Author Archives: John Chew

CASE STUDY on Wal-Mart Stores’ Discount Operations; Richard Feynman Video on An Original Thinker

Feynman Video on No Ordinary Genius

Richard Feynman was one of my heroes. Start your 2012 on an inspiring note by watching the video (link) below.

Throughout history, the Ayn Rand pointed out, the greatest heroes of mankind have been original thinkers who rejected the core beliefs of their societies, formed new ideas, and struggled for years against social norms to have the new theories accepted. Socrates, Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin, and Pasteur are all examples of this phenomenon.

An individual—a thinking individual—is not a helpless pawn of his society, its educational system, and its core beliefs. He is able to look at the realities of the world, at nature, at facts, and think independently. This is how many individuals come to reject the beliefs of their families, their clergy, their teachers, their professors, their governments, and their societies in general. This is how independent freethinkers have arisen, battled against the entrenched conservative beliefs of their societies, and ultimately established the truth of their new theories. –Andrew Bernstein

Richard Feynman is no ordinary genius. He was one of the world’s greatest physicists who loved Go-Go Girls (yeah!) and bongo drums–an inspiring 90 minute video on a creative, free-thinker. Lessons for the investor?

http://youtu.be/Fzg1CU8t9nw

Wal-Mart (“WMT”) Case Study

Wal-Mart Case Study on its Stores’ Discount Operations (9-387-018).  Please read the first 112 pages of Competition Demystified in the Value Vault[1]. You will find the above case there. Please describe why you think Wal-Mart has been so successful? Please support your assumptions with data and figures from the case.  Will WMT continue to be successful? How would you determine if WMT will maintain its success.  What about competition? Hint: Sam Walton was a superb entrepreneur and CEO but leave him out of your analysis.  For those who wish to learn more about Wal-Mart and Sam Walton then go here: http://www.amazon.com/Sam-Walton-Made-America/dp/0553562835/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1325609378&sr=8-1

You have until Monday of next week to complete this case.  To get yourself in the mood to complete a case study: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4j25Pj4JyQ and part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ7aVrtTbg0

Yes, it is lonely and hard work, but you can save $80,000 per year (yes, you don’t receive the MBA credential).

This case will take you a few hours but the effort will be rewarded because you must know the sources of competitive advantage for one of the greatest companies of all-time.

We will begin to review your 112 pages of reading this week plus include other case studies to reinforce concepts.

A blog on investing and competitive analysis from a student of mine and fine investor: http://thefallibleinvestor.com/

Quiz on Economic Thinking

We may have to read Capitalism by Reisman (in VALUE VAULT plus the Study Guide on Capitalism) to deepen our understanding of costs, prices, economies of scale and diminishing marginal utility.

Can someone reply to these questions?

  1. What is inflation?
  2. Do rising wages cause inflation?
  3. Should businesses pay an excess profits tax on the raising of prices of their products if excessive?

Take no more than three minutes.

May 2012 exceed your expectations.

[1] To enter the VALUE VAULT please email me at aldridge56@aol.com with VALUE VAULT in the subject heading.

Questions from Readers-Emerging Franchises & Fusion Investing

Questions from a Reader:

Subject: Competition Demystified+Fusion Investing

QUESTION

I am currently reading Bruce Greenwald’s Competition Demystified, and I am not finished. However, I remember asking you before about emerging franchise, and you replied that Prof. Greenwald covered this topic in the book. I would appreciate if you can direct me to this chapter and where he exactly tackles the strategic issue of emerging franchise and company strategic actions.

Answer: Let me be sure we have the same definition for emerging franchise. This would be a franchise in its early to middle stage of (typically rapid)growth like Wal-Mart (WMT) in the early 1970s and 1980s as it grew through local economies of scale on the edges of its local territorial advantage. WMT could earn high returns while also redeploying its capital at the same high  returns (high marginal returns to capital) thus funding its growth and compounding capital at high rates for a 20-year period. No wonder WMT created more millionaires than any other company in history.  Now, of course, WMT can not grow by redeploying its capital at the same rates since it has saturated the US market, and the company does not have unique cost advantages in foreign markets. The first two cases on Wal-Mart and Coors will cover local economies of scale. See pages 77 to 112 of the book, Competition Demystified.

