Monday 15 January 2018

Be like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett: If you’re not spending 5 hours per week learning, you’re being irresponsible

Reuters/Rick Wilking.
“In my whole life, I have known no wise people (over a broad subject matter area) who didn’t read all the time — none. Zero.” — Charlie Munger, Self-made billionaire & Warren Buffett’s longtime business partner
Why did the busiest person in the world, former president Barack Obama, read an hour a day while in office?
Why has the best investor in history, Warren Buffett, invested 80% of his time in reading and thinking throughout his career?
Why has the world’s richest person, Bill Gates, read a book a week during his career? And why has he taken a yearly two-week reading vacation throughout his entire career?
Why do the world’s smartest and busiest people find one hour a day for deliberate learning (the 5-hour rule), while others make excuses about how busy they are?
What do they see that others don’t?
The answer is simple: Learning is the single best investment of our time that we can make. Or as Benjamin Franklin said, “An investment in knowledge pays the best interest.”
This insight is fundamental to succeeding in our knowledge economy, yet few people realize it. Luckily, once you do understand the value of knowledge, it’s simple to get more of it. Just dedicate yourself to constant learning.

Knowledge is the new money


1_x2Gft2aJSkBkVncx8L4tXw

“Intellectual capital will always trump financial capital.” — Paul Tudor Jones, self-made billionaire entrepreneur, investor, and philanthropist
We spend our lives collecting, spending, lusting after, and worrying about money — in fact, when we say we “don’t have time” to learn something new, it’s usually because we are feverishly devoting our time to earning money, but something is happening right now that’s changing the relationship between money and knowledge.
We are at the beginning of a period of what renowned futurist Peter Diamandis calls rapid demonetization, in which technology is rendering previously expensive products or services much cheaper — or even free.
This chart from Diamandis’ book Abundance shows how we’ve demonetized $900,000 worth of products and services you might have purchased between 1969 and 1989.

0_w18Bf9GB62h8l-Lq

This demonetization will accelerate in the future. Automated vehicle fleets will eliminate one of our biggest purchases: A car. Virtual reality will make expensive experiences, such as going to a concert or playing golf, instantly available at much lower cost. While the difference between reality and virtual reality is almost incomparable at the moment, the rate of improvement of VR is exponential.
While education and health care costs have risen, innovation in these fields will likely lead to eventual demonetization as well. Many higher educational institutions, for example, have legacy costs to support multiple layers of hierarchy and to upkeep their campuses. Newer institutions are finding ways to dramatically lower costs by offering their services exclusively onlinefocusing only on training for in-demand, high-paying skills, or having employers who recruit studentssubsidize the cost of tuition.
Finally, new devices and technologies, such as CRISPR, the XPrize Tricorder, better diagnostics via artificial intelligence, and reduced cost of genomic sequencing will revolutionize the healthcare system. These technologies and other ones like them will dramatically lower the average cost of healthcare by focusing on prevention rather than cure and management.
While goods and services are becoming demonetized, knowledge is becoming increasingly valuable.
Perhaps the best example of the rising value of certain forms of knowledge is the self-driving car industry. Sebastian Thrun, founder of Google X and Google’s self-driving car team, gives the example of Uber paying $700 million for Otto, a six-month-old company with 70 employees, and of GM spending $1 billion on their acquisition of Cruise. He concludes that in this industry, “The going rate for talent these days is $10 million.”
That’s $10 million per skilled worker, and while that’s the most stunning example, it’s not just true for incredibly rare and lucrative technical skills. People who identify skills needed for future jobs — e.g., data analyst, product designer, physical therapist — and quickly learn them are poised to win.
Those who work really hard throughout their career but don’t take time out of their schedule to constantly learn will be the new “at-risk” group. They risk remaining stuck on the bottom rung of global competition, and they risk losing their jobs to automation, just as blue-collar workers did between 2000 and 2010 when robots replaced 85 percent of manufacturing jobs.
Why?

1_hq9WIMwDHGg5EB--47D1YA

People at the bottom of the economic ladder are being squeezed more and compensated less, while those at the top have more opportunities and are paid more than ever before. The irony is that the problem isn’t a lack of jobs. Rather, it’s a lack of people with the right skills and knowledge to fill the jobs.
An Atlantic article captures the paradox: “Employers across industries and regions have complained for years about a lack of skilled workers, and their complaints are borne out in US employment data. In July [2015], the number of job postings reached its highest level ever, at 5.8 million, and the unemployment rate was comfortably below the post-World War II average. But, at the same time, over 17 million Americans are either unemployed, not working but interested in finding work, or doing part-time work but aspiring to full-time work.”
In short, we can see how at a fundamental level knowledge is gradually becoming its own important and unique form of currency. In other words, knowledge is the new money. Similar to money, knowledge often serves as a medium of exchange and store of value.
But, unlike money, when you use knowledge or give it away, you don’t lose it. Transferring knowledge anywhere in the world is free and instant. Its value compounds over time faster than money. It can be converted into many things, including things that money can’t buy, such as authentic relationships and high levels of subjective well-being. It helps you accomplish your goals faster and better. It’s fun to acquire. It makes your brain work better. It expands your vocabulary, making you a better communicator. It helps you think bigger and beyond your circumstances. It puts your life in perspective by essentially helping you live many lives in one life through other people’s experiences and wisdom.
Former president Obama perfectly explains why he was so committed to reading during his presidency in a recent New York Times interview(paywall): “At a time when events move so quickly and so much information is transmitted,” he said, reading gave him the ability to occasionally “slow down and get perspective” and “the ability to get in somebody else’s shoes.” These two things, he added, “have been invaluable to me. Whether they’ve made me a better president I can’t say. But what I can say is that they have allowed me to sort of maintain my balance during the course of eight years, because this is a place that comes at you hard and fast and doesn’t let up.”

