If I couldn’t drive in 100 runs, if I couldn’t hit at least .330, I was unhappy. Goals keep you on your toes, make you bear down, give you objectives at those times when you might otherwise be inclined to just go through the motions."

Let's hit the ballpark… 

References: 'The Science of Hitting' by Ted Williams and John Underwood, 1970
Photo sources: HBO Documentary - 'Becoming Warren Buffett', 2017
Further Reading: The Science of Hitting [video]

The Truth About Investing

Howard Marks recently presented at the CFA Society in India. His presentation was titled "The Truth about Investing".  

The 40 page presentation covers the core foundations of Howard Mark's investment philosophy. For those looking for more on Howard Mark's investment thoughts I highly recommend his book "The Most Important Thing - Uncommon Sense for the Thoughtful Investor" which is in my Top 5 recommended books. The book draws on many of the investing themes that Mr Marks has written about over the years in his investment memos.  These memos are available on the Oaktree Capital Management website. Click here to to access the memo archive.  

The video from the CFA Society can be accessed below:

Investment Thesis - Pen to Paper

Many of the Investment Masters recognise the benefits of writing to improve thinking and identify potential pitfalls and/or psychological biases that may have crept into the investment decision making process.

“I find this very useful when I write my annual report. I learn while I think when I write it out. Some of the things I think I think, I find don’t make any sense when I start tying to write them down and explain them to people. You ought to be able to explain why you’re taking the job you’re taking, why you’re making the investment you’re making, or whatever it may be. And if it can’t stand applying pencil to paper, you’d better think it through some more.” Warren Buffett

“Beginning around 1980, I developed a discipline that whenever I put on a trade, I would write down the reasons on a pad. When I liquidated the trade, I would look at what actually happened and compare it with my reasoning and expectations when I put on the trade.” Ray Dalio

“I always write down when I make a purchase. I usually update those notes once a quarter on what the intrinsic value is. Why we bought? What are the drivers? I update those thoughts every three to six months. Those are useful because I can go back to the notes and say, ‘hey there was a method to the madness.’” Mohnish Pabrai

“Good writing clarifies your own thinking and that of your fellow shareholders.” Seth Klarman

“We’re keen to always have the portfolio managers put pencil to paper and work through their investment ideas in a structured way, above a pre-designed investment threshold.” Peter Schoenfeld

“‘Why do we bother with this? When nobody reads it?’… It’s not for the readers, It’s for us. We write it for ourselves. Putting ideas on paper forces you to think through things.” Shelby Davis

“We publish these fifteen-page quarterly letters because it forces us to write down and communicate in a very clear fashion what we think and why we think it. There are a lot of crumpled up pieces of paper that end up next to the garbage can when we do that. Yet, a lot of times they are a reminder that there are a couple of questions that we still have about an investment that we really should be addressing. It also helps because by synthesizing it, you sometimes realize just how good the investment that you have is.” Larry Robbins

"I used to always recommend to my students that they take a yellow pad like this and if they’re buying a hundred shares of General Motors at 30 and General Motors has whatever it has out, 600 million shares or a little less, that they say, ‘I’m going to buy the General Motors company for $18 billion, and here’s why’. And if they can’t give a good essay on that subject, they’ve got no business buying 100 shares or ten shares or one share at $30 per share because they are not subjecting it to business tests." Warren Buffett

“I was greatly helped by the discipline of having to write down my thoughts.” George Soros

“I think being a good writer is a really great tool to being a good investor. It's important to be able to articulate how you're thinking about things. It's important to be able to simplify your ideas down to a few key principles. Writings are a really great way to do that.” Mike Trigg

“Writing has always been a crucial part of my investment process and I believe it’s been a big contributor to our results over time. For me, I’ve found it to be the most effective way to work through challenging investment problems I’m working on.” John Huber

While writing down a thesis helps thinking, it's important to recognise the act of writing will increase a person's commitment to an idea, particularly if it is made public. Experiments show that people are more loyal to choices they make when they are written down.

"We are most consistent when we have made a public, effortful or voluntary commitment. The more public a decision is, the less likely we will change it. Written commitments are strong since they require more effort than verbal commitments and can also be made public." Peter Bevelin

"Yet another reason that written commitments are so effective is that they require more work than verbal ones. And the evidence is clear that the more effort that goes into a commitment, the greater is its ability to influence the attitudes of the person who made it." Robert Cialdini

One way to help overcome this is to consider a wide range of potential outcomes, not just the outcome your investment thesis is predicated on. By writing these down, it will make it harder to ignore facts that contradict you’re original hypothesis.

“It is incredibly important to list all possible hypotheses, not just the most probable ones but also the most absurd and outrageous ones. This is the only way to retain an open mind about all possible scenarios, not just the more probable ones. Once a hypothesis is foreclosed, it is incredibly difficult to put it back on the table. The corollary in investing would be to articulate competing hypotheses, for example that a Company does not have a moat or has a deteriorating moat. It is incredibly important to write things down. The human brain has a tendency to ignore or downplay hypotheses we disagree with and information that does not fit with our beliefs. The best antidote to this tendency is to physically write down competing hypotheses and all the facts. It is also important to write down the type of information, which, were it come to light in the research process, would invalidate a theory. This protects us from bending the theory to fit the facts rather than simply dismissing the theory.” Robert Vinall

It's paramount to remain open minded, to continually re-test the thesis and be prepared to exit a position if the original thesis is no longer valid.