Then you have entrant strategies for a company trying to enter against established incumbents like Kiwi enters the airline industry–see pages 238 to 254. The entrant has to go into niches that are not of interest to the larger incumbents, then build from there. Note the Japanese Car companies entrant strategies into the US auto market–from small, fuel-efficient cars to Lexus! The Japanese took market share from the Americans.

Now if you are thinking of smaller, dominant companies in their niches, you might enjoy reading, Hidden Champions of the 21st Century: Success Strategies of Unknwn World Market Leaders by Hermann Simon (2009)

QUESTION 

  1. What is your take on Fusion investing approach (blending Fundamental (value approach) +Technical + Quant+ behavioral + intermarket ). I noticed some successful money managers who are in the minority adopted this approach successfully over long periods of time. Names like : John Palicka, who this week published his book on fusion investing, John Bolton and Michael Burry).. http://www.amazon.com/Fusion-Analysis-Fundamental-Technical-Risk-Adjusted/dp/0071629386#_

Mr. Palicka is  a CFA and CMT. The value of a CFA designation: http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/apr2011/bs20110426_844533.htm

Answer: I don’t know if John Bolton and Michael Burry use technical analysis, but any tool which helps you understand who is on the other side of the trade from you is helpful. If I saw Seth Klarman, Einhorn, and Buffett on the Buy-side against my short position, I would seriously recheck my work or at least find out their reasons for owning the company. You have to respect the other side or else you discover the fool is you.

I am not an expert on technical analysis but I do know that when I traded soybeans and T-Bonds on the trading floor in Chicago (1980s) finding out who the supra-marginal buyer or seller was and then doing the opposite was almost a guarantee of making money at least in the short-term (one hour to three days). The price would rally up for two or three days into long-term resistance and the chart breakout players would come into the market following the price, and I would sell responsively into their demand because the market orders were from small, weaker speculators whom were buying from commercial hedgers. I wanted to be with the strong against the weak.

If you see prices flat-lining for several years, it means that there is little new supply or demand, and people become used to this price level. If there is a breakout to the upside (especially if the marginal cost of production is above average costs), then I would buy on the higher price. There are economic reasons behind the price rise. However, what possible edge can you have (Barriers to Entry?) reading charts since everyone sees the same thing as you do? nGo where you have the biggest edge.

But I do not know in what exact proportions to “fuse” all the different methods.  All I am trying to do is figure out what something is worth and then pay a whole lot less for it. For most companies and for much of the time, I can’t figure it out. But there are certain times when the world goes crazy and prices become extreme then even I can find opportunity.

I can guarantee that too much complexity will hurt your results.  Also, I am extremely skeptical that Mr. Palicka with a CFA, CMT writing a book will provide anything new.  Having a CFA, CMT may not hurt you, but I do believe those designations are neither necessary nor sufficient to help you as an investor. I know that comment may find much disagreement, but I am happy to post such rebuttals in the comments section. At the risk of alienating some readers, I will call it; like I see it–like the umpire says.

I have heard Joel G. explain that despite going to Wharton MBA school, he learned value investing through Graham and Buffett and then his application of those principles.  There is no secret to investing–just relentless application over years with the right framework and independent thinking.

If you want a philosophical background to think for yourself then read, Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.

QUESTION

I would also appreciate if you can share your reading list with us.

Do you mean a recommended list or what I am reading now? My current reading list is below. Since I live five blocks from a good research library, I can check out many interesting books on diverse subjects.  Also, I often just skim books.

  1. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William Shirer–with the passage of the expanded “Patriot” Act, the U.S. President can arbitrary detain, torture and execute American citizens without Habeas Corpus and Due Process provided that they are “Terrorists.” How convenient. I don’t like my neighbor because his dog uses my motorcycle like a fire-hydrant.  He makes the perfect terrorist suspect don’t you think? …….So I want to study the lessons of Fascism and totalitarianism.
  2. The Great A&P and The Struggle for Small Business America by Marc Levinson. This books shows that corporate goliaths are not immune to the insistent forces of competition and change. Perhaps I can find a case study here.
  3. The Ikea Edge by Anders Dahlvig. Some people read Wall Street Research, but I find business histories on companies and CEO’s  a great education for studying competitive advantage and how companies evolve–the inevitable ebb and flow of success and failure.
  4. Uprising by George Magnus. Will emerging markets shape or shake the world economy? I have traveled and worked in Brazil, Cuba and other countries. I am not so enthused as the public hype about emerging markets.  Take China–how does a dictatorial regime that is directing the banking sector (similar to the Fed in the US) not go through a massive boom/bust? Brazil’s business regulations require 200,000 pages of fine print. Absurd! No wonder large segments of the economy operate on the black market. Using the best lawyers, we opened a business in Brazil after ten months–ten months of paperwork, delays and denial.

