You are not compelled to sell just because of short-term appreciation. Fisher taught either the investment you hold is a better investment than cash or it is not.

Sometimes the market will quickly confirm Buffett's judgement that a company is a good investment.  When that happens, he is not compelled to sell just because of short-term appreciation.  

He considers the Wall Street maxim "you never go broke taking a profit" to be foolish advice.

Fisher taught him that either the investment you hold is a better investment than cash or it is not.  

Buffett says that he is "quite content to hold any security indefinitely, so long as 

• the prospective return on equity capital (ROE) of the underlying business is satisfactory, 
• management is competent and honest, and 
• the market does not overvalue the business. 

If the stock market does significantly overvalue a business, he will sell.

In addition, Buffett will sell a fairly valued or undervalued security if he needs the proceeds to purchase something else - either

• a business that is even more undervalued or 
• one of equal value that he understands better.  

Beyond this investment strategy, however, Buffett confessed in 1987 that there are three common-stock positions that he will not sell, regardless of how seriously the stock market may overvalue their shares:  The Washing Post Company, GEICO Corporation, and Capital Cities/ABC.  In 1990, he added The Coca-Cola Company to this list of permanent common-stock holdings.

This 'till-death-do-us-part attitude places these four investments on the same commitment level as Berkshire's controlled businesses.  Permanent status is not something Buffett hands out indiscriminately.  And it should be noted that a company is not automatically "permanent" on the day Buffett buys it.  Berkshire Hathaway has owned shares of The Washington Post Company for 20 years and GEICO for 18 years.  Buffett first purchased Capital Cities in 1977.  Even Coca-Cola, first purchased in 1988, was not elevated to permanent status until 1990.

As long as businesses are increasing shareholder value at a satisfactory rate, a long term investor would prefer that the stock market delay its recognition.

It is Warren Buffett's practice to let companies inform him by their operating results, not by their short-term stock quotes, whether Berkshire's investments are successful.

He is convinced that although the stock market, in the short run, may ignore a business's financial results, it will, over time, confirm a company's success or failure at providing increased shareholder value.

Buffett remembers Ben Graham telling him that "in the short run, the market is a voting machine but inn the long run it is a weighting machine."

He is willing to be patient.  In fact, as long as Berkshire's businesses are increasing shareholder value at a satisfactory rate, he would prefer that the stock market delay its recognition, thereby allowing him the opportunity to purchase more shares at bargain prices.  

Investing for the Long Run

Introduction
The difference of only a few percentage points in investment returns 
or interest rates can have a huge impact on your future wealth. 
Therefore, in the long run, the rewards of investing in stocks can 
outweigh the risks. We'll examine this risk/reward dynamic in this 
lesson.

Volatility of Single Stocks
Individual stocks tend to have highly volatile prices, and the returns
you might receive on any single stock may vary wildly. If you invest
in the right stock, you could make bundles of money. For instance,
Eaton Vance EV, an investment-management company, has had the
best-performing stock for the last 25 years. If you had invested
$10,000 in 1979 in Eaton Vance, assuming you had reinvested all
dividends, your investment would have been worth $10.6 million by
December 2004.

On the downside, since the returns on stock investments are not
guaranteed, you risk losing everything on any given investment.
There are hundreds of recent examples of dot-com investments that
went bankrupt or are trading for a fraction of their former highs.
Even established, well-known companies such as Enron, WorldCom,
and Kmart filed for bankruptcy, and investors in these companies
lost everything.

Between these two extremes is the daily, weekly, monthly, and
yearly fluctuation of any given company's stock price. Most stocks
won't double in the coming year, nor will many go to zero. But do
consider that the average difference between the yearly high and
low stock prices of the typical stock on the New York Stock
Exchange is nearly 40%.

In addition to being volatile, there is the risk that a single company's
stock price may not increase significantly over time. In 1965, you
could have purchased General Motors GM stock for $50 per share
(split adjusted). In the following decades, though, this investment
has only spun its wheels. By June 2008, your shares of General
Motors would be worth only about $18 each. Though dividends


would have provided some ease to the pain, General Motors' return
has been terrible. You would have been better off if you had
invested your money in a bank savings account instead of General
Motors stock.

Clearly, if you put all of your eggs in a single basket, sometimes that
basket may fail, breaking all the eggs. Other times, that basket will
hold the equivalent of a winning lottery ticket.