"Charlie and I believe that when you find information that contradicts your existing beliefs, you've got a special obligation to look at it - and quickly." Warren Buffett

“It is incredibly important to seek out disconfirming as well confirming information. Having formed hypotheses, the natural inclination is to seek out confirming information. Given that there is so much information out there, this is not likely to be all that difficult to find. This makes it even more critical to seek out disconfirming information too.” Robert Vinall

"We try not to have many investing ‘rules,’” but there is one that has served us well: If we decide we were wrong about something, in terms of why we did it, we exit, period. We never invent new reasons to continue with a position when the original reasons are no longer available." David Einhorn

"You can't avoid wrong decisions. But if you recognise them promptly and do something about them, you can frequently turn the lemon into lemonade." Charlie Munger

It is a delicate balance between maintaining confidence in an idea and having the humility to recognise you may be wrong. 

"We know that we are fallible and must therefore consider the possibility that for every investment we make we may be wrong." Seth Klarman

Its time to start writing … 

Lessons from Valeant

Pershing Square's 2016 Annual report was released recently. While Bill Ackman's long term track record is impressive, he lost a substantial amount of money in Valeant. He wasn't alone, a few other high profile investors such as ValueAct and Sequoia also took significant losses. Like all good investors, Mr.Ackman acknowledged his mistakes and highlighted the lessons he learnt.

The Investment Masters recognise the importance of analyzing past mistakes, so as not to repeat them. In most cases we can learn more from our mistakes than our successes. We can also learn from the mistakes of other.

“When we make mistakes, we always try to do post-mortems.” Lou Simpson

"The big difference between those who are successful and those who are not is that successful people learn from their mistakes and the mistakes of others." Sir John Templeton

Mr. Ackman recently exited the Valeant position. While he acknowledged he may have sold at a price that may look cheap, he detailed his rationale for selling. Valeant had plunged more than 90% from it's peak; a permanent loss of capital.

At the time of sale, Valeant represented just 3% of the Pershing’s portfolio. Ackman surmised that even if the share price increased substantially, the impact on the overall portfolio would be modest and wouldn't compensate for the human resources and significant mind-share the investment would consume.

Ackman stated, "Clearly, our investment in Valeant was a huge mistake. The highly acquisitive nature of Valeant's business required flawless capital allocation and operational execution, and therefore, a larger than normal degree of reliance on management. In retrospect, we misjudged the prior management team and this contributed to our loss."

Ackman noted the many lessons from the investment and raised some important considerations for investors:

• Management’s historic ability to deploy capital in acquisitions and earn high rates of return is not a sufficiently durable asset that one can assign material value to when assessing the intrinsic value of a business

• Intrinsic value can be dramatically affected by changes in regulations, politics, or other extrinsic factors we cannot control and the existence of these factors is a highly important consideration in position sizing

• A management team with a superb long-term investment record is still capable of making significant mistakes

• A large stock price decline can destroy substantial amounts of intrinsic value due to its effects on morale, retention and recruitment, and the perception and reputation of a company

I recall reading Ackman's 110-page presentation on Valeant titled "The Outsider" where his detailed thesis explained why it was such a compelling opportunity. Ackman paralleled the similarities between Valeant and the highly successful companies profiled in William Thorndike's book, 'The Outsider CEO's'.  It was a pretty compelling sales pitch. 

Notwithstanding the benefit of hindsight, I've outlined some red flags that may assist in avoiding the next Valeant disaster.

Highly Acquisitive Company

Valeant was a highly acquisitive company, effectively a 'roll-up'.  Such companies always carry more risks. Ackman has acknowledged past performance in acquisitions is not a durable asset. In the "Outsiders" presentation Ackman noted, "Management has completed 100+ acquisitions and licenses, investing $19b+ since 2008" .. "Acquisitions have been highly accretive" .. "Valeant management expects the majority of the company's future free cash flow will be allocated to its value-creating acquisition strategy." It’s worth taking heed of the risks in acquisition driven companies, as stated by Phil Fisher some six decades ago!

"There may be quite a high degree of investment risk in a company that as a matter of basic investment policy is constantly and aggressively trying to grow by acquisition.. It is my own belief that this investment risk is significantly still further increased when one of two conditions exist in a company's organisational make-up. One is when the top executive officer regularly spends a sizeable amount of his time on mergers and acquisitions.  The other is when a company assigns one of its top officer group to making such matters one of his principal duties.  In either event powerful figures within a company usually soon acquire a sort of psychological vested interest in completing enough mergers or acquisitions to justify the time they are spending." Phil Fisher 1960

High Guidance

Valeant had a track record of providing aggressive guidance. Guidance in 2012 was 40-45% EPS growth. In 2013 it was c35%. In 2014 it was c40% and in 2015 guidance was c21-25%.

“Be suspicious of companies that trumpet earnings projections and growth expectations. Businesses seldom operate in a tranquil, no surprise environment, and earnings simply don't advance smoothly (except, of course, in the offering books of investment bankers). Charlie and I not only don't know today what our businesses will earn next year we don't even know what they will earn next quarter. We are suspicious of those CEOs who regularly claim they do know the future and we become downright incredulous if they consistently reach their declared targets, Managers that always promise to "make the numbers will at some point be tempted to make up the numbers.” Warren Buffett

“Having a person running a company to please Wall Street can really be problematic.” Jim Chanos

“Rejecting guidance is rare among public companies, though it’s a practice we applaud. We worry that providing quarterly guidance may tempt companies to publish aggressive growth targets to appease Wall Street. Our concern is not that the aggressive forecasts won’t be met, but rather that they will, at any cost! Earnings growth should be a consequence of sound strategy, not the object of it." Allan Mecham

Win/Lose

Valeant business model in part comprised buying pharmaceutical companies, stripping R&D costs out and aggressively raising prices on older drugs. Valeant certainly wasn't a win-win proposition for consumers, government budgets or the community at large.