Thanks for the questions.

Investor Personality Tests; Research; Birth of Plenty; MBA Course on Hedge Funds

Investor Personality Tests

If you take these tests quickly and truthfully perhaps you will gain insights into your strengths/weaknesses as an investor. Have fun. http://www.marktier.com/Main/ipp.php

http://www.marketpsych.com/personality_test.php#T3

http://www.myprivatebanking.com/UserFiles/file/MyPrivatebanking%20Investment%20Personality%20Test.pdf

Unfortunately, if your test results were like mine, you will have little choice but to receive therapy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UpL3ncoK99U

A Recommended Web-Site

Jason Zweig: http://www.jasonzweig.com/resources.html

Successful investing is about controlling the controllable. You can’t control what the market does, but you can control what you do in response. In the long run, your returns depend less on whether you pick good investments than on whether you are a good investor.

The first step to reaching your financial goals is to make sure you set goals that are reachable. Your expectations must be realistic. The stock market is not going to provide a high return just because you need it to.

The second step is to recognize what you are up against. Despite what all the daily market reports make it sound like, investing is not a game, a sport, a battle, or a war; it is not an endurance contest in a hostile wilderness. Investing is simply the struggle for self-control – the unrelenting effort to keep yourself from becoming your own worst enemy.

The market is not perfectly efficient, but it is mostly efficient most of the time. Attempting to beat the market may often be entertaining, but it is seldom rewarding. There’s nothing wrong with gambling on poor odds, as long as you admit honestly that what you’re doing is gambling and as long as you put only a tiny proportion of your wealth at risk……

Risk is a function of probabilities and consequences – not just how likely you are to be right but how badly you will suffer if you turn out to be wrong. Investors tend to be overconfident about the accuracy of their own analysis-and to underestimate how keenly they will kick themselves if that analysis is mistaken. Understanding your own shortcomings as an investor is far more important to your long-term success than analyzing the pros and cons of individual investments.

In the short run, hares have more fun; but in the long run, it’s always the tortoises who win the race.

The Strategy of Rich vs. Poor Countries

Video Lecture–How the world became rich: The Birth of Plenty by William Bernstein (58 minutes). This is an enjoyable romp through economic, political and financial history that explains how countries create wealth. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTUZXwQwUJM from http://www.efficientfrontier.com/ Another great resource.

TREASURE CHEST for Research Sources

An amazing collection of academic research on securities and historical financial data here (need prices on stock from 1825? How about on the Shanghai Stock Exchange?): http://viking.som.yale.edu/ Follow the links.

For example: MBA course on hedge funds: Strategy and tactics here: http://viking.som.yale.edu/will/hedge/Hedge%20Funds%202005.htm

Strategy Lesson: The benefits of focus and specialization-A Gunslinger. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks7-A-7Zvak&feature=related  & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeFpM2OEWPs&feature=related

The duality of man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMEViYvojtY

 

Why the Study of Competitive Advantage and HAPPY NEW YEAR

Life is my college. May I graduate well, and earn some honors.” –Louisa May Alcott, American writer

I will be posting almost exclusively on strategic logic as we study Competition Demystified by Bruce Greenwald (in the Value Vault, see ABOUT, http://csinvesting.org/about/) in early 2012. Now is the time to voice a complaint, comment or suggestion if you have reservations about our impending trek. Understanding financial statement analysis, studying market history and other great investors are all part of your investment journey.  The gap, I see, in the education of many is in understanding competitive advantages. There is no way around studying case studies and thinking hard about the subject.