Volatility of the Stock Market
One way of reducing the risk of investing in individual stocks is by
holding a larger number of stocks in a portfolio. However, even a
portfolio of stocks containing a wide variety of companies can
fluctuate wildly. You may experience large losses over short periods.
Market dips, sometimes significant, are simply part of investing in
stocks.

For example, consider the Dow Jones Industrials Index, a basket of
30 of the most popular, and some of the best, companies in America.
If during the last 100 years you had held an investment tracking the
Dow, there would have been 10 different occasions when that
investment would have lost 40% or more of its value.

The yearly returns in the stock market also fluctuate dramatically.
The highest one-year rate of return of 67% occurred in 1933, while
the lowest one-year rate of return of negative 53% occurred in 1931.
It should be obvious by now that stocks are volatile, and there is a
significant risk if you cannot ride out market losses in the short
term. But don't worry; there is a bright side to this story.


Over the Long Term, Stocks Are Best
Despite all the short-term risks and volatility, stocks as a group have
had the highest long-term returns of any investment type. This is an
incredibly important fact! When the stock market has crashed, the
market has always rebounded and gone on to new highs. Stocks have
outperformed bonds on a total real return (after inflation) basis, on
average. This holds true even after market peaks.

If you had deplorable timing and invested $100 into the stock market
during any of the seven major market peaks in the 20th century,
that investment, over the next 10 years, would have been worth
$125 after inflation, but it would have been worth only $107 had you
invested in bonds, and $99 if you had purchased government
Treasury bills. In other words, stocks have been the best-performing
asset class over the long term, while government bonds, in these
cases, merely kept up with inflation.

This is the whole reason to go through the effort of investing in
stocks. Again, even if you had invested in stocks at the highest peak
in the market, your total after-inflation returns after 10 years would
have been higher for stocks than either bonds or cash. Had you
invested a little at a time, not just when stocks were expensive but
also when they were cheap, your returns would have been much
greater.


Time Is on Your Side
Just as compound interest can dramatically grow your wealth over
time, the longer you invest in stocks, the better off you will be.
With time, your chances of making money increase, and the volatility
of your returns decreases.

The average annual return for the S&P 500 stock index for a single
year has ranged from negative 39% to positive 61%, while averaging
13.2%. After holding stocks for five years, average annualized returns
have ranged from negative 4% to positive 30%, while averaging 11.9%.
These returns easily surpass those you can get from any of the other
major types of investments. Again, as your holding period increases,
the expected return variation decreases, and the likelihood for a
positive return increases. This is why it is important to have a long term
investment horizon when getting started in stocks.


Why Stocks Perform the Best
While historical results certainly offer insight into the types of
returns to expect in the future, it is still important to ask the
following questions: Why, exactly, have stocks been the best
performing asset class? And why should we expect those types of
returns to continue? In other words, why should we expect history
to repeat?


Quite simply, stocks allow investors to own companies that have the
ability to create enormous economic value. Stock investors have full
exposure to this upside. For instance, in 1985, would you have
rather lent Microsoft money at a 6% interest rate, or would you have
rather been an owner, seeing the value of your investment grow
several-hundred fold?

Because of the risk, stock investors also require the largest return
compared with other types of investors before they will give their
money to companies to grow their businesses. More often than not,
companies are able to generate enough value to cover this return
demanded by their owners.


Meanwhile, bond investors do not reap the benefit of economic
expansion to nearly as large a degree. When you buy a bond, the
interest rate on the original investment will never increase. Your
theoretical loan to Microsoft yielding 6% would have never yielded
more than 6%, no matter how well the company did. Being an owner
certainly exposes you to greater risk and volatility, but the sky is also
the limit on the potential return.


The Bottom Line
While stocks make an attractive investment in the long run, stock
returns are not guaranteed and tend to be volatile in the short term.
Therefore, we do not recommend that you invest in stocks to
achieve your short-term goals. To be effective, you should invest in
stocks only to meet long-term objectives that are at least five years
away. And the longer you invest, the greater your chances of
achieving the types of returns that make investing in stocks
worthwhile.

Quiz 
There is only one correct answer to each question.
1 The average yearly difference between the high and low of the
typical stock is between:
a. 30% and 50%.
b. 10% and 30%.
c. 50% and 70%.

2 If you were saving to buy a car in three years, what percentage of
your savings for the car should you invest in the stock market?
a. 50%.
b. 70%.
c. 0%.