6 essentials skills to master the new knowledge economy

“The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.” — Alvin Toffler
So, how do we learn the right knowledge and have it pay off for us? The six points below serve as a framework to help you begin to answer this question. I also created an in-depth webinar on Learning How To Learnthat you can watch for free.
  1. Identify valuable knowledge at the right time. The value of knowledge isn’t static. It changes as a function of how valuable other people consider it and how rare it is. As new technologies mature and reshape industries, there is often a deficit of people with the needed skills, which creates the potential for high compensation. Because of the high compensation, more people are quickly trained, and the average compensation decreases.
  2. Learn and master that knowledge quickly. Opportunity windows are temporary in nature. Individuals must take advantage of them when they see them. This means being able to learn new skills quickly. After reading thousands of books, I’ve found that understanding and using mental models is one of the most universal skills that everyone should learn. It provides a strong foundation of knowledge that applies across every field. So when you jump into a new field, you have preexisting knowledge you can use to learn faster.
  3. Communicate the value of your skills to others. People with the same skills can command wildly different salaries and fees based on how well they’re able to communicate and persuade others. This ability convinces others that the skills you have are valuable is a “multiplier skill.” Many people spend years mastering an underlying technical skill and virtually no time mastering this multiplier skill.
  4. Convert knowledge into money and results. There are many ways to transform knowledge into value in your life. A few examples include finding and getting a job that pays well, getting a raise, building a successful business, selling your knowledge as a consultant, and building your reputation by becoming a thought leader.
  5. Learn how to financially invest in learning to get the highest return.Each of us needs to find the right “portfolio” of books, online courses, and certificate/degree programs to help us achieve our goals within our budget. To get the right portfolio, we need to apply financial terms — such as return on investment, risk management, hurdle rate, hedging, and diversification — to our thinking on knowledge investment.
  6. Master the skill of learning how to learn. Doing so exponentially increases the value of every hour we devote to learning (our learning rate). Our learning rate determines how quickly our knowledge compounds over time. Consider someone who reads and retains one book a week versus someone who takes 10 days to read a book. Over the course of a year, a 30% difference compounds to one person reading 85 more books.
To shift our focus from being overly obsessed with money to a more savvy and realistic quest for knowledge, we need to stop thinking that we only acquire knowledge from 5 to 22 years old, and that then we can get a job and mentally coast through the rest of our lives if we work hard. To survive and thrive in this new era, we must constantly learn.
Working hard is the industrial era approach to getting ahead. Learning hard is the knowledge economy equivalent.
Just as we have minimum recommended dosages of vitamins, steps per day, and minutes of aerobic exercise for maintaining physical health, we need to be rigorous about the minimum dose of deliberate learning that will maintain our economic health. The long-term effects of intellectual complacency are just as insidious as the long-term effects of not exercising, eating well, or sleeping enough. Not learning at least 5 hours per week (the 5-hour rule) is the smoking of the 21st century and this article is the warning label.
Don’t be lazy. Don’t make excuses. Just get it done.
“Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever.” — Mahatma Gandhi
Before his daughter was born, successful entrepreneur Ben Clarke focused on deliberate learning every day from 6:45 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. for five years (2,000+ hours), but when his daughter was born, he decided to replace his learning time with daddy-daughter time. This is the point at which most people would give up on their learning ritual.
Instead of doing that, Ben decided to change his daily work schedule. He shortened the number of hours he worked on his to do list in order to make room for his learning ritual. Keep in mind that Ben oversees over 200 employees at his company, The Shipyard, and is always busy. In his words, “by working less and learning more, I might seem to get less done in a day, but I get dramatically more done in my year and in my career.” This wasn’t an easy decision by any means, but it reflects the type of difficult decisions that we all need to start making. Even if you’re just an entry-level employee, there’s no excuse. You can find mini learning periods during your downtimes (commutes, lunch breaks, slow times). Even 15 minutes per day will add up to nearly 100 hours over a year. Time and energy should not be excuses. Rather, they are difficult, but doable challenges. By being one of the few people who rises to this challenge, you reap that much more in reward.
We often believe we can’t afford the time it takes, but the opposite is true: None of us can afford not to learn.
Learning is no longer a luxury; it’s a necessity.