The most profound effect studying competitive analysis, franchises, and barriers to entry as an investor has been to understand how rare structural competitive advantages really are. And the great businesses that can grow and redeploy capital at high rates are precious and difficult to find. Companies are often non-franchise, asset-type investments that an investor should buy only when there is a huge discount (read: massive disappointment, despair and disgust with the business) between reproduction and earnings power value (See Greenwald Lecture Notes here: http://wp.me/p1PgpH-23). If you are similarly influenced, you will be much more discerning in your investments. You may even invest as Buffett suggests, with a 20-hole punch-card.  Much of your investment life will be spent reading while waiting for the perfect pitch.

BUFFETT

Back to why our study of Competition Demystified is critical. Buffett is a keen student of business franchises as he was tutored by Charlie Munger when they bought See’s Candy.

(Source 1983 Berkshire Annual Report and Letter to Shareholders). Despite the volume problem, See’s strengths are many and important.  In our primary marketing area, the West, our candy is preferred by an enormous margin to that of any competitor (Regional/Local Economies of Scale).

You also alluded to getting a return on the amount of capital invested in the business.
 How do you determine what is the proper price to pay for the business?

Buffett: It is a tough thing to decide but I don’t want to buy into any business I am not terribly sure of. So if I am terribly sure of it, it probably won’t offer incredible returns. Why should something that is essentially a cinch to do well, offer you 40% a year? We don’t have huge returns in mind, but we do have in mind not losing anything. We bought See’s Candy in 1972, See’s Candy was then selling 16 m. pounds of candy at a $1.95 a pound and it was making 2 bits a pound or $4 million pre-tax. We paid $25 million for it—6.25 x pretax or about 10x after tax. It took no capital to speak of. When we looked at that business—basically, my partner, Charlie, and I—we needed to decide if there was some untapped pricing power there. Where that $1.95 box of candy could sell for $2 to $2.25. If it could sell for $2.25 or another $0.30 per pound that was $4.8 on 16 million pounds. Which on a $25 million purchase price was fine. We never hired a consultant in our lives; our idea of consulting was to go out and buy a box of candy and eat it.

See’s Candy

What we did know was that they had share of mind in California. There was something special. Every person in Ca. has something in mind about See’s Candy and overwhelmingly it was favorable. They had taken a box on Valentine’s Day to some girl and she had kissed him. If she slapped him, we would have no business. As long as she kisses him, that is what we want in their minds. See’s Candy means getting kissed. If we can get that in the minds of people, we can raise prices. I bought it in 1972, and every year I have raised prices on Dec. 26th, the day after Christmas, because we sell a lot on Christmas. In fact, we will make $60 million this year. We will make $2 per pound on 30 million pounds. Same business, same formulas, same everything–$60 million bucks and it still doesn’t take any capital.

And we make more money 10 years from now. But of that $60 million, we make $55 million in the three weeks before Christmas. And our company song is: “What a friend we have in Jesus.” (Laughter). It is a good business. Think about it a little. Most people do not buy boxed chocolate to consume themselves, they buy them as gifts—somebody’s birthday or more likely it is a holiday. Valentine’s Day is the single biggest day of the year. Christmas is the biggest season by far. Women buy for Christmas and they plan ahead and buy over a two or three-week period. Men buy on Valentine’s Day. They are driving home; we run ads on the Radio. Guilt, guilt, guilt—guys are veering off the highway right and left. They won’t dare go home without a box of Chocolates by the time we get through with them on our radio ads.  So that Valentine’s Day is the biggest day.

Can you imagine going home on Valentine’s Day—our See’s Candy is now $11 a pound thanks to my brilliance. And let’s say there is candy available at $6 a pound. Do you really want to walk in on Valentine’s Day and hand—she has all these positive images of See’s Candy over the years—and say, “Honey, this year I took the low bid.” And hand her a box of candy. It just isn’t going to work. So in a sense, there is untapped pricing power—it is not price dependent. (Source: Buffett’s 1998 Speech to Univ. of FL Business School Students)

Charlie Munger on the Mental Model of Microeconomics

Strategic logic or microeconomics is one of the mental models that Charlie Munger suggests you know cold.

http://www.tilsonfunds.com/MungerUCSBspeech.pdf

Too Much Emphasis on Macroeconomics

My fourth criticism is that there’s too much emphasis on macroeconomics and not enough on microeconomics. I think this is wrong. It’s like trying to master medicine without knowing anatomy and chemistry. Also, the discipline of microeconomics is a lot of fun. It helps you correctly understand macroeconomics. And it’s a perfect circus to do. In contrast, I don’t think macroeconomics people have all that much fun. For one thing they are often wrong because of extreme complexity in the system they wish to understand.