3 If you were investing for your retirement, which is more than 10
years away, based on historical returns in the 20th century, what
percentage of the time would you have been better off by
investing only in stocks versus a combination of stocks, bonds,
and cash?
a. 50%.
b. 100%.
c. 0%.

4 Well known stocks like General Motors:
a. Always outperform the stock market.
b. Are too highly priced for the average investor.
c. Can underperform the stock market.

5 Which of the following is true?
a. After adjusting for inflation, bonds outperform stocks.
b. When you invest in stocks, you will earn 12% interest on your
money.
c. Stock investments should be part of your long-term
investment portfolio.



http://news.morningstar.com/classroom2/course.asp?docId=142859&page=1&CN=COM

Super Rich The Greed Game

The short-term and long-term perspectives on an investment can diverge.

In a rising market, many people feel wealthy in the short run due to unrealized capital gains, but they are likely to be worse off over the long run than if security prices had remained lower and the returns to incremental investment higher.

The Average Investor Is Better Off Trading Long-Term

By Arthur, The Stock Investor Home
Investor are often reminded by the stockmarket that their shares value can go up (the bull) as well as down (the bear).  That is why people who tried to time the market can never beat it.  It is also the number one reason why people who tried to time the market will only end up losing money again and again.
 
One of the best time study was to "sell in May" and keep away from the market.  This is a method which was once used by traders and coined by the Hirch organization who publish the Stock Traders Almanac.  What they published was a fascinating stat that says that since 1950, if you invested $10,000 in the market at the beginning of November and held it to April of every year, you would have $536,000 currently. If you had done the same thing but invested from May to October, you would actually have a loss of $236.  You might want to give this time study investing method a tried but at your own risk.
 
Study have shown that for the average investor who have a full-time job on hand, they are better off investing for the long-term and ignore the short-term volatility of the share market.  Remember, short-term volatility is only importance to short-term investor.  As long you as you keep your long-term financial goal in mind and average the number of shares in good and bad time, the average long-term investor are going to perform much better than any short-term trader.
 
The secrets to consistently outperform any stock market indices no matter where you lived is very simple.  Since 1925, common stocks have generated an average annual rate of return of around 9-10 percent versus 3-5 percent for government bonds.  In addition, stocks have been one of the only investments that have consistently outpaced inflation over time.
 
Time is the best way to ride out any volatility.  Time have repeatedly show you that the stock market share value will recover and your share prices will once rise again.  That is why Warren Buffett favourite holding period for stock is FOREVER.  To benefits from the test of time, you must select your company stock carefully for investment.  Go for large companies such as Coca-Cola which you know that it will be around for many centuries.  Diversify your stock investment to not more than 10 companies.  Diversification works only if your don't OVER diversify.
 
No one in the stock investment world can consistently out-perform or beat the market.  Successful investor DO NOT tried to beat the market.  What they do is to keep their long-term financial goal in mind and invest using Fixed Cost Averaging, Time Diversification, and Investment Fund Diversification in Large Companies listed on stock exchange.
 
Don't bother to listen to any financial news, all they do is to constantly keep you in fear.  They are in the business of providing the financial buzz, they are not in the business to educate you to become a better stock investor.
 
To conclude, always keep your investing method simple.  Make used of the time tested formula and invested a fixed amount monthly.  Let the power of time and compound interest do it magic tricks for you.

http://www.sap-basis-abap.com/shares/the-average-investor-is-better-off-trading-long-term.htm

Lessons from the '87 Crash

SPECIAL REPORT October 11, 2007

Lessons from the '87 Crash

Enjoying the Dow's record run? Don't get too comfy. The market's Black Monday breakdown is a reminder of how quickly investor sentiment can turn

by Ben Steverman

As major stock indexes hit all-time highs, it's worth looking back 20 years to a far gloomier time, when investors were cruelly and suddenly reminded that the value of their investments can depend on something as unpredictable as a mood swing.

Every once in a while, fear, snowballing into panic, sweeps financial markets—the stock market crash of October, 1987, now celebrating its 20th birthday, is a prime example.

In the five trading sessions from Oct. 13 to Oct. 19, 1987, the Dow Jones industrial average lost a third of its value and about $1 trillion of U.S. stock market value was wiped out. The losses culminated in a panic-stricken 22.6% decline in the Dow on Black Monday, Oct. 19. The traumatic drop raised recession fears and had some preparing for another Great Depression.

Stock market crashes were nothing new in 1987, but previous financial crises—in 1929, for example—often reflected fundamental problems in the U.S. economy.