"There was a lot wrong with Valeant. It was so aggressive and it was drugs people needed…  I don’t think capitalism requires you to make all the money you can. I think there times when you should be satisfied with less. Valeant looked at it like a game of chess, they didn’t think of any human consequences. They just stepped way over the line and in the end of course they were cheating” Charlie Munger

"We want our operations and the businesses we invest in to pass the “Win-Win Test” with all six counterparties: customers, employees, suppliers, stewards, shareholders, and the community. Win-Win is the only system that is sustainable over the long-term – any fatal flaw with any counterparty will inevitably self-correct. We believe by striving to eliminate Win-Lose, Lose-Win, and Lose-Lose situations we can go far in removing many of the blind spots that those unsustainable relationships nurture." Christopher Begg

Corporate Debt

Valeant's acquisition spree was funded via a massive increase in corporate debt. Fortune magazine noted, "Its debt-to-equity ratio, a measure of a company's financial leverage, is nearly eight times that of other big pharma companies like Pfizer, Novartis and Merck."

"I turn down many otherwise down attractive investments because of their weak balance sheets, and I believe that this discipline is a material reason for our success over the years." Ed Wachenheim

"Staying away from excessive leverage cures a lot of ills." Thomas Gayner

Position Size

Ackman reflected that given the risks facing Valeant that were outside of his control, the position size was too large. In Pershing Square's 2015 Interim Report, Ackman disclosed that Valeant was at odds with his usual principles of investment; Valeant required continued access to capital markets to achieve accelerated growth. With lower conviction and higher risk position sizes must be structured accordingly.

"Our lack of strong convictions about these businesses [Salomon, USAir Group, Champion International], however, means that we must structure our investments in them differently from what we do when we invest in a business appearing to have splendid economic characteristics." Warren Buffett 1989

“Make your position size more a function of not how much you can make, but really how much you can lose. So manage your position based on your downward loss perspective not your upward potential.” James Dinan

Consistency / Commitment Bias

With the benefit of hindsight, it's easy to suggest Ackman should have cut his position earlier.  Ackman's close proximity to the company may have blinded him to the problems starting to surface. The "Outsiders" presentation noted a confidentiality agreement between Pershing Square and Valeant in 2014 allowed them to conduct "substantial due diligence". This included in-person meetings with the board, extensive management interviews, review of the R&D pipeline, selective local due diligence at the country level and review of bear thesis. Ackman was all-in.

"One of the most difficult intellectual confessions is to admit you are wrong.  Behaviourally we know we are subject to confirmation bias. Eagerly we wrap our minds around anything and everything than concurs with our statement. Too often, we misjudge stubbornness for conviction. We are willing to risk the appearance of being wrong long before a willingness to personally confess our own errors." Robert Hagstrom

Falling In Love

When investors make a large commitment to a stock and then publicly promote it, it can be psychologically challenging to change tack. It's paramount to stay open minded and not fall in love with a position or management. As Ackman acknowledged, even a management team with a superb track record can make a mistake.

“If we only confirm our beliefs, we will never discover if we’re wrong. Be self-critical and unlearn your best-loved ideas. Search for evidence that dis-confirms ideas and assumptions. Consider alternative outcomes, viewpoints and answers.” Peter Bevelin

"One thing my father taught me at a young age was not to fall in love with companies or the people running them." Lloyd Khaner

Get Out

Valeant had collapsed dramatically before Ackman finally sold. Sometimes when investing, the best option can be to sell. Running concentrated positions in a multi-billion dollar portfolio reduces flexibility. Ultimately, Ackman acknowledged the position was taking an emotional toll on the firm and it was in the best interest to move on. The small position size following the stocks collapse meant it's contribution to future returns was going to be marginal. Profits and losses are not symmetrical. If you lose 80% of your money you need to earn 400% to get back to break even. Better to cut your losses and focus your energies elsewhere.

"Large permanent losses can dampen the confidence of an investor - and I sternly believe that a good investor needs to be highly confident about his ability to make decisions, because investment decisions seldom are clear and usually are muddled with uncertainties and unknowns." Ed Wachenheim

"Even the most conservative investors can be paralysed by large losses, whether due to mistakes, premature judgements, or the effects of leverage.  If losses impair your future decision making, then the cost of a mistake is not just the loss from that investment alone, but the impact that loss may have on the future chain of events.  If a loss freezes you from taking full advantage of a great opportunity, or pressures you to make it a smaller position than it should or would otherwise be, then the cost may be far greater than the initial loss itself." Seth Klarman

All investors make mistakes, even the great ones. The key is to address them early and take action. Then learn from the mistake.

“In every great stock market disaster or fraud, there is always one or two great investors invested in the thing all the way down. Enron, dot-com, banks, always ‘smart guys’ involved all the way down.” Jim Chanos

“Quickly identify mistakes and take action.” Charlie Munger

"If you feel you have made a mistake, get out fast" Roy Neuberger

“Whatever the outcome, we will heed a prime rule of investing; you don’t have to make it back the way you lost it.” Warren Buffett

Ultimately an investor is only as good as his or her next investment. Being on the lookout for red flags can help an investor from taking undue risks and impairing capital. It's important to remain open minded and continually test a thesis to ensure the outlook hasn't changed.

Remember the first rule of investing is don't lose money. And rule number 2 …. don't forget rule number one.