Start your learning ritual today with these three steps

The busiest, most successful people in the world find at least an hour to learn everyday. So can you!
Just three steps are needed to create your own learning ritual:
  1. Find the time for reading and learning even if you are really busy and overwhelmed.
  2. Stay consistent on using that “found” time without procrastinating or falling prey to distraction.
  3. Increase the results you receive from each hour of learning by using proven hacks that help you remember and apply what you learn.
Over the last three years, I’ve researched how top performers find the time, stay consistent, and get more results. There was too much information for one article, so I spent dozens of hours and created a free masterclass to help you master your learning ritual too!


https://qz.com/1178713/be-like-bill-gates-and-warren-buffett-if-youre-not-spending-5-hours-per-week-learning-youre-being-irresponsible/

Wednesday 10 January 2018

Understanding Investments - How to Stop Worrying and Start Investing

The Great Courses Plus
Published on 2 Nov 2016

The Great Courses Plus here: https://www.TheGreatCoursesPlus.com/u...

Investing, and the skills to succeed at it, play critical roles in building and maintaining your financial resources. And investment opportunities are available to everyone. No matter where on your financial timeline you may be—whether you're just starting out, approaching retirement, or somewhere in between—there is no question that improving and enhancing your investment skills can have a positive impact on your financial life and in turn, your life goals.

Understanding Investments helps you do just that. In 24 lectures, it introduces the fundamentals of investing to those new to the subject while broadening and deepening the knowledge of more experienced investors. Taught by Professor Connel Fullenkamp, an award-winning educator from Duke University who regularly consults in the world of international finance, these lectures clearly explain the various kinds of financial markets, the different kinds of investments available to you, and the pros and cons of each. Even more important: The course shows you how to evaluate each of these in terms of your own financial situation.


Wednesday 20 December 2017

The Risks facing the Investors in Hengyuan


Edge Weekly
Analysing Hengyuan’s discount to Petron
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/analysing-hengyuans-discount-petron

Good article on Hengyuan in the Edge.

Well written and very balanced views.

Good luck in your investing.


Highlighting some of the points in the above article.

----

1.  A key driver of the refiners’ earnings has been better margins arising from improved spreads between crude oil prices and their refined finished products, primarily RON92 and RON95 gasoline or motor gasoline (mogas).

Based on forward indices, however, the spreads are expected to peak in the fourth quarter. The 2Q2018 forwards show spreads easing 11.6% to US$8.9 per barrel.


Comments:  "The 2Q2018 forwards show spreads easing 11.6% to US$8.9 per barrel."

----

2. ... investors have to rely strictly on Hengyuan’s quarterly financial reports to evaluate its prospects. This can be tricky. Some details, for example, the cause of the RM76 million swing, were not explained in the 2Q2017 report.

Comments:  The author wished for more details in the account to understand Hengyuan's business more thoroughly.

----

3.  Furthermore, it would be difficult to anticipate the company’s capital expenditure plans.

.
.
.
What is not clear, however, is the timeline for the capital expenditure.



Comments:  Upgrading is already facing a delay.

----

4.  The good news is that Hengyuan has lots of cash — RM897.77 million as at Sept 30, which was more than double its cash holding a year ago. However, the group also carries a lot of debt — RM1.31 billion in total.

While net gearing has improved to a healthy 9.87% from 34.47% last year, aggressive capital expenditure could put pressure on the group’s balance sheet.


Comments:  Lots of cash, also lots of debt. Heavy capex.

----

5.  Nevertheless, the company has not been paying dividends, which gives its capex plans more leverage and reduces the need for a cash call.

Comments:  With its present balance sheet and huge capital expenditure for next year, this is not unexpected.  Not paying dividend is not a big deal.


----

6.  ... the bulk of Hengyuan’s debt is denominated in US dollars — two separate term loans of US$350 million, some US$200 million of which has to be repaid (or refinanced) by 2022 while the balance will be run until 2024.


Comments:  Short term debt repayment will put pressure on its cash flow


----

7.  ... both Petron and Hengyuan can expect better margins in the fourth quarter. However, margins should begin to normalise next year, although they will remain higher than this year’s.


Comments:  The high margins enjoyed this year is unlikely to be sustained next year. Margin is expected to normalise next year. The good results this year may just be a short term temporary one.


----

8.  .... without further elaboration from management, it is difficult to ascertain why Hengyuan has been able to enjoy such good margins compared with Petron.

....... The group notes that revenue was further boosted by a 600,000 barrel increase in sales (from the previous year) during the quarter. Unlike Petron, however, Hengyuan does not disclose exact sales volume each quarter.

....Coupled with big fluctuations in the US dollar and ringgit exchange rate and the steady uptick in crude oil prices this year, it is difficult to ascertain what is driving Hengyuan’s margins.