Case study: Nebraska Furniture Mart’s new store in Kansas City

Let me demonstrate the power of microeconomics by solving a microeconomic problem. One simple problem is this: Berkshire Hathaway just opened a furniture and appliance store in Kansas City [www.nfm.com/store_kansascity.asp]. At the time Berkshire opened it, the largest selling furniture and appliance store in the world was another Berkshire Hathaway store, selling $350 million worth of goods per year. The new store in a strange city opened up selling at the rate of more than $500 million a year. From the day it opened, the 3,200 spaces in the parking lot were full. The women had to wait outside the ladies restroom because the architects didn’t understand biology. (Laughter). It’s hugely successful.

Well, I’ve given you the problem. Now, tell me what explains the runaway success of this new furniture and appliance store, which is outselling everything else in the world? (Pause). Well, let me do it for you. Is this a low-priced store or a high-priced store? (Laughter). It’s not going to have a runaway success in a strange city as a high-priced store. That would take time. Number two, if it’s moving $500 million worth of furniture through it, it’s one hell of a big store, furniture being as bulky as it is. And what does a big store do? It provides a big selection. So what could this possibly be except a low-priced store with a big selection?

But, you may wonder, why wasn’t it done before, preventing its being done first now? Again, the answer just pops into your head: it costs a fortune to open a store this big. So, nobody’s done it before. So, you quickly know the answer. With a few basic concepts, these microeconomic problems that seem hard can be solved much as you put a hot knife through butter. I like such easy ways of thought that are very remunerative. And I suggest that you people should also learn to do microeconomics better.  END.

You should read the first three chapters of Competition Demystified to explain how Mrs. Bee developed Nebraska Furniture Market’s advantage.  We will review those chapters in the next several posts while delving deeply into minimum efficient scale and economies of scale.

Whether you learn about microeconomics here or elsewhere, it is critical to apply these mental models in your business analysis.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Book on Moats; Best Blogs; Ask Greenblatt; Eddie Lampert

Moats

If you want to contribute to a book on Moats: The Competitive Advantages of Buffett & Munger Businesses go here: http://www.frips.com/book.htm. You can read a few sample chapters of the book. I disagree with Buffett’s comment that Net-Jets has a competitive advantage—perhaps the company’s scale reduces its deadhead costs—but the company has yet to show consistently high profitability. I am not recommending this book/project, only making you aware. I hope when we complete our study of competitive advantages, you could surpass the analysis found there.

Ask Joel Greenblatt a question by Jan. 21, 2012 here: http://www.morningstar.com/Conference/speakers?referid=B4112

 BEST BLOGS

What are the best blogs for intelligent investors? See for yourself: http://www.fatpitchfinancials.com/2048/what-are-the-top-5-blogs-or-online-resources-you-particularly-enjoy-reading/#more-2048  or to vote and receive a recent listing: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dEtsSEVOaFNpU3JQRW5CY1FsSUxkVEE6MQ

An extensive list of blogs found here: http://www.valuewalk.com/links/

Below is an assortment of blogs I have come across. The bolded links are ones I have found to be informative, but with little time to read all of these blogs, I leave the rest up to you. Your first priority in learning about investing should be to read original company filings with your accounting textbook alongside and/or the works of the masters like Buffett, Fisher, Graham, Klarman, Greenblatt, and Munger. However, any blog which informs and encourages you to think is worth a perusal. Learn from many sources, just don’t fritter away your time.

www.valueinvestorsclub.com

http://www.magicformulainvesting.com/welcome.html

www.greenbackd.com 

http://fundooprofessor.wordpress.com/

http://www.simoleonsense.com/

www.thomasewoods.com

www.mises.org

www.lewrockwell.com

http://www.jamesaltucher.com/

http://www.grahamanddoddsville.net/

www.newyorker.com (good, in-depth business stories)

www.brontecapital.com Also, read his analysis of Fairholme (name not mentioned) here: http://www.brontecapital.com/peformance/2011/Client%20Letter%20201111.pdf. SHLD, one of Fairholme’s holdings, is mentioned in the last posting. This is a lesson in correlated bets of a NON-diversified portfolio. If wrong, you go down with the ship.