MYSTERIOUS MELTDOWN
The market's nervous breakdown in 1987 is much harder to explain. Especially in light of what came next: After a couple months of gyrations, the markets started bouncing back. The broad Standard & Poor's 500-stock index ended 1987 with a modest 2.59% gain. And in less than two years, stocks had returned to their pre-crash, summer of 1987 heights.

More importantly for most Americans, the U.S. economy kept humming along. Corporate profits barely flinched.

To this day, no one really knows for sure why the markets chose Oct. 19 to crash. Finance Professor Paolo Pasquariello of the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business says the mystery behind 1987 prompted scholars to come up with new ways of studying financial crises. Instead of just focusing on economic fundamentals, they put more attention on the "market microstructure," the ways people trade and the process by which the market forms asset prices.

True, in hindsight there are plenty of adequate reasons for the '87 crash. Stocks had soared through much of 1987, hitting perhaps unsustainable levels: In historical terms, stock prices were way ahead of corporate profits. New trading technology and unproven investing strategies put strain on the market. There were worries about the economic impact of tensions in the Persian Gulf and bills being considered in Congress.

OUT OF SORTS
But for whatever reason, the mood on Wall Street shifted suddenly, and everyone tried to sell stocks at once. "Something just clicked," says Chris Lamoureux, finance professor at the University of Arizona. "It would be like a whole crowded theater trying to get out of one exit door."

It's a fairly common phenomenon on financial markets. Every stock transaction needs a buyer or a seller. When news or a mood shift causes a shortage of either buyers or sellers in the market, stock prices can surge or plunge quickly. Most of the time, balance is quickly restored. Lower prices draw in new buyers looking for a bargain, for example.

Sometimes, as in 1987 and many other true crises, things get out of hand. What happens at these moments is a mystery that may be best explained by dynamics deep within human nature.

Usually, explains behavioral finance expert Hersh Shefrin, a professor at Santa Clara University, investors believe they understand the world. In a crisis, "something dramatically different happens and we lose our confidence," Shefrin says. "Panic is basically a loss of self-control. Fear takes over."

BUYERS AND SELLERS
Why don't smart investors, seeing others panic and sell stocks, step in to buy them up at a bargain?

First, it's very hard, in the midst of a crisis, to tell whether markets are acting rationally or irrationally. Buyers refused to enter credit markets this summer on fears about risky mortgage debt. It will take months, maybe years, to add up the full impact of losses on subprime loans.

It's also tough to think rationally yourself. "It's hard to keep your emotions in check when your money is on the line," Shefrin says.

And, even if you're confident the panicked market is giving you a buying opportunity, you're likely to want to wait until it hits bottom. If a market is in free fall, buying stocks on the way down is likely to give you instant losses.

Not only will buyers hold back. A falling market will bring many more sellers out of the woodwork. Leverage is one reason: Many investors buy stocks on borrowed money, so they can't afford to lose as much without facing bankruptcy.

This is one explanation for the temporary, sharp drops in many financial markets in the summer of 2007. Losses on leveraged mortgage debt prompted many hedge funds to dump all sorts of assets to raise cash.

THERAPY FOR A PANICKED MARKET
The solution to a panicked market, many say, is slowing down the herd of frightened investors all running in the same direction. New stock market rules instituted since 1987 pause trading after big losses. For example, U.S. securities markets institute trading halts when stock losses reach 10% in any trading session. "If you give people enough time, maybe they will figure out nothing fundamental is going on," University of Michigan's Pasquariello says.

There's another form of therapy for overly emotional markets: information. In 1929 and during other early financial crises, there were no computer systems, economic data were scarce, and corporate financial reporting was suspect. "The only thing people knew in the 1920s was there was a panic and everybody was selling," says Reena Aggarwal, finance professor at Georgetown University. "There was far less information available." In 1987, and even more today, investors had places to get more solid data on the market and the economy, giving them more courage not to follow the herd. That's one reason markets found it so easy to shrug off the effects of 1987, Aggarwal adds.

You can slow markets down, reform trading rules, and tap into extra information, but financial panics may never go away. It seems to be part of our collective human nature to occasionally reassess a situation, panic, and then all act at once.

Many see the markets as a precarious balance between fear and greed. Or, alternatively, irrational exuberance and unwarranted pessimism. "All you need is a shift in mass that's just big enough to push you toward the tipping point," Shefrin says.