Comments:  The author repeatedly highlighted (in 3 places in the same article) the difficulty establishing what is driving Hengyuan's margins. The management seems not forthcoming it would seem from the author's writing.

----

9.  That said, the outlook for both companies, PetronM and Hengyuan, is not without risk, given the difficulty in anticipating what crude oil price volatility will do to spreads going forward.


Comments:  The author rightly and honestly drew this conclusion:

----

Conclusion:

The author of this article shares some insights into Hengyuan's risks.

Well written indeed.




Reference:
Edge Weekly
Analysing Hengyuan’s discount to Petron
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/analysing-hengyuans-discount-petron
Ben Shane Lim
The Edge Malaysia December 19, 2017



Analysing Hengyuan’s discount to Petron

Edge Weekly
Analysing Hengyuan’s discount to Petron
Ben Shane Lim

The Edge Malaysia

December 19, 2017 16:00 pm +08

This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly, on December 11, 2017 - December 17, 2017.


THE broader oil and gas industry may be in the doldrums but refiners like Hengyuan Refining Co Bhd and Petron Malaysia Refining & Marketing Bhd have enjoyed a stellar run.

At its close of RM11.28 last Friday, Hengyuan’s share price had shot up 403% year on year while Petron’s share price closed at a near-record high of RM12.46, gaining 205% year on year.

Their share price performance was matched by an equally impressive surge in the earnings of the two companies. Petron’s earnings spiked 144% year on year to RM305.61 million for the nine months ended Sept 30 while Hengyuan saw a 469% year-on-year improvement from a lower base to RM725.67 million.

A key driver of the refiners’ earnings has been better margins arising from improved spreads between crude oil prices and their refined finished products, primarily RON92 and RON95 gasoline or motor gasoline (mogas).

Against this backdrop, it is interesting to note that Hengyuan is priced at a substantial discount to Petron in terms of earnings — only 3.5 times annualised 2017 earnings (9M2017 earnings per share came to RM2.42). In contrast, Petron is being valued at 8.26 times earnings on the same basis.

The difference in valuation is even starker, considering that Hengyuan’s 2Q2017 earnings were weighed down by a RM76 million swing in “other operating gains/(losses)” during the quarter. Adjusted for this, Hengyuan’s historical valuation would be even more attractive.

Of course, there are some major differences between the two companies. The most obvious is the fact that Hengyuan is a pure refinery play while Petron also distributes petrol via several hundred stations in the country.

A less obvious difference is the fact that Hengyuan has kept a relatively low profile since its new major shareholder, China’s Shandong Hengyuan Petrochemical Co, took over Shell Refining Co’s 51% stake late last year.

Channel checks reveal that both fund managers and analysts alike have not been granted meaningful access to management. In contrast to Petron, which is tracked by two local research houses, there is little to no marketing of the stock from the sell-side.

This also means that investors have to rely strictly on Hengyuan’s quarterly financial reports to evaluate its prospects. This can be tricky. Some details, for example, the cause of the RM76 million swing, were not explained in the 2Q2017 report.

Furthermore, it would be difficult to anticipate the company’s capital expenditure plans. Recall that one of the key reasons oil major Shell exited the market was its reluctance to invest additional capex in expanding, reconstructing and upgrading Hengyuan’s refining capacity.

Hengyuan has broadly indicated that it plans to upgrade existing facilities to meet Euro 4 and Euro 5 fuel standards. In its quarterly financial reports, Hengyuan states that it has capital commitments totalling RM790.07 million, 24.1% of which has been contracted while the balance has not.

What is not clear, however, is the timeline for the capital expenditure.

The good news is that Hengyuan has lots of cash — RM897.77 million as at Sept 30, which was more than double its cash holding a year ago. However, the group also carries a lot of debt — RM1.31 billion in total. While net gearing has improved to a healthy 9.87% from 34.47% last year, aggressive capital expenditure could put pressure on the group’s balance sheet.

Nevertheless, the company has not been paying dividends, which gives its capex plans more leverage and reduces the need for a cash call.

In contrast, Petron is now a zero-debt company with RM113.64 million cash on its books or 42 sen per share. Generating RM320 million in net cash from operating activities and with no debts to service, Petron is in a much better position to pay dividends. The group only had capital commitments of RM170 million as at Sept 30.



Better earnings in 4Q

While Petron’s balance sheet may look stronger, Hengyuan boasts better gross and net margins of 14.5% and 12.2% respectively. Petron’s net and gross margins in the third quarter were 8.5% and 4.14%.

Again, without further elaboration from management, it is difficult to ascertain why Hengyuan has been able to enjoy such good margins compared with Petron.

In its latest financial report, Hengyuan attributes the better margins to “an unforeseen spike in the average price of market-traded refined products, following unplanned production outages caused by hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and a fire incident reported in a world-scale European refinery”.

The group notes that revenue was further boosted by a 600,000 barrel increase in sales (from the previous year) during the quarter. Unlike Petron, however, Hengyuan does not disclose exact sales volume each quarter.