The Buffett Series - Buffett on Book Value

The Buffett Series explores some of the interesting and timeless investment concepts discussed by Mr. Buffett in his annual Berkshire letters.  Over the years I've found there isn't a lot that Mr. Buffett and his partner Mr. Munger haven't worked out when it comes to investing. I am constantly discovering hidden investment gems, and new ways of thinking about businesses and the investment process.  

This Series contains ten short essays on concepts that have featured in Mr. Buffett's annual letters since the early 1980's [click here to read the other essays].  It's amazing how timeless and universal they are.  This short essay touches on the concept of "Book Value".

From the teachings of his mentor Ben Graham, Buffett focussed on book value early in his career.  In later years he recognised is was intrinsic value, not book value, that was the key to finding outstanding investments.  He recognised that a business can be worth multiples of book value.  Berkshire paid 4X book for See's Candy, 2X book for Scott Fetzer and more recently 2.8X book for Precision Cast Parts and 5X book for Iscar.

Over the years Buffett has written extensively about 'book value'.  I remember at different times over the last few decades when the markets had become focused on book value.  Investors talked of assets like steel mills, paper companies, mining stocks and shipping lines being attractive solely on the basis that they were trading at big discounts to book value.  In many cases, they were 'value traps'.  The industries had changed and the future returns just weren't what they used to be.   

One must remember book value is a historic number and provides little information about the future prospects for a business.  The best businesses are those with high returns on capital which need little further capital to grow earnings. 

I've included below some extracts from Buffett's letters which may assist your thinking when it comes to book value. 

"In past reports I have noted that book value at most companies differs widely from intrinsic business value - the number that really counts for owners." Berkshire 1986 Letter

"Book value’s virtue as a score-keeping measure is that it is easy to calculate and doesn’t involve the subjective (but important) judgments employed in calculation of intrinsic business value.

It is important to understand, however, that the two terms - book value and intrinsic business value - have very different meanings. Book value is an accounting concept, recording the accumulated financial input from both contributed capital and retained earnings. Intrinsic business value is an economic concept, estimating future cash output discounted to present value. Book value tells you what has been put in; intrinsic business value estimates what can be taken out.

An analogy will suggest the difference. Assume you spend identical amounts putting each of two children through college. The book value (measured by financial input) of each child’s education would be the same. But the present value of the future payoff (the intrinsic business value) might vary enormously - from zero to many times the cost of the education. So, also, do businesses having equal financial input end up with wide variations in value." Berkshire 1983 Letter

"Some investors weight book value heavily in their stock-buying decisions (as I, in my early years, did myself). And some economists and academicians believe replacement values are of considerable importance in calculating an appropriate price level for the stock market as a whole.

Those of both persuasions would have received an education at the auction we held in early 1986 to dispose of our textile machinery. The equipment sold (including some disposed of in the few months prior to the auction) took up about 750,000 square feet of factory space in New Bedford and was eminently usable. It originally cost us about $13 million, including $2 million spent in 1980-84, and had a current book value of $866,000 (after accelerated depreciation). Though no sane management would have made the investment, the equipment could have been replaced new for perhaps $30-$50 million.

Gross proceeds from our sale of this equipment came to $163,122. Allowing for necessary pre- and post-sale costs, our net was less than zero. Relatively modern looms that we bought for $5,000 apiece in 1981 found no takers at $50. We finally sold them for scrap at $26 each, a sum less than removal costs.

Ponder this: the economic goodwill attributable to two paper routes in Buffalo - or a single See’s candy store - considerably exceeds the proceeds we received from this massive collection of tangible assets that not too many years ago, under different competitive conditions, was able to employ over 1,000 people." Berkshire 1985 Letter

"Of course, it's per-share intrinsic value, not book value, that counts. Book value is an accounting term that measures the capital, including retained earnings, that has been put into a business. Intrinsic value is a present-value estimatee of the cash that can be taken out of a business during its remaining life. At most companies, the two values are unrelated." Berkshire  1993 Letter

"We define intrinsic value as the discounted value of the cash that can be taken out of a business during its remaining life. Anyone calculating intrinsic value necessarily comes up with a highly subjective figure that will change both as estimates of future cash flows are revised and as interest rates move. Despite its fuzziness, however, intrinsic value is all- important and is the only logical way to evaluate the relative attractiveness of investments and businesses.

To see how historical input (book value) and future output (intrinsic value) can diverge, let's look at another form of investment, a college education. Think of the education's cost as its "book value." If it is to be accurate, the cost should include the earnings that were foregone by the student because he chose college rather than a job.

For this exercise, we will ignore the important non-economic benefits of an education and focus strictly on its economic value. First, we must estimate the earnings that the graduate will receive over his lifetime and subtract from that figure an estimate of what he would have earned had he lacked his education. That gives us an excess earnings figure, which must then be discounted, at an appropriate interest rate, back to graduation day. The dollar result equals the intrinsic economic value of the education.

Some graduates will find that the book value of their education exceeds its intrinsic value, which means that whoever paid for the education didn't get his money's worth. In other cases, the intrinsic value of an education will far exceed its book value, a result that proves capital was wisely deployed. In all cases, what is clear is that book value is meaningless as an indicator of intrinsic value." Berkshire 1994 Letter

The Buffett Series - A Changing Media Landscape

The Buffett Series explores some of the interesting and timeless investment concepts discussed by Mr. Buffett in his annual Berkshire letters. Over the years I've found there isn't a lot that Mr. Buffett and his partner Mr. Munger haven't worked out when it comes to investing. I am constantly discovering hidden investment gems, and new ways of thinking about businesses and the investment process.  

This Series contains ten short essays on concepts that have featured in Mr. Buffett's annual letters since the early 1980's. It's amazing how timeless and universal they are. This short essay touches on the concept of "A Changing Media Landscape".