IN FOR THE LONG HAUL
What should an individual investor do in the event of a financial crisis? If you're really sure that something fundamental has changed and the economy is heading toward recession or even another depression, it's probably in your interest to sell. But most experts advise waiting and doing nothing. "In volatile times, it is very likely that you [will be] the goat that other people are taking advantage of," University of Arizona's Lamoureux says. "It's often a very dangerous time to be trading."

Shefrin adds: "The chances of you doing the right thing are low." Don't think short-term, he says, and remind yourself of the long-term averages. For example, in any given year, stock markets have a two in three chance of moving higher. Other than that, it's nearly impossible to predict the future.

So, another financial panic may be inevitable. But relax: There's probably nothing you can do about it anyway. Anything you do might make your situation worse. So the best advice may be to send flowers to your stressed-out stockbroker, stick with your long-term investment strategy, and sit back and watch the market's roller-coaster ride.

Steverman is a reporter for BusinessWeek's Investing channel .

http://www.businessweek.com/investing/content/oct2007/pi20071011_494930.htm

Equity investors: Don't panic!

This week has heralded another sharp sell off in the stock market – but whatever private investors do they must not panic.

When there is a mass sell-off of assets everything falls. Photo: AP

By Garry White

5:02PM GMT 21 Nov 2011

Of course, the situation in Europe is serious – with debt concerns moving from Greece to Italy to Spain and now France. the US deficit is also of serious concern. However, events currently unfolding are not the end of the world. Equity markets are likely to recover from this crisis over the next few years as the global economy improves, but there will be plenty of pain on the way.

When there is a mass sell-off of assets everything falls – the good assets and the bad. Investing is a long term affair and panic selling could means good investments are sold when they are cheap. This defeats the main investment principles of buying low and selling high.

Of course, the value of an asset is only what someone else is prepared to pay for it – so although shares look cheap at the moment they could get cheaper in the short term. However, returns from the stock market over time – particularly when dividends are reinvested – are still likely to mean it is worth staying in the market.

There’s also the fact that panic selling can crystallise tax liabilities to consider.

The truth is, now is actually a great time to buy quality companies at what could be a bargain prices, as long as you have a sensible investment horizon. And are brave enough.  

Invest at the point of maximum pessimism." This is a famous quote from legendary investor John Templeton, who was one of the last century's most successful contrarian investors - hoovering up shares during the Great Depression. He was the founder of fund management group Templeton.

Conversely, the theory goes, you should sell at the point of maximum optimism.

It is important to remember that you will never time a market bottom or market top accurately. That's why Questor thinks the best investment strategy is to continue to drip-feed funds into the market – and this is especially the case when markets are falling.

This strategy is called pound-cost averaging and it makes good sense for investors with an appropriate time frame.

Although the sharp falls seen recently in equities is a concern – it is not a reason to panic. Sell in haste today and you may regret your decision in two year’s time.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/questor/8904859/Equity-investors-Dont-panic.html

Investing for the long term

Great Investors: Philip Fisher

Morningstar.com's Interactive Classroom

Course 505


Great Investors: Philip Fisher

Introduction

The late Phil Fisher was one of the great investors of all time and the author of the classic book Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits. Fisher started his money management firm, Fisher & Co., in 1931 and over the next seven decades made tremendous amounts of money for his clients. For example, he was an early investor in semiconductor giant Texas Instruments TXN, whose market capitalization recently stood at well over $40 billion. Fisher also purchased Motorola MOT in 1955, and in a testament to long-term investing, held the stock until his death in 2004.

Fisher's Investment Philosophy

Fisher's investment philosophy can be summarized in a single sentence: Purchase and hold for the long term a concentrated portfolio of outstanding companies with compelling growth prospects that you understand very well. This sentence is clear on its face, but let us parse it carefully to understand the advantages of Fisher's approach. The question that every investor faces is, of course, what to buy? Fisher's answer is to purchase the shares of superbly managed growth companies, and he devoted an entire chapter in Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits to this topic. The chapter begins with a comparison of "statistical bargains," or stocks that appear cheap based solely on accounting figures, and growth stocks, or stocks with excellent growth prospects based on an intelligent appraisal of the underlying business's characteristics.

The problem with statistical bargains, Fisher noted, is that while there may be some genuine bargains to be found, in many cases the businesses face daunting headwinds that cannot be discerned from accounting figures, such that in a few years the current "bargain" prices will have proved to be very high. Furthermore, Fisher stated that over a period of many years, a well-selected growth stock will substantially outperform a statistical bargain. The reason for this disparity, Fisher wrote, is that a growth stock, whose intrinsic value grows steadily over time, will tend to appreciate "hundreds of per cent each decade," while it is unusual for a statistical bargain to be "as much as 50 per cent undervalued."