Coupled with big fluctuations in the US dollar and ringgit exchange rate and the steady uptick in crude oil prices this year, it is difficult to ascertain what is driving Hengyuan’s margins.

Sure, mogas spreads picked up in the second half of the year. Bloomberg data shows that the Singapore Mogas 92 ICE Brent Crack Spread for December expanded to US$9.885 per barrel last week, about 65% higher than the two-year average of six points. The index is an indication of the spread between crude oil prices and refined mogas, a general indicator of refiners’ margins.

Based on forward indices, however, the spreads are expected to peak in the fourth quarter. The 2Q2018 forwards show spreads easing 11.6% to US$8.9 per barrel.

In other words, both Petron and Hengyuan can expect better margins in the fourth quarter. However, margins should begin to normalise next year, although they will remain higher than this year’s.

This, of course, assumes that foreign exchange movements do not distort the companies’ earnings. Both employ a myriad of hedging and derivative instruments to protect themselves from forex movements.

As the dollar weakened against the ringgit, Hengyuan booked a RM67.3 million realised forex loss in the third quarter (and a RM17.8 million unrealised forex gain). In contrast, Petron only booked a RM6.5 million realised forex loss in the same period.

Another difference between the two companies is that Petron is also an exporter while Hengyuan is focused purely on the domestic market. About 9% of Petron’s revenue comes from exports.

Adding to the forex conundrum is the fact that the bulk of Hengyuan’s debt is denominated in US dollars — two separate term loans of US$350 million, some US$200 million of which has to be repaid (or refinanced) by 2022 while the balance will be run until 2024.

In the final analysis, it may be justified that Hengyuan is valued at a discount to Petron. However, the discount may be a little deep at the moment, approaching the low single digits. Barring unforeseen circumstances, Hengyuan could be considered Petron’s cheaper peer.

That said, the outlook for both companies is not without risk, given the difficulty in anticipating what crude oil price volatility will do to spreads going forward.

http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/analysing-hengyuans-discount-petron

Sunday 17 December 2017

Some stocks will perform better than others and these "stunners" will dominate the investor's portfolio.

You won’t improve results by pulling out the fl owers and watering
the weeds.
— Peter Lynch, ONE UP ONWALL STREET


For an investor who—like Keynes and Buffett—adopts a buy-and-hold policy in respect of stocks, portfolio concentration is something that tends to happen naturally over time. 

Inevitably, some stocks within a portfolio will perform better than others and these “stunners” will come to constitute a large proportion of total value. A policy of portfolio concentration cautions against an instinctive desire to “re-balance” holdings just because an investor’s stock market investments are dominated by a few companies.

Buffett illustrates this point with an analogy. If an investor were to purchase a 20 percent interest in the future earnings of a number of promising basketball players, those who graduate to the NBA would eventually represent the bulk of the investor’s royalty stream. Buffett says that:

To suggest that this investor should sell off portions of his most successful investments simply because they have come to dominate his portfolio is akin to suggesting that the Bulls trade Michael Jordan because he has become so important to the team.

Buffett cautions against selling off one’s “superstars” for the rather perverse reason that they have become too successful. 

The decision to sell or hold a security should be based solely on an assessment of the stock’s expected future yield relative to its current quoted price, rather than any measure of past performance  

Focus investor and Risk

In contrast to the diversified stockholder, the focus investor will ordinarily demand a significant margin of comfort prior to allocating substantial funds to a single stock. Fear of loss can concentrate the mind wonderfully, and the investor staking a large proportion of his or her total funds on only one security is more likely to rigorously scrutinize this potential investment.

As Buffett summarizes, a policy of portfolio concentration should serve to increase “both the intensity with which an investor thinks about a business and the comfort-level he must feel
with its economic characteristics before buying into it.”

Focusing on only a handful of stocks should not, therefore, increase portfolio “ risk,” at least as it is defined by the layperson—that is, the possibility of incurring financial loss.

  • The intelligent investor will only select those stocks that exhibit the largest shortfall between quoted price and perceived underlying value—that is, those securities that are likely to provide the greatest margin of safety against financial loss in the long term. 
  • Although a compact suite of stocks will be undeniably more volatile than a diversified holding, short-term price fluctuations are of little concern to a long-term holder of stocks who focuses on income rather than capital appreciation.
  • Indeed, value investors favor those stocks that display the potential for extreme volatility— the difference is that these investors expect predominantly upside volatility.


Risk, for value investors, is not a four-letter word—it is embraced and addressed proactively, not defensively

Portfolio concentration can produce better results than diversification.

Portfolio concentration can produce better results than diversification due to a number of factors, including 

  • lower transaction costs—broker commissions proportionately decrease as deal size increases— and
  •  potentially lower administration costs. 
But perhaps the most compelling argument for portfolio concentration by informed investors is the simple logic expressed in one of Warren Buffett’s shareholder letters:
I cannot understand why an [educated] investor . . . elects to put money into a business that is his 20th favorite rather than simply adding that money to his top choices—the businesses he understands best and that present the least risk, along with the greatest profit potential. 
The same impulse that propels stock market speculation also motivates the drive toward diversification—the desire to be part of the crowd.