www.fatpitchfinancials.com

http://www.footnoted.com/

http://www.whopperinvestments.com/are-you-an-asset-based-or-franchise-value-investor#more-836

http://variantperceptions.wordpress.com/

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/

http://pink-sheets.blogspot.com/

http://www.distressed-debt-investing.com/

http://www.farnamstreetblog.com/articles/

http://www.oldschoolvalue.com/

http://boombustblog.com/

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/

http://www.stableinvestor.com/

http://insidercow.com/

http://thebrowser.com/

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/

http://www.barelkarsan.com/

Eddie Lampert meets a bad business

Buffett does acknowledge that even the best managers (Eddie Lampert)  will flounder if the business is not intrinsically sound. His most telling comment on management is:

‘When a management with a reputation for brilliance tackles a business with a reputation for poor fundamental economics, it is the reputation of the business that remains intact.’

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sears Holding Corp. announces its struggles. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sears-holdings-provides-update-2011-12-27?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts

There are many lessons here: allocation of capital, operating a non-franchise business, a bad business, and hubris. We shall return again.

Economics and QE2 Explained with Cartoons; A Future Case Study: Amazon

The First Economist

Hayek’s Road to Serfdom

A Reader’s Digest Version–thirty pages–of Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, plus cartoons.  Hayek and Mises both predicted the inevitable collapse of socialism and fascism. http://www.cblpi.org/ftp/Econ/RoadtoSerfdom

_ReadersDigest_and_Cartoon_Versions.pdf

Quantitative Easing explained in a cartoon video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16CkS-k  About five million viewers have watched this video of two bears (dogs?) asking simple questions about monetary policy.  The theory at issue here is Keynesianism  which assumes that stimuli from government, a category that includes QE2 (Quant. Easing for the second time), are beneficial. Really? Why?  If economics can neither be explained in plain English nor understood then it’s probably bunk.

For a Future Case Study on Moats

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/17/business/at-amazon-jeff-bezos-talks-long-term-and-means-it.html?_r=2&ref=jamesbstewart&pagewanted=print

Amazon Says Long Term And Means It By

In 1997, the year Amazon.com went public, its chief executive, Jeff Bezos, issued a manifesto: “It’s all about the long term,” he said. He warned shareholders “we may make decisions and weigh tradeoffs differently than some companies” and urged them to make sure that a long-term approach “is consistent with your investment policy.” Amazon’s management and employees “are working to build something important, something that matters to our customers, something that we can tell our grandchildren about,” he added.

But shareholders seem never to have gotten the message. In October, when Amazon reported strong third-quarter revenue growth and earnings that were pretty much what the company had predicted, but indicated it would be spending more to support continued growth, investors hammered its stock. Amazon shares dropped nearly $30, or 13 percent, to $198 a share in just one day, Oct. 25. This week they were trading even lower, at $181.

Over the years, Amazon shares have been periodically buffeted by short-term results that seem to have disappointed investors. “The stock has been bumpy,” a Morgan Stanley analyst, Scott Devitt, told me this week. “Investor trust seems to go in cycles.”

The notion that public companies should maximize shareholder value by managing for the long term is pretty much gospel among good-governance proponents and management experts. Jack Welch advanced the concept in a seminal 1981 speech at the Pierre Hotel in New York and elaborated on it in subsequent books and articles while running General Electric, when G.E. was widely lauded as the best-managed company in the country. It has been especially championed in Silicon Valley, where technology companies like Google have openly scorned Wall Street analysts and their obsession with quarterly estimates and results by refusing to issue earnings guidance.

Amazon, in particular, has been true to its word to manage for the long term. It remains one of the world’s leading growth companies and its stock has soared 12,200 percent since its public offering. In late October it reported quarterly revenue growth of 44 percent to almost $11 billion, which came on the heels of 80 percent growth a year ago. “We’re seeing the best growth which we’ve seen since 2000, meaning in 2010 and so far over the past 12 months ending September,” the chief financial officer, Thomas Szkutak, told investors in October. But operating earnings fell sharply to $79 million. While that was in line with most estimates, Amazon offered a forecast for the fourth quarter in which it said it might lose as much as $200 million or earn as much as $250 million, and even the high end would represent a 47 percent drop.