While everyone now recognises the changes going on in the media landscape due to disruption from the advent of high speed internet and the likes of Netflix and YouTube, this is not a new phenomenon. In fact, way back in 1990 Buffett recognised that media businesses were unlikely to be as profitable in the future as they had been in the past. Media businesses were transforming from quality franchises to ordinary businesses.

In his 1990 letter, Buffett acknowledged he was surprised at developments in the media industry that year and questioned whether the poor results of Berkshire's media investments was "just part of an aberration cycle - to be fully made up in the next upturn - or whether the business has slipped in a way that permanently reduces intrinsic business values". He concluded the latter … 

"Since I didn't predict what has happened, you may question the value of my prediction about what will happen. Nevertheless, I'll proffer a judgment: While many media businesses will remain economic marvels in comparison with American industry generally, they will prove considerably less marvellous than I, the industry, or lenders thought would be the case only a few years ago.

The reason media businesses have been so outstanding in the past was not physical growth, but rather the unusual pricing power that most participants wielded. Now, however, advertising dollars are growing slowly. In addition, retailers that do little or no media advertising (though they sometimes use the Postal Service) have gradually taken market share in certain merchandise categories. Most important of all, the number of both print and electronic advertising channels has substantially increased. As a consequence, advertising dollars are more widely dispersed and the pricing power of ad vendors has diminished. These circumstances materially reduce the intrinsic value of our major media investments and also the value of our operating unit, Buffalo News - though all remain fine businesses."

Buffett revisited the challenges facing the industry in his 1991 letter titled "A change in media economics and some valuation math"

"In last year's report, I stated my opinion that the decline in the profitability of media companies reflected secular as well as cyclical factors. The events of 1991 have fortified that case: The economic strength of once-mighty media enterprises continues to erode as retailing patterns change and advertising and entertainment choices proliferate. In the business world, unfortunately, the rear-view mirror is always clearer than the windshield: A few years back no one linked to the media business - neither lenders, owners nor financial analysts - saw the economic deterioration that was in store for the industry. (But give me a few years and I'll probably convince myself that I did.)

The fact is that newspaper, television, and magazine properties have begun to resemble businesses more than franchises in their economic behavior. Let's take a quick look at the characteristics separating these two classes of enterprise, keeping in mind, however, that many operations fall in some middle ground and can best be described as weak franchises or strong businesses.

An economic franchise arises from a product or service that: (1) is needed or desired; (2) is thought by its customers to have no close substitute and; (3) is not subject to price regulation. The existence of all three conditions will be demonstrated by a company's ability to regularly price its product or service aggressively and thereby to earn high rates of return on capital.

Moreover, franchises can tolerate mis-management. Inept managers may diminish a franchise's profitability, but they cannot inflict mortal damage. In contrast, "a business" earns exceptional profits only if it is the low-cost operator or if supply of its product or service is tight. Tightness in supply usually does not last long. With superior management, a company may maintain its status as a low-cost operator for a much longer time, but even then unceasingly faces the possibility of competitive attack. And a business, unlike a franchise, can be killed by poor management.

Until recently, media properties possessed the three characteristics of a franchise and consequently could both price aggressively and be managed loosely. Now, however, consumers looking for information and entertainment (their primary interest being the latter) enjoy greatly broadened choices as to where to find them. Unfortunately, demand can't expand in response to this new supply: 500 million American eyeballs and a 24-hour day are all that's available. The result is that competition has intensified, markets have fragmented, and the media industry has lost some - though far from all - of its franchise strength".

Buffett uses an example to show that a hypothetical media business which earns $1m a year that can grow at 6% per annum in perpetuity is worth $25m. This is in contrast to a business earning the same $1m with no growth which is worth only $10m. While a multiple of twenty-five times earnings is appropriate for the first company the second company fetches ten times earnings.  

"The industry's weakened franchise has an impact on its value that goes far beyond the immediate effect on earnings. For an understanding of this phenomenon, let's look at some much over-simplified, but relevant, math.

A few years ago the conventional wisdom held that a newspaper, television or magazine property would forever increase its earnings at 6% or so annually and would do so without the employment of additional capital, for the reason that depreciation charges would roughly match capital expenditures and working capital requirements would be minor. Therefore, reported earnings (before amortization of intangibles) were also freely-distributable earnings, which meant that ownership of a media property could be construed as akin to owning a perpetual annuity set to grow at 6% a year. Say, next, that a discount rate of 10% was used to determine the present value of that earnings stream. One could then calculate that it was appropriate to pay a whopping $25 million for a property with current after-tax earnings of $1 million. (This after-tax multiplier of 25 translates to a multiplier on pre-tax earnings of about 16.)

Now change the assumption and posit that the $1 million represents "normal earning power" and that earnings will bob around this figure cyclically. A "bob-around" pattern is indeed the lot of most businesses, whose income stream grows only if their owners are willing to commit more capital (usually in the form of retained earnings). Under our revised assumption, $1 million of earnings, discounted by the same 10%, translates to a $10 million valuation. Thus a seemingly modest shift in assumptions reduces the property's valuation to 10 times after-tax earnings (or about 6 1/2 times pre-tax earnings).

Dollars are dollars whether they are derived from the operation of media properties or of steel mills. What in the past caused buyers to value a dollar of earnings from media far higher than a dollar from steel was that the earnings of a media property were expected to constantly grow (without the business requiring much additional capital), whereas steel earnings clearly fell in the bob-around category. Now, however, expectations for media have moved toward the bob-around model. And, as our simplified example illustrates, valuations must change dramatically when expectations are revised."