As the financier Gerald Loeb recognized, a widely diversified portfolio “is an admission of not knowing what to do and an effort to strike an averagefor those investors who believe that they can in fact rank stocks, a policy of portfolio concentration is preferable.  


Keeping It Simple
Diversification is, in reality, more a strategy of risk dispersion than risk reduction.

Keynes’ response to uncertainty and risk in the share market was radically different to the prevailing wisdom—as he explained in a letter to one of his business associates:
 . . . my theory of risk is that it is better to take a substantial holding of what one believes shows evidence of not being risky rather than scatter holdings in fields where one has not the same assurance.

To ascertain which stocks “show evidence of not being risky,” the value investor searches for those securities that exhibit a sufficiently large margin of safety—that is, those stocks with a substantial gap between estimated intrinsic value and the quoted price.

In undertaking this analysis, the intelligent investor will necessarily focus only on those businesses he or she understands. Keynes noted that he would prefer “one investment about which I had sufficient information to form a judgment to ten securities about which I know little or nothing.” His contention was that intelligent, informed investors will reduce their downside risk by scrutinizing only those sectors within their “circle of competence” —to use Buffett’s phrase—and then only investing in those stocks which exhibit a satisfactory margin of safety. 

Like Socrates, the intelligent investor is wise because he recognizes the bounds of his knowledge  

Waiting for a Fat Pitch

Waiting for a Fat Pitch 

I call investing the greatest business in the world because you never have to swing. You stand at the plate, the pitcher throws you General Motors at 47! US Steel at 39! and nobody calls a strike on you. There's no penalty except opportunity lost. All day you wait for the pitch you like; then when the fielders are asleep, you step up and hit it.
— Warren Buffett, quoted in FORBES magazine

 A policy of portfolio diversification is the logical outcome of a belief in efficient markets. As Keynes noted, it is “false to believe that one form of investment involves taking a view and that another does not. Every investment means committing oneself to one particular side of the market. ”A strategy of extreme diversification is, at its core, a concession by the investor that stock - picking is futile for that particular individual — that, indeed, one stock is as good as another. It is a candid admission that the market knows more than that person.

Keynes rejected the notion that markets always priced securities correctly based on publicly available information and that, therefore, it was pointless to search for potential stunners. His view was much more pragmatic, and was grounded in his experience as an investor and financial theorist: Keynes believed that financial exchanges — although perhaps usually efficient — were not always efficient. On occasions, the stock market generates prices that veer radically from underlying value — Mr. Market is perhaps in the throes of a particularly acute bipolar episode — and it is at these times that the intelligent investor should buy in quantity. 

The poet Paul Valery once asked Albert Einstein if he kept a notebook to record his ideas — Einstein is said to have replied,
“ Oh, that’s not necessary — it’s so seldom I have one.
Similarly, opportunities to buy quality stocks at a material discount to fundamental value are infrequent.  As stock investor and author Philip Fisher commented:
. . .practical investors usually learn their problem is finding enough outstanding investments, rather than choosing among too many. .. Usually a very long list of securities is not a sign of the brilliant investor, but of one who is unsure of himself. 

Agreeing that “ ultra - favorites”are usually thin on the ground, Keynes noted that
“ there are seldom more than two or three enterprises at any given time in which I personally feel myself entitled to put full confidence. ” 

When the market does offer a security at a substantial discount to its intrinsic worth the investor should, therefore, acquire meaningful amounts of that stock. 

Charlie Munger opts for a metaphor close to his heart when explaining Berkshire Hathaway ’ s policy of “loading up ”on mispriced bets:
Playing poker in the Army and as a young lawyer honed my business skills. What you have to learn is to fold early when the odds are against you, or if you have a big edge, back it heavily because you don’t get a big edge often

Opportunity comes, but it doesn’t come often, so seize it when it does come.

Good investment opportunities are too scarce to be parsimonious with, Buffett often reminds his acolytes — when a stunner presents itself, the value investor should not be afraid to back his or her judgment with relatively large capital outlays. 



Ref:  Keynes and the Market

“What works in Investing”. VALUE INVESTING

THE SUPERINVESTORS OF GRAHAM-AND-DODDSVILLE.

Buffett contributed to the Columbia Business School Magazine, Hermes the article, “The Superinvestors of Graham-and-Doddsville”. 

This reviews the very long run investment performance of investors educated in the search for value.

This cognition, the value approach, is unparalleled in how many investors it has successfully served, compared to other approaches – technical analysis, sector rotation, momentum, and so on.