Fisher divided the universe of growth stocks into large and small companies. On one end of the spectrum are large financially strong companies with solid growth prospects. At the time, these included IBM IBM, Dow Chemical DOW, and DuPont DD, all of which increased fivefold in the 10-year period from 1946 to 1956.

Although such returns are quite satisfactory, the real home runs are to be found in "small and frequently young companies… [with] products that might bring a sensational future." Of these companies, Fisher wrote, "the young growth stock offers by far the greatest possibility of gain. Sometimes this can mount up to several thousand per cent in a decade." Fisher's answer to the question of what to buy is clear: All else equal, investors with the time and inclination should concentrate their efforts on uncovering young companies with outstanding growth prospects.

Fisher's 15 Points

All good principles are timeless, and Fisher's famous "Fifteen Points to Look for in a Common Stock" from Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits remain as relevant today as when they were first published. The 15 points are a qualitative guide to finding superbly managed companies with excellent growth prospects. According to Fisher, a company must qualify on most of these 15 points to be considered a worthwhile investment:

1. Does the company have products or services with sufficient market potential to make possible a sizable increase in sales for at least several years? A company seeking a sustained period of spectacular growth must have products that address large and expanding markets.

2. Does the management have a determination to continue to develop products or processes that will still further increase total sales potentials when the growth potentials of currently attractive product lines have largely been exploited? All markets eventually mature, and to maintain above-average growth over a period of decades, a company must continually develop new products to either expand existing markets or enter new ones.

3. How effective are the company's research-and-development efforts in relation to its size? To develop new products, a company's research-and-development (R&D) effort must be both efficient and effective.

4. Does the company have an above-average sales organization? Fisher wrote that in a competitive environment, few products or services are so compelling that they will sell to their maximum potential without expert merchandising.

5. Does the company have a worthwhile profit margin? Berkshire Hathaway's BRK.B vice-chairman Charlie Munger is fond of saying that if something is not worth doing, it is not worth doing well. Similarly, a company can show tremendous growth, but the growth must bring worthwhile profits to reward investors.

6. What is the company doing to maintain or improve profit margins? Fisher stated, "It is not the profit margin of the past but those of the future that are basically important to the investor." Because inflation increases a company's expenses and competitors will pressure profit margins, you should pay attention to a company's strategy for reducing costs and improving profit margins over the long haul. This is where the moat framework we've spoken about throughout the Investing Classroom series can be a big help.

7. Does the company have outstanding labor and personnel relations? According to Fisher, a company with good labor relations tends to be more profitable than one with mediocre relations because happy employees are likely to be more productive. There is no single yardstick to measure the state of a company's labor relations, but there are a few items investors should investigate. First, companies with good labor relations usually make every effort to settle employee grievances quickly. In addition, a company that makes above-average profits, even while paying above-average wages to its employees is likely to have good labor relations. Finally, investors should pay attention to the attitude of top management toward employees.

8. Does the company have outstanding executive relations? Just as having good employee relations is important, a company must also cultivate the right atmosphere in its executive suite. Fisher noted that in companies where the founding family retains control, family members should not be promoted ahead of more able executives. In addition, executive salaries should be at least in line with industry norms. Salaries should also be reviewed regularly so that merited pay increases are given without having to be demanded.

9. Does the company have depth to its management? As a company continues to grow over a span of decades, it is vital that a deep pool of management talent be properly developed. Fisher warned investors to avoid companies where top management is reluctant to delegate significant authority to lower-level managers.

10. How good are the company's cost analysis and accounting controls? A company cannot deliver outstanding results over the long term if it is unable to closely track costs in each step of its operations. Fisher stated that getting a precise handle on a company's cost analysis is difficult, but an investor can discern which companies are exceptionally deficient--these are the companies to avoid.

11. Are there other aspects of the business, somewhat peculiar to the industry involved, which will give the investor important clues as to how outstanding the company may be in relation to its competition? Fisher described this point as a catch-all because the "important clues" will vary widely among industries. The skill with which a retailer, like Wal-Mart WMT or Costco COST, handles its merchandising and inventory is of paramount importance. However, in an industry such as insurance, a completely different set of business factors is important. It is critical for an investor to understand which industry factors determine the success of a company and how that company stacks up in relation to its rivals.