Buffett recognised back in 1990 that the media industry had changed and was likely to continue to do so. Today, the equity value of many of the traditional media companies have been decimated by change. The fall in value in many cases has been a slow burn. The internet destroyed the newspapers classified sections. The advent of high speed internet has allowed Netflix and YouTube to access a global audience unavailable to traditional TV licence and cable operators providing economies of scale not available to the incumbents.

When evaluating businesses it's important to think about how conditions are changing and whether the changes are structural or cyclical. Today, new technology can allow competitors to penetrate a business' 'moat' and change the industry economics for the better or worse. It's important to think about how the businesses in your portfolio are placed to survive an ever changing world.

Further Suggested Reading - Tutorials - Quality Businesses, Change, Rear-View Mirror, Alternative Scenarios, Tech Invest, Thinking about Management, Permanent Loss, Intrinsic Value.
 

The Buffett Series - Businesses you Know

The Buffett Series explores some of the interesting and timeless investment concepts discussed by Mr. Buffett in his annual Berkshire letters. Over the years I've found there isn't a lot that Mr. Buffett and his partner Mr. Munger haven't worked out when it comes to investing. I am constantly discovering hidden investment gems, new ways of thinking about businesses and the investment process.  

This Series contains ten short essays on concepts that have featured in Mr. Buffett's annual letters since the early 1980's. It's amazing how timeless and universal they are. This short essay touches on the concept of "Businesses you Know."

In his 1994 letter, Buffett outlines why it can be profitable to revisit companies you know well. In investing it's important to understand the businesses you are investing in, know the limitations of your knowledge and stick within your circle of competence.

"Before looking at new investments, we consider adding to old ones. If a business is attractive enough to buy once, it may well pay to repeat the process. We would love to increase our economic interest in See's or Scott Fetzer, but we haven't found a way to add to a 100% holding. In the stock market, however, an investor frequently gets the chance to increase his economic interest in businesses he knows and likes. Last year we went that direction by enlarging our holdings in Coca-Cola and American Express.

Our history with American Express goes way back and, in fact, fits the pattern of my pulling current investment decisions out of past associations. In 1951, for example, GEICO shares comprised 70% of my personal portfolio and GEICO was also the first stock I sold - I was then 20 - as a security salesman (the sale was 100 shares to my Aunt Alice who, bless her, would have bought anything I suggested). Twenty-five years later, Berkshire purchased a major stake in GEICO at the time it was threatened with insolvency. In another instance, that of the Washington Post, about half of my initial investment funds came from delivering the paper in the 1940's. Three decades later Berkshire purchased a large position in the company two years after it went public. As for Coca-Cola, my first business venture - this was in the 1930's - was buying a six-pack of Coke for 25 cents and selling each bottle for 5 cents. It took only fifty years before I finally got it: The real money was in the syrup.

My American Express history includes a couple of episodes: In the mid-1960's, just after the stock was battered by the company's infamous salad-oil scandal, we put about 40% of Buffett Partnership Ltd.'s capital into the stock - the largest investment the partnership had ever made. I should add that this commitment gave us over 5% ownership in Amex at a cost of $13 million. As I write this, we own just under 10%, which has cost us $1.36 billion. (Amex earned $12.5 million in 1964 and $1.4 billion in 1994.)

My history with Amex's IDS unit, which today contributes about a third of the earnings of the company, goes back even further. I first purchased stock in IDS in 1953 when it was growing rapidly and selling at a price-earnings ratio of only 3. (There was a lot of low-hanging fruit in those days.) I even produced a long report - do I ever write a short one? - on the company that I sold for $1 through an ad in the Wall Street Journal.

Obviously American Express and IDS (recently renamed American Express Financial Advisors) are far different operations today from what they were then. Nevertheless, I find that a long-term familiarity with a company and its products is often helpful in evaluating it."

Buffett recognised that dealing with companys he had a history with and could understand provided an edge. Given Buffett's distaste for change, it's likely it also gave him some level of confidence in the sustainability of the business model, thereby also reducing risk. Buffett has always been a big believer in sticking within his circle of competence. Revisiting company's within that circle has proved to be a successful investing strategy over the last 50+ years.

"In his fifty years of practice, Buffett added one more principle; through unremitting hard work over a long period, investors can build up their own circle of competence. This can give them a deeper understanding than others of a company or industry, and allow them to make better judgements of future performance. Your unique strength lies within this circle." Li Lu

The Buffett Series - Investment Analysis

Charlie Munger loves the concept of simplicity. When it comes to investing it's important to understand what a company does and what the key factors are that will determine the company's success. You don't need a 2,000 line spreadsheet to determine if an investment is likely to be successful. But you do need to think. Talking to people involved in the industry and with the product can provide a huge edge.  

In Berkshire Hathaway's 1997 annual letter, there's a great snippet where Buffett details how he came about building a significant position in Amex. Buffett had purchased $300m of American Express hybrids in a private placement in 1991. The hybrids were due to convert to common stock in 1994 and in the month before Buffett had been mulling over whether to sell upon conversion.  While he thought the CEO was outstanding and likely to maximise whatever Amex's potential was, he was leaning toward a sale, as the company faced relentless competition from a multitude of card issuers, led by Visa. Buffett continues ...

"Here's where I got lucky. During that month of decision, I played golf at Prouts Neck, Maine with Frank Olson, CEO of Hertz. Frank is a brilliant manager, with intimate knowledge of the card business. So from the first tee on I was quizzing him about the industry. By the time we reached the second green, Frank had convinced me that Amex's corporate card was a terrific franchise, and I had decided not to sell. On the back nine I turned buyer, and in a few months Berkshire owned 10% of the company.

