Buffett's Business Categories: Great, Good, and Gruesome

In his 2007 Annual Report (pages 7–10), Warren Buffett categorizes businesses into three distinct types, using vivid analogies to illustrate his investment philosophy. Here’s an expanded breakdown of each category:

---

🏆 GREAT Businesses

“The Great one pays an extraordinarily high interest rate that will rise as the years pass.”

🔑 Characteristics:

• Wide & Enduring Moat: Sustainable competitive advantage that competitors cannot easily cross

• Minimal Capital Requirements: Can grow earnings without significant reinvestment

• High Returns on Invested Capital: Consistently high returns on tangible assets

• Strong Pricing Power: Ability to raise prices without losing customers

• Predictable & Durable: Stable industry with slow change

📈 Example: See’s Candy

• Purchase: 1972 for $25 million

• Sales then: $30 million; Sales in 2007: $383 million

• Pre-tax earnings then: <$5 million; Pre-tax earnings in 2007: $82 million

• Capital required then: $8 million; Capital required in 2007: $40 million

• Key metric: Earned $1.35 billion pre-tax since purchase while requiring only $32 million in additional capital

• Why it’s great:

  • Strong brand loyalty

  • Cash business (no receivables)

  • Short production cycle (low inventory)

  • Sends almost all earnings back to Berkshire for reinvestment

🏰 Other Great Businesses (by Buffett’s criteria):

• Coca-Cola (global brand, pricing power)

• GEICO (low-cost producer in auto insurance)

• American Express (powerful brand, network effect)

• Microsoft & Google (high returns with minimal capital needs)

---

👍 GOOD Businesses

“The Good one pays an attractive rate of interest that will be earned also on deposits that are added.”

🔑 Characteristics:

• Solid Economics: Good returns on capital

• Requires Reinvestment: Must reinvest earnings to grow

• Durable Competitive Advantage: But less impregnable than "Great" businesses

• Steady Earnings Growth: But growth tied to capital investment

• Respectable but Not Spectacular Returns

📊 Example: FlightSafety International

• Purchase: 1996

• Pre-tax earnings then: $111 million; in 2007: $270 million

• Fixed assets then: $570 million; in 2007: $1.079 billion

• Investment required: $923 million depreciation + $1.635 billion capital expenditures = $2.558 billion total investment

• Key metric: Gained $159 million in earnings but required $509 million incremental investment

• Why it’s good (not great):

  • Must constantly buy new simulators to match new aircraft models

  • Each simulator costs >$12 million (273 simulators total)

  • "Put-up-more-to-earn-more" model

⚡ Other Good Businesses:

• Regulated Utilities (MidAmerican Energy)

• Most Industrial Companies

• Many Manufacturing Businesses

---

💀 GRUESOME Businesses

“The Gruesome account both pays an inadequate interest rate and requires you to keep adding money at those disappointing returns.”

🔑 Characteristics:

• Rapid Growth Requirements: Needs constant capital infusion

• Poor or No Profits: Earns little or no money despite growth

• No Durable Competitive Advantage: "Moats" are illusory or quickly crossed

• Capital Intensive: Consumes cash

• Vulnerable to Competition: Subject to continuous "creative destruction"

✈️ Prime Example: Airlines

• Buffett's famous quote: "If a farsighted capitalist had been present at Kitty Hawk, he would have done his successors a huge favor by shooting Orville down."

• History lesson: Buffett bought USAir preferred stock in 1989, eventually sold at a profit during "misguided optimism," then watched the company go bankrupt twice

• Why airlines are gruesome:

  • Insatiable capital demands

  • Fierce competition

  • High fixed costs

  • Vulnerable to fuel prices, economic cycles, and disasters

  • No durable pricing power

📉 Characteristics of Gruesome Industries:

• Capital-intensive manufacturing with rapid technological change

• Businesses requiring superstar management to succeed

• Industries prone to rapid obsolescence

• Companies where success depends on continuous innovation just to survive

---

💡 Buffett's Investment Implications

For GREAT Businesses:

• Buy at reasonable prices and hold forever

• Use their cash flows to buy other great businesses

• Don't worry about growth rates—focus on return on capital

• Example: See's earnings funded many other Berkshire acquisitions

For GOOD Businesses:

• Buy at attractive prices

• Expect decent but not spectacular returns

• Recognize they're "savings accounts" that require deposits to grow

• Manage for steady improvement

For GRUESOME Businesses:

• AVOID (with rare exceptions for turnaround specialists)

• Recognize that "growth" can be a trap if it requires too much capital

• Understand industry economics before investing

• Buffett's admission: Even he makes mistakes here (Dexter Shoe)

---

🎯 The Core Philosophy

1. Focus on the Business, Not the Stock:

• "It's better to have a part interest in the Hope Diamond than to own all of a rhinestone."

2. Seek Durable Advantages:

• "A truly great business must have an enduring 'moat' that protects excellent returns on invested capital."

3. Beware of Change:

• "We rule out businesses in industries prone to rapid and continuous change."

• "A moat that must be continuously rebuilt will eventually be no moat at all."

4. Management Matters, But the Business Matters More:

• "If a business requires a superstar to produce great results, the business itself cannot be deemed great."

• Compare: A brilliant brain surgeon's practice vs. Mayo Clinic—the institution outlasts the individual.