12. Does the company have a short-range or long-range outlook in regard to profits? Fisher argued that investors should take a long-range view, and thus should favor companies that take a long-range view on profits. In addition, companies focused on meeting Wall Street's quarterly earnings estimates may forgo beneficial long-term actions if they cause a short-term hit to earnings. Even worse, management may be tempted to make aggressive accounting assumptions in order to report an acceptable quarterly profit number.

13. In the foreseeable future will the growth of the company require sufficient equity financing so that the larger number of shares then outstanding will largely cancel the existing stockholders' benefit from this anticipated growth? As an investor, you should seek companies with sufficient cash or borrowing capacity to fund growth without diluting the interests of its current owners with follow-on equity offerings.

14. Does management talk freely to investors about its affairs when things are going well but "clam up" when troubles and disappointments occur? Every business, no matter how wonderful, will occasionally face disappointments. Investors should seek out management that reports candidly to shareholders all aspects of the business, good or bad.

15. Does the company have a management of unquestionable integrity? The accounting scandals that led to the bankruptcies of Enron and WorldCom should highlight the importance of investing only with management teams of unquestionable integrity. Investors will be well-served by following Fisher's warning that regardless of how highly a company rates on the other 14 points, "If there is a serious question of the lack of a strong management sense of trusteeship for shareholders, the investor should never seriously consider participating in such an enterprise."

Important Don'ts for Investors

In investing, the actions you don't take are as important as the actions you do take. Here is some of Fisher's advice on what you should not do.

1. Don't overstress diversification.

Investment advisors and the financial media constantly expound the virtues of diversification with the help of a catchy cliche: "Don't put all your eggs in one basket." However, as Fisher noted, once you start putting your eggs in a multitude of baskets, not all of them end up in attractive places, and it becomes difficult to keep track of all your eggs.

Fisher, who owned at most only 30 stocks at any point in his career, had a better solution. Spend time thoroughly researching and understanding a company, and if it clearly meets the 15 points he set forth, you should make a meaningful investment. Fisher would agree with Mark Twain when he said, "Put all your eggs in one basket, and watch that basket!"

2. Don't follow the crowd.

Following the crowds into investment fads, such as the "Nifty Fifty" in the early 1970s or tech stocks in the late 1990s, can be dangerous to your financial health. On the flip side, searching in areas the crowd has left behind can be extremely profitable. Sir Isaac Newton once lamented that he could calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of crowds. Fisher would heartily agree.

3. Don't quibble over eighths and quarters.

After extensive research, you've found a company that you think will prosper in the decades ahead, and the stock is currently selling at a reasonable price. Should you delay or forgo your investment to wait for a price a few pennies below the current price?

Fisher told the story of a skilled investor who wanted to purchase shares in a particular company whose stock closed that day at $35.50 per share. However, the investor refused to pay more than $35. The stock never again sold at $35 and over the next 25 years, increased in value to more than $500 per share. The investor missed out on a tremendous gain in a vain attempt to save 50 cents per share.

Even Warren Buffett is prone to this type of mental error. Buffett began purchasing Wal-Mart many years ago, but stopped buying when the price moved up a little. Buffett admits that this mistake cost Berkshire Hathaway shareholders about $10 billion. Even the Oracle of Omaha could have benefited from Fisher's advice not to quibble over eighths and quarters.

The Bottom Line

Philip Fisher compiled a sterling record during his seven-decade career by investing in young companies with bright growth prospects. By applying Fisher's methods, you, too, can uncover tomorrow's dominant companies.




Quiz 505

There is only one correct answer to each question.
1 Fisher was the author of which classic investment book?
a. Security Analysis.
b. One Up on Wall Street.
c. Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits.

2 What sorts of companies did Fisher favor?
a. Young growth companies.
b. Companies with large dividends.
c. Companies in mature industries.

3 Fisher's time horizon for holding a well-selected stock can best be described as what?
a. Very long-term.
b. Short-term.
c. Three to five years.

4 Which statement would Fisher most agree with?
a. "I don't want a lot of good investments; I want a few outstanding ones."
b. "It is important to own a well-diversified portfolio of over 50 stocks to reduce risk."
c. "Large capitalization companies in mature and steady industries are the best investments."