We now have a $3 billion gain in our Amex shares, and I naturally feel very grateful to Frank. But George Gillespie, our mutual friend, says that I am confused about where my gratitude should go. After all, he points out, it was he who arranged the game and assigned me to Frank's foursome."

In a recent CNBC interview, Buffett explained some of the analysis he undertook when he bought Berkshire's $17b stake in Apple ….

"Well, I would say Apple's — I mean, obviously it's very, very, very tech-involved, but it's a consumer product to a great extent too. And I mean, it has consumer aspects to it. And one of the great books on investing, which I've touted before, is one that Phil Fisher wrote back around 1960 or thereabouts, called "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits." It had an effect on me. I went out to meet Phil Fisher after reading the book, I found him in this little office in San Francisco. And I recommend any investor read that book. And it's still in print. And he talks about something called the scuttlebutt method, which made a big impression on me at the time. But I used it a lot, which is essentially going out and finding out as much as you can about how people feel about the products that they ... it's just asking questions, basically. And Apple strikes me as having quite a sticky product and enormously useful product that people would use, and not that I do. Tim Cook's always kidding me about that. But it's a decision-based ... but again, it gets down to the future earning power of Apple when you get right down to it. And I think Tim has done a terrific job, I think he's been very intelligent about capital deployment. And I don't know what goes on inside their research labs or anything of the sort. I do know what goes on in their customers' minds because I spend a lot of time talking to 'em."

Buffett expands on the scuttlebutt process… 

"I had learned that from a fella named Phil Fisher who wrote this great book called "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits." And he calls it the scuttlebutt method. And Phil was a remarkable guy.  And I first used it back in 1963 when American Express had this great Salad Oil Scandal that people were worried about it bankrupting the company. So I went out to restaurants and saw what people were doing with the American Express card, and I went to banks to see what they were doing with travelers' checks and everything. And clearly American Express had lost some money from this scandal, but it hadn't affect their consumer franchise. So I ask people about products all the time. When I take my great-grandchildren to Dairy Queen they bring along friends sometimes. They've all got a iPhone and, you know, I ask 'em what they do with it and how ... whether they could live without it, and when they trade it in what they're gonna do with it. And of course, I see when they come to the furniture mart that people have this incredible stickiness of — with the product. I mean, if they bring in an iPhone, they buy a new iPhone. I mean, they're ... it just has that quality. It gets built into their lives. Now, that doesn't mean something can't come along that will disrupt it. But the continuity of the product is huge, and the degree to which their lives centre around it is huge. And it's a pretty nice, it's a pretty nice franchise to have with a consumer product."

and on the Apple products ...

"But what I do know is when I take a dozen kids, as I do on Sundays out to Dairy Queen they're all holding their Apple, they barely can talk to me except if I'm ordering ice cream or something like that. And then I ask 'em how they live their lives. And the stickiness really is something. I mean, they do build their lives around it, just like you were describing. And the interesting thing is, when they come into ... when they come into get a new one, they're gonna get they overwhelmingly get the same product. I mean, they got their photos on it and, I mean, yeah, I know you can ... you can make some shifts and all that. But they love it."

Buffett reminded us of the need for simplicity in his 1994 letter ...

"Our investments continue to be few in number and simple in concept:  The truly big investment idea can usually be explained in a short paragraph.  We like a business with enduring competitive advantages that is run by able and owner-oriented people.  When these attributes exist, and when we can make purchases at sensible prices, it is hard to go wrong (a challenge we periodically manage to overcome).

Investors should remember that their scorecard is not computed using Olympic-diving methods:  Degree-of-difficulty doesn't count. If you are right about a business whose value is largely dependent on a single key factor that is both easy to understand and enduring, the payoff is the same as if you had correctly analyzed an investment alternative characterized by many constantly shifting and complex variables."

While Buffett no doubt analysed Apple's historical financial statements, he recognised that it is Apple's future earnings power that will determine the success or failure of the investment. A key factor that will determine that future earnings power is the strength and sustainability of the consumer product franchise. Here, observing, speaking to, and thinking about the company's products and customers can provide an edge. Understanding the qualitative factors can be more important than the historical numbers. Keep it simple, it's not rocket science.

“The most important question you should be asking: will this business still be around a decade from now?  Numbers alone won’t tell you the answer; instead you must think critically about the qualitative characteristics of your business.” Peter Thiel

The Buffett Series - Look-Through Earnings

The Buffett Series explores some of the interesting and timeless investment concepts discussed by Mr. Buffett in his annual Berkshire letters. Over the years I've found there isn't a lot that Mr. Buffett and his partner, Mr.Munger, haven't already worked out when it comes to investing. I am constantly discovering hidden investment gems, new ways of thinking about both businesses and the investment process.  

This Series contains ten short essays on concepts that have featured in Mr.Buffett's annual letters since the early 1980's. It's amazing how timeless and universal they are. This short essay touches on the concept of ‘Look-Through Earnings.’

Buffett focuses on the earnings that are generated by the companies he owns. While a company may pay out some of the earnings it generates in the form of dividends, the retained earnings are no less valuable to an investor. In fact, if the company can retain and reinvest those earnings at a high rate of return, the investor is better served by the company doing so. Such companies are often referred to as compounding machines.  

Buffett recognises that while the price of a company's shares can fluctuate regardless of fundamentals over the short term, over the long term changes in the company's share price will reflect changes in the company's earnings.  

In his 1991 letter, Buffett advises investors ...