  • As evidence of this, Warren names disciples of the value approach – Walter Schloss, Tom Knap and Ed Anderson of Tweedy Browne, Bill Ruane of the Sequoia, Rick Guerin of Pacific Partners, and Stan Perlmeter of Perlmeter Investments. 
  • Today, there is a new line-up of younger value orientated 11 investors contributing to Buffett’s case – Bill Miller, Chris Davis, Bruce Berkowitz, Seth Klarman to name a few. 


As Buffett says “the idea of buying dollar bills for 40 cents takes immediately with people or it doesn’t (grab a person right away, no matter how much you talk to a person and show him records).” 

We believe Warren Buffett’s genius is his ability to judiciously (as opposed to opportunistically) transcend investment philosophies in search of the answer to the question asked , “What works in Investing”. 



STANDING ON THE SHOULDERS OF THE GIANTS

We aim to stand on the shoulders of the above-mentioned giants using investment philosophy and process wholly based on buying stocks at a margin of safety to our view of intrinsic value.



  • PREFER TO BUY HIGH QUALITY COMPANIES


While we enormously prefer to buy high quality companies with wide moats protecting excess profitability, there are of course occasions when the market bids up quality beyond fair value, negating the types of opportunities sought out by Buffett and Munger.


  • MEDIOCRE COMPANIES WITH EVEN LARGER MARGINS OF SAFETY


In these instances, we walk in the footsteps of classic value investors like Walter Schloss, sifting through less advantaged (or more mediocre) companies in search of even larger margins of safety to our view of intrinsic value.


  • IN SEARCH OF EXCESS RETURNS, AVOID BUYING RISK AND BUY VALUE.


What we refuse to do is to buy risk instead of value in search of excess returns.  

Quality has outperformed the market by 40% over 50 years!

QUALITY HAS OUTPERFORMED

Quality companies are defined as those with high profitability, low profit volatility and minimal use of leverage.

Quality has outperformed the market by 40% over 50 years!

Amazingly, this out-performance is not because of an unwinding of some sort of specific risk.

It came from management teams of wonderful businesses simply reinvesting in their competitive advantages and generating more cash which they reinvested to generate further cash – an autocatalytic process that is the hall mark of intrinsic value.

Such excess return, combined with less fundamental risk, is called a “free lunch”.



BEATING THE MARKET

The Efficient Market Hypothesis refutes the existence of “$100 bills lying on the side walk waiting to be picked up by investors”.

The theory hypothesizes that these opportunities will be immediately arbitraged away, thus preventing anyone from getting rich on them.

Yet this is what Warren Buffett has been doing.

"Investing in wonderful businesses) is like having a Triple A Bond outperforming the B+ bond in the long term by 1% a year, when in a reasonable world, it “should” yield, say, 1% less. "

Now would be a good time to circle back to Keynes and validate his reasons for concentrating his portfolio in “well managed industrial companies that compound value by re-investing part of their profits.”

“Quality” has outperformed the market forever: The S&P had a High Grade Index that started in 1925 and handsomely outperformed the S&P 500 to the end of 1965'.


http://www.firstavenue.co.za/sites/default/files/downloads/the_evolution_of_valuation_22112011.pdf

"Cheap" classic value companies versus Quality (growing intrinsic value) companies

Classic value metrics such as P/B, P/E or DY do not represent intrinsic value. 

To illustrate this, Grantham says when he poses the following question to investment audiences

  • “I give you Coca Cola at 1.2x book or General Motors 1.0x. 
  • Which would you have?” he gets no takers for GM. 


That is the clearest difference between P/B as a corner stone of classic value, and not intrinsic value.

The extra qualities represented by Coca Cola are worth a premium. The only question is, “how much?’ 


OUTPERFORMANCE OF INTRINSIC VALUE (QUALITY) VS. OF LOW P/B.

What this means is that

  • any outperformance of intrinsic value (quality) is pure alpha
  • where outperformance of low P/B (as it is for many small caps) is compensation for a high risk premium. 


To support this point, Grantham points out that had the US government not bailed out the behemoths of the US financial system in the crises of 2008, many companies trading at low price to book ratios would have gone bankrupt (not just in the US, but across the world due to the interconnectedness of the global financial system).

What we learn from Buffett’s review of the first 25 years of his investment experience is that this risk premium sometimes comes back to bite you. 

It should not be surprising that in times of deep economic crises, more of these “cheap,” classic value companies go bust than is the case for the “expensive” intrinsic value companies.

Further studies found that classic value investment opportunities tend to coincide with other characteristics such as

  • small capitalization, 
  • illiquidity, 
  • high leverage, or 
  • dissipating fundamentals due to severe cyclical conditions.  


 “The pure administration of classic value investment style really needs a long term lock-up, like Warren Buffet (Partnership) has or it will have occasional quite dreadful client problems.” 

Investment history is replete with examples of such dreadful client problems – Gary Brinson of UBS in the late 90s, Tony Dye who ran a value based contrarian portfolio for Phillips and Drew, and low PE value manager David Dreman in 2008, all lost the majority of their clients due to severe underperformance. 