5 According to Fisher, management quality:
a. Is irrelevent so long as the company is growing.
b. Should cause you to avoid a stock if there are serious stewardship issues.
c. Should not delegate to lower-level employees.


http://news.morningstar.com/classroom2/course.asp?docId=145662&CN=COM&page=1
http://news.morningstar.com/classroom2/printlesson.asp?docId=145662&CN=COM

European Stocks Find Fans among U.S. Funds

European Stocks Find Fans among U.S. Funds
Posted by: Ben Steverman on June 24, 2010

Despite a fiscal crisis in Europe that is dragging stocks lower day after day, European stocks are finding enthusiastic buyers among an unlikely group: American fund managers.

That’s the clear impression from the Morningstar Investment Conference, an annual gathering in Chicago of 1,350 financial advisors, fund managers and other investing pros.

On June 24, the second day of the three-day conference, the Dax Index, a measure of the German stock market, fell 1.4%, and the Euro Stoxx 50 index, covering 50 stocks from across Europe, dropped 2.2%, bringing its year-to-date losses to a negative 10.8%.

But also on June 24, managers of global stock funds were extolling the virtues of European equities in panel discussions.

The common theme for these investors: The problems in Europe are serious, but the stock market has overreacted and many European stocks are selling at terrific discounts.

“What’s happening in Europe is of great concern,” said Franklin Mutual Series portfolio manager Philippe Brugere-Trelat, “and that’s the main reason stock markets in Europe are so cheap.”

But, he said at a panel discussion on “stock picking across the globe”: Many companies headquartered in Europe are “not European at all” in the sense that a large portion of their sales and earnings come from outside the continent.

Furthermore, the weaker euro gives a big advantage to European companies selling outside Europe. “The Euro at $1.20 is a very big cherry on the cake in terms of earnings and sales,” Brugere-Trelat said. The Euro on June 24 was trading at $1.23, down 13.9% from the beginning of 2010.

At a different panel discussion, Artisan Partners portfolio manager Mark Yockey admitted he has a relatively high exposure to European stocks — especially to financial issues that could be most vulnerable to debt problems.

However, he said, many European banks are like his holding, ING, which is one of three main banks in the Netherlands. An oligopoly like that gives ING and other similarly situated banks extra strength and staying power. “We think once things settle down they’re going to grow their earnings,” he said.

Another speaker and manager of foreign stocks on the same panel, Janus Capital Management portfolio manager Brent Lynn, said he has a relatively lower exposure to Europe but that he’s ready to start buying.

“We have more compelling valuations in Europe than I’ve seen in a number of years,” he said. The sovereign debt problems make him “worried … but intrigued by the prospect of buying high quality companies” at cheap prices.

The deals are so good that Lynn said he was considering buying domestically oriented banks in Italy and Spain, two of the most indebted European nations. His targets are “franchises that we think will be survivors.”

If investors are convinced the Europe stock slide has gone too far, this could be a great time to buy. Extending that logic, the market’s continued slide means that European stocks could be an even better deal in the future.

Referring to this, Yockey won a laugh from his audience when he said: “The opportunities are getting better and better every day.”

http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2010/06/european_stocks_find_fans_among_us_funds.html

*****Long term investing based on Buy and Hold works for Selected Stocks

It sure beats FD rates and it is safe too.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tWENexpUrXS_RMxB7k73RgQ&output=html

Click: Dividend Yield Investing - Stock Selection is still the Key
http://myinvestingnotes.blogspot.com/2010/03/dividend-yield-investing.html

Click also:
How can the average investor improves his investment returns in stocks?

and here too:

Dividend-paying companies: major shareholders must be willing to share their profits with their investors through good dividend payments.

Learn to be long-term greedy when others are short-term fearful.

The bullish lesson?
Learn to be long-term greedy when others are short-term fearful. Going against the herd is never easy, but if you truly believe in a company's long-run demand story, major downturns can offer the very best buying opportunities. 

As Warren Buffett reminds us, "Only those who will be sellers of equities in the near future should be happy at seeing stocks rise. Prospective purchasers should much prefer sinking prices."

The bearish takeaway? 

There's just no substitute for knowing a business model cold.  The only way to reasonably predict a company's fortunes is to know exactly what sort of strategies management is pursuing, and questioning if they can actually create value by doing so.

As Buffett once wrote, "Equity Investment Strategy = Evaluate the Business in Its Entirety."

The final Foolish move
Investors often focus strictly on stock price movements, without realizing that developing a proper stock-picking process counts most.

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2010/03/03/tuesdays-hottest-stocks.aspx