The reason Amazon is earning so little while selling so much is that it is spending so much on long-term growth. It’s opening 17 new fulfillment centers — airport hangar-size storage and shipping facilities — this year and aggressively cutting prices. Its profit margin for the quarter was just 2.4 percent, and it said it might be zero for the fourth quarter. (By comparison, Wal-Mart’s margins are 6 percent on revenue of $440 billion. )

Amazon seems to be taking customer focus to new levels, willing to run its ever-bigger global business while earning little or nothing in return. To the dismay of some, Mr. Bezos even takes a long-term view of price cuts. “With rare exceptions, the volume increase in the short term is never enough to pay for the price decrease,” he told shareholders in 2005. But that kind of thinking, he added, is “short term. We can estimate what a price reduction will do this week and this quarter. But we cannot numerically estimate the effect that consistently lowering prices will have on our business over five years or 10 years or more.” Selling at low prices may undercut profits, but they create “a virtuous cycle that leads over the long term to a much larger dollar amount of free cash flow, and thereby to a much more valuable Amazon.com,” Mr. Bezos said.

Amazon has done little to dampen speculation that it is selling its revamped Kindle e-reader devices and its recently introduced Fire tablet at a loss. Amazon simply doesn’t think like most other companies. When “we think about the economics of the Kindle business, we think about the totality,” Mr. Szkutak said. “We think of the lifetime value of those devices. So we’re not just thinking about the economics of the device and the accessories. We’re thinking about the content.” In other words, profits will come down the road when Kindle users buy content through Amazon.

“If everything you do needs to work on a three-year time horizon, then you’re competing against a lot of people,” Mr. Bezos told reporter Steve Levy last month in an interview in Wired. “But if you’re willing to invest on a seven-year time horizon, you’re now competing against a fraction of those people, because very few companies are willing to do that. Just by lengthening the time horizon, you can engage in endeavors that you could never otherwise pursue. At Amazon we like things to work in five to seven years. We’re willing to plant seeds, let them grow—and we’re very stubborn.”

Whatever they might say about long-term shareholder value, this is simply too much for many of today’s investors, many of whom are hedge funds, pension funds and institutions who measure their results — and earn their pay — based on quarterly benchmarks. “If you look at the average length of ownership of a stock, the period is declining,” Mr. Devitt said. “Amazon is marching to a different drumbeat, which is long term. Are they doing the right thing? Absolutely. Amazon is growing at twice the rate of e-commerce as a whole, which is growing five times faster than retail over all. Amazon is bypassing margins and profits for growth.”

For Amazon, long-term growth confers two major benefits: the kind of economies of scale enjoyed by Wal-Mart and eliminating or weakening competitors. The book retailer Borders has been forced out of business and a rival, Barnes & Noble, is struggling. Best Buy, the electronics retailer, reported this week that earnings plunged 29 percent, despite higher revenue and a surge of Black Friday sales, because the chain had to cut prices and offer free shipping to compete with Amazon. Amazon inflamed many competitors this holiday season by offering extra discounts to shoppers who took mobile devices into stores and then used them to compare prices and order from Amazon.

The revamped Kindle line and especially the new Fire tablet illustrate Amazon’s long-term strategy. “Amazon has much greater ambitions than near-term profits or margins,” Ken Sena, an Evercore analyst, said.

“Some people are griping that the Fire is sub-par,” Mr. Sena continued. “It’s not an iPad. And some investors are confused. Why would they give it away, even lose money on it? But getting it into as many hands as possible is important to them. They’ll use it to drive higher physical and digital good sales on their site. And these devices also bring Amazon deeper into the local retail opportunity, not to mention the app marketplace potential that exists. Media sales on the device are just the beginning. I think Amazon understands all these components.”

The Fire “isn’t meant to be another iPad,” Mr. Devitt noted. “It’s a device to sell Amazon content. All indications are it’s a success. It’s the most gifted item on Amazon. It’s too soon to tell, but it seems more promising than it’s getting credit for.” This week Amazon said it had sold more than a million Kindles a week for the last three weeks.