The big lesson to learn here is not that classic value investing doesn’t work. 

It is the fact that it works far less frequently in recent times than it used to, enough to produce dreadful client problems.  

The reasons for Buffett’s evolution (from using classic value metrics in his Partnership years to intrinsic value at Berkshire).

Chris Davis shares that classic value investing would have denied Buffett the benefits of compounding (of shareholder value) that comes along with the intrinsic value found in wonderful businesses. 

Further, Buffett would have also suffered from a scale disadvantage if he had continued investing in cheap but small companies.


BUYING CIGAR BUTTS

We quote “Buying cigar butts at less than liquidation value would almost certainly have continued to work out well for Buffett as long as the amounts involved were small enough. 

Such opportunities tend to be in very small companies. 

This approach requires more portfolio turnover as time works against lousy businesses.” 

In other words, while the decision to sell a mediocre investment that has done well for you is immediate, it moves much further out in great quality business.

Failure to calibrate the right price to sell a mediocre business could negate your whole investment case.



BUYING WONDERFUL BUSINESS

In the mean time, a wonderful business continues to renew corporate value by garnering more and more of the profit pool in its industry.

You have to be vaguely right about when to sell it. 

Last, and as importantly, the tax implications of high portfolio turnover are highly unfavorable.





BUFFETT HAS PRAISED KEYNES AND FISHER IN HIS VARIOUS LETTERS

The investment philosophy that has guided Berkshire Hathaway until today is more reminiscent of Keynes and Fisher than Graham. 

In fact, Buffett has paid homage to Keynes in various letters to Berkshire shareholders.

Further, he is known to have once said his strategy was 15% Fisher and 85% Benjamin Graham.

We believe this to be genius of Buffett – finding out what works and evolving to it.



http://www.firstavenue.co.za/sites/default/files/downloads/the_evolution_of_valuation_22112011.pdf

Investment Strategies employed by Warren Buffett in his Partnerships

Throughout the aforementioned paradigm shift incorporating corporate growth into valuation, Benjamin Graham continued to utilize his net asset based definition of value in managing money for limited partners/shareholders in his partnership. Benjamin Graham retired (and wound up his partnership) in 1956'


HISTORY OF BUFFETT'S INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP

  • In 1956,  the same year that Benjamin Graham retired, Warren Buffet started up his investment partnership, Buffett Partnership Ltd. 
  • By 1960, Buffett had seven partnerships operating under Buffett Partnership Ltd, namely, Buffett Associates, Buffett Fund, Dacee, Emdee, Glenoff, Mo-Buff, and Underwood. 
  • In 1962, Buffett merged all partnerships into one. 
  • In 1966, he closed the partnership to new money. 
  • In 1969, following his most successful year, Buffet liquidated the partnership and transferred their assets back to his limited partners (shareholders). He further recommended his partners to Bill Ruane who then founded Sequoia Fund. 


At his point, the stock market is simply roaring with growth stocks powering ahead until the 1973 oil crisis.



THE INVESTMENT STRATEGIES OF BUFFETT'S PARTNERSHIP

Of importance to us at this stage are the investment strategies employed by Buffet in his Partnership.

In one of his letters to his limited partners in 1962, Buffett explained in detail the strategies he used to generate excess returns. 


1.  Between 5% - 10% of his portfolio was invested in undervalued securities, a group of companies he referred to as ‘generals’. 

The group provided relative margin of safety at the time of purchase, but subsequently behaved just like the market. He expected this section of the portfolio to display limited downside in falling markets but have a very good chance of outperforming in upwardly drifting markets. 

A good example of this was the purchase of a company by the name of Dempster, a windmill manufacturing company in 1962. Buffett consulted his friend, Charlie Munger, to whom he was introduced in 1959, on this investment. Just a year later (1963), Buffett sells Dempster for three times (3x) the amount he invested. Dempster, almost worthless when Buffett bought it, had built a portfolio of assets worth over $2m during the time of Buffett’s investment! 



2.  The second group tended to focus on workouts – M&A, spin offs, reorganizations and liquidations. 

Because of this, such shares would be underpriced and would outperform in down years, but underperform in strong markets. 

For instance, Munger recommended that Buffett buy a company by the name of Harry Bottle in 1962. This move turned out to be very profitable as Bottle cuts costs, laid off workers, and moved into a cash rich position. 



3.  The third strategy was control situations where he would initiate a large enough position in a company to try and influence corporate policy. 

A famous control situation is Berkshire Hathaway which started out as an undervalued position (general) in 1962. Buffett arranged a business coup to take control of it at Berkshire’s board meeting in 1965. He appointed a new president, Ken Chance, to run it. After distributing (unbundling) Berkshire to his limited partners in 1969, Buffett, himself a partner, remained with 29% of the stock. 



There is a wealth of knowledge we learn from letters Buffett wrote to his limited partners (and after to his Berkshire Hathaway shareholders) on the pros and cons of the investment strategies employed during the partnership years (1956 to 1969).