"We also believe that investors can benefit by focusing on their own look-through earnings. To calculate these, they should determine the underlying earnings attributable to the shares they hold in their portfolio and total these. The goal of each investor should be to create a portfolio (in effect, a ‘company’) that will deliver him or her the highest possible look-through earnings a decade or so from now.  

An approach of this kind will force the investor to think about long-term business prospects rather than short-term stock market prospects, a perspective likely to improve results. It's true, of course, that, in the long run, the scoreboard for investment decisions is market price. But prices will be determined by future earnings. In investing, just as in baseball, to put runs on the scoreboard one must watch the playing field, not the scoreboard."

In the 1994 letter Buffett related Berkshire's growth target with look-through earnings ...

"If our intrinsic value is to grow at our target rate of 15%, our look-through earnings, over time, must also grow at about that pace.”

In his 1996 letter Buffett once again advised …

"Put together a portfolio of companies whose aggregate earnings march upward over the years, and so also will the portfolio's market value. Though it's seldom recognized, this is the exact approach that has produced gains for Berkshire shareholders: Our look-through earnings have grown at a good clip over the years, and our stock price has risen correspondingly. Had those gains in earnings not materialized, there would have been little increase in Berkshire's value."

Many successful investors adopt Buffett's approach to focus on earnings; rather than focus on short term share prices these investors build portfolios whose earnings will grow over time.  

“Note that I have no interest in the development of share prices. This is why I don’t waste your time with a discussion of the fund’s or individual company’s price development. If a company regularly increases its earnings power, the share price will track this over time. A robust investment process correctly identifies companies which increase their earnings power. A rising share price is the outcome. My sights are firmly trained on process.” Robert Vinall

“At Giverny Capital, we do not evaluate the quality of an investment by the short-term fluctuations in its stock price. Our wiring is such that we consider ourselves owners of the companies in which we invest. Consequently, we study the growth in earnings of our companies and their long-term outlook.” Francois Rochon

Paying a reasonable price for a portfolio of quality companies that can compound earnings in the years ahead is likely to deliver attractive returns.

The Buffett Series - A lower Tax Rate?

With the prospect of Corporate Tax cuts in the US post the election of Mr Trump it’s worth thinking about the implications for investments. Confronted with a change in the US corporate tax rate in the 1980's Buffett addressed the issue of winners and losers in his 1986 letter.

“The tax rate on corporate ordinary income is scheduled to decrease from 46% in 1986 to 34% in 1988. This change obviously affects us positively - and it also has a significant positive effect on two of our three major investees, Capital Cities/ABC and The Washington Post Company.”

I say this knowing that over the years there has been a lot of fuzzy and often partisan commentary about who really pays corporate taxes - businesses or their customers. The argument, of course, has usually turned around tax increases,  not decreases. Those people resisting increases in corporate rates frequently argue that corporations in reality pay none of the taxes levied on them but, instead, act as a sort of economic pipeline, passing all taxes through to consumers. According to these advocates, any corporate-tax increase will
simply lead to higher prices that, for the corporation, offset the increase. Having taken this position, proponents of the "pipeline" theory must also conclude that a tax decrease for corporations will not help profits but will instead flow through, leading to correspondingly lower prices for consumers.

Conversely, others argue that corporations not only pay the taxes levied upon them, but absorb them also.  Consumers, this school says, will be unaffected by changes in corporate rates.

What really happens? When the corporate rate is cut, do Berkshire, The Washington Post, Cap Cities, etc., themselves soak up the benefits, or do these companies pass the benefits along to their customers in the form of lower prices? This is an important question for investors and managers, as well as for policymakers.

Our conclusion is that in some cases the benefits of lower corporate taxes fall exclusively, or almost exclusively, upon the corporation and its shareholders, and that in other cases the benefits are entirely, or almost entirely, passed through to the customer. What determines the outcome is the strength of the corporation’s business franchise and whether the profitability of that franchise is regulated.

For example, when the franchise is strong and after-tax profits are regulated in a relatively precise manner, as is the case with electric utilities, changes in corporate tax rates are largely reflected in prices, not in profits. When taxes are cut, prices will usually be reduced in short order. When taxes are increased, prices will rise, though often not as promptly.

A similar result occurs in a second arena - in the price-competitive industry, whose companies typically operate with very weak business franchises.  In such industries, the free market "regulates" after-tax profits in a delayed and irregular, but generally effective, manner. The marketplace, in effect, performs much the same function in dealing with the price-competitive industry as the Public Utilities Commission does in dealing with electric utilities. In these industries, therefore, tax changes eventually affect prices more than profits.

In the case of unregulated businesses blessed with strong franchises, however, it’s a different story: the corporation and its shareholders are then the major beneficiaries of tax cuts. These companies benefit from a tax cut muchas the electric company would if it lacked a regulator to force down prices.

Many of our businesses, both those we own in whole and in part, possess such franchises.  Consequently, reductions in their taxes largely end up in our pockets rather than the pockets of our customers.  While this may be impolitic to state, it is impossible to deny. If you are tempted to believe otherwise, think for a moment of the most able brain surgeon or lawyer in your area. Do you really expect the fees of this expert (the local "franchise-holder" in his
or her specialty) to be reduced now that the top personal tax rate is being cut from 50% to 28%?

Your joy at our conclusion that lower rates benefit a number of our operating businesses and investees should be severely tempered, however, by another of our convictions: scheduled 1988 tax rates, both individual and corporate, seem totally unrealistic to us. These rates will very likely bestow a fiscal problem on Washington that will prove incompatible with price stability. We believe, therefore, that ultimately - within, say, five years - either higher tax rates or higher inflation rates are almost certain to materialize.  And it would not surprise us to see both."