---

📚 Key Takeaways for Investors

1. Look for businesses that can grow without much capital

2. Avoid businesses that consume cash for growth

3. Durable competitive advantages are more important than growth rates

4. Simple businesses you understand are preferable to complex ones

5. Price matters—even great businesses can be poor investments at high prices

Buffett's framework explains why Berkshire owns See's Candy but avoids airlines, and why he prefers businesses like GEICO and Coca-Cola over capital-intensive industries. This categorization remains central to Berkshire's acquisition strategy and investment approach today.

=====

• Buffett measures investments by earnings growth and moat widening, not stock price.

Is NVIDIA a Great, Good or Gruesome company? Quality versus Valuation

To answer it, we need to judge NVIDIA by the core principles Warren Buffett famously looks for, as derived from his mentor Benjamin Graham and his own writings.

Based on Buffett's criteria, NVIDIA is a "Good" to "Great" company, but it is far from the type of business Buffett typically buys.

Here’s a breakdown using Buffett's key principles:

---

1. The Business: Easy to Understand? ✅

Buffett prefers simple businesses he can comprehend. While the semiconductor industry is complex, the fundamental concept of NVIDIA being the leading designer of high-performance GPUs (graphics processing units) is understandable. Its role as the "picks and shovels" provider for the AI gold rush is a powerful, simple narrative. However, the rapid pace of technological change and obsolescence is a factor Buffett dislikes.

Verdict: Leans towards "Understandable."

2. Durable Competitive Advantage (The Moat): ✅ ✅ ✅

This is where NVIDIA shines and approaches "Greatness."

• Brand & Mindshare: NVIDIA is synonymous with high-performance computing, AI, and deep learning.

• Switching Costs: Its CUDA software platform has created a "moat within the moat." Millions of developers and entire industries are locked into its ecosystem, making a switch to a competitor extremely difficult and costly.

• Economies of Scale & R&D: The cost of designing cutting-edge chips is astronomical. NVIDIA's massive scale and relentless R&D spending ($8.7 billion in the last quarter alone) create a huge barrier to entry.

Verdict: Exceptionally Wide and Durable Moat → Great.

3. Consistent Earnings Power: ⚠️

Buffett loves companies with predictable, recurring earnings. NVIDIA's historical financials from the SSG show the opposite: significant volatility.

• EPS: $0.39 (2021) → $0.17 (2022) → $1.19 (2023) → $2.94 (2024)
  This rollercoaster, driven by crypto booms/busts and now the AI boom, is a hallmark of a cyclical business. While the current trend is spectacularly up, the inconsistency is a red flag for a pure Buffett-style investor.

Verdict: Gruesome historically, but currently Great. The key question is durability.

4. High Profitability with Minimal Debt: ✅ ✅

This is another area where NVIDIA excels and aligns with Buffett.

• Profit Margins: As the SSG shows, pre-tax profit on sales has exploded to 64.4%. This is extraordinary and indicates fantastic pricing power.

• Return on Equity (ROE): A 109.2% ROE is world-class and indicates superb management efficiency in generating returns from shareholder equity.

• Debt: With a Debt-to-Capital ratio of 11.5%, NVIDIA has a very strong, conservatively financed balance sheet. Buffett loves low debt.

Verdict: Profitability is Great; Financial structure is Great.

5. Management: Rational, Candid, and Owner-Oriented ✅

While a full analysis requires deeper study of capital allocation, CEO Jensen Huang is widely regarded as a visionary, long-term leader. His focus on building the CUDA ecosystem years before it was profitable shows strategic rationality. The company has also started returning capital to shareholders via a small dividend and buybacks.

Verdict: Appears to be Good to Great.

6. The Price: The "Rule Number One" Problem ❌

This is the ultimate deal-breaker from a Buffett perspective.

"Rule No. 1: Never lose money. Rule No. 2: Never forget rule No. 1."

Buffett is obsessed with the "margin of safety"—buying a wonderful company at a fair price, not a wonderful company at a wonderful (i.e., expensive) price.

• The SSG shows a Current P/E of 44.7, far above its 5-year average of 28.2.

• The stock is in the "HOLD" zone, with a low Upside/Downside Ratio of 1.3-to-1.

• The price is built on the assumption that hyper-growth will continue for years.

For Buffett, paying this price for a historically cyclical company violates his core principle of a margin of safety. The risk of permanent capital loss is too high if growth slows.

Verdict: The current price is Gruesome from a value-investing standpoint.

---

Final Synthesis: Great, Good, or Gruesome?

• As a Business (The "Great" Part): NVIDIA possesses one of the widest and most powerful competitive moats in the modern world, driven by its software ecosystem and technological leadership. Its current profitability is staggering.

• As a Buffett-Style Investment (The "Gruesome" Part): Its historical earnings volatility, exposure to technological disruption, and—most importantly—its extremely high valuation make it an unsuitable purchase for a pure disciple of Buffett.

Overall Verdict: NVIDIA is a "Great" company being traded at a "Gruesome" price.

It is the epitome of a "wonderful company at a wonderful price." A Buffett purist would admire the business but would never buy it at its current level. They would simply say, "It's outside my circle of competence and the price doesn't offer a margin of safety," and move on.

Quality versus Valuation:

Buy at a price that provides a "margin of safety"

 A Reasonable Price (Margin of Safety):

This is where many investors fail. 

You must buy at a price that provides a "margin of safety"—a buffer in case your analysis is slightly wrong. Here are some rough guidelines:

A truly great business: maybe 20-25 times earnings.

A good business: 12-15 times earnings.

A mediocre business: 8-10 times earnings (but you should probably avoid these).