Nearly 15 years after Amazon’s public offering, it’s safe to say that Mr. Bezos and his colleagues have realized their goal of creating a company to tell their grandchildren about. But one of these days Amazon has to deliver on its promise of higher margins and profits, however long term that may turn out to be. “To many investors, long term is a year,” Mr. Devitt said. “For Bezos, he’s looking at a 10- to 20-year time line. When he says long term, he means 2020 or 2030.”

Now from http://ycharts.com/  Amazon: Free Shipping and Low Prices Don’t Add Up To a Moat By Jeff Bailey

The smartest guy in financial journalism, James B. Stewart, earlier this month in his Saturday New York Times column, praised Amazon (AMZN) for taking the long view in building its business and criticized the company’s critics for failing to appreciate the company’s steadfastness. (See above.)

Amazon revenue continues to rise spectacularly. Its profits, however, have fallen, as margins are squeezed by aggressive product pricing and surging use of the company’s popular free-shipping option. So, the question seems to be, will those strategies help Amazon build what Warren Buffett would call a moat – a protective fortress around its business that long-term allows it to reap substantial profits and build value?

Stewart, author of several fabulous business books, including “Den of Thieves,” about the late-1980s Wall Street scandals, and a Pulitzer Prize winner for his work at the Wall Street Journal, is such a well-regarded thinker about companies that we at YCharts were forced to stop and consider his point of view; he’s not just another pro-Amazon tout.

We have regularly written that we view Amazon as overvalued and have marveled at how its recent growth has made it less profitable, not more so.

The critics have certainly influenced Amazon’s share price in recent months.

Amazon.com Stock Chart by YCharts

Yet the PE remains in the 90s, and this for a company with a plunging and razor-thin profit margin.

Amazon.com PE Ratio Chart by YCharts

Stewart’s admiration of Amazon certainly makes sense if you’re an Amazon customer. The service is wonderful, and like so many American shoppers during this holiday season we have ventured into actual stores very few times because shopping online – from Amazon and its many imitators – is so much easier. That change in consumer behavior seems to suggest a moat is forming. But does the moat encircle Amazon protectively, or is it instead a moat encircling bricks-and-mortar retailers into a market-share-losing ghetto?

The brutal price-comparison ethic Amazon unleashed on the book business years ago helped it take huge market share. But it also rendered the book business less profitable for all players. And as that ethic unfolds across product categories – aided most recently by Amazon’s Price Check app – results at Amazon and Best Buy (BBY) would suggest the greater transparency on pricing is helping consumers, but not so much retailers.

Running Borders out of business, sadly for Amazon and other booksellers, didn’t make the book business more profitable again. Rather, the pricing model Amazon brought to the market seems to have rendered book retailing a crummier business. And it’s also unlikely that consumer electronics and the other categories Amazon is transforming will, once a few large competitors go bust, miraculously become more profitable. There isn’t a shortage of players in any of these markets and the consumer behavior Amazon helped spur – constant price shopping, demanding free or reduced-priced shipping – would seem impossible to reverse.

The Wall Street Journal recently noted the toll free shipping is taking on retailers’ profits. The Journal, noting Amazon’s shrinking margins, said, “Free shipping has likely played a meaningful role in this, although the company hasn’t detailed the cost.”

Actually, Amazon does detail the cost in its 10-K filings (page 26). Its net shipping costs – total shipping costs minus what Amazon collects from customers for shipping – totaled $1.39 billion in 2010, up 63% from $849 million the prior year. Total sales were only growing by 40%. So net shipping costs were equal to 4% of sales in 2010, versus 3.4% in 2009. That trend may have accelerated during 2011, and could largely explain why profits have fallen.

The strategy Stewart lauds is doing a bang-up job of boosting revenue. And consumers love Amazon’s service. But it’s hard to see how the company is going to fatten its margins when competition remains fierce; consumers have been taught to demand low-low prices (and free shipping); and beyond elegant technology, Amazon’s main tools for attracting consumers are both margin killers — low-low prices and free shipping.

Certainly the Kindle is an attempt to build a moat around Amazon’s book business. Selling the devices at what has been reported as a loss suggests the company sees future payoff from Kindle-owning consumers downloading their reading (no shipping expense here) exclusively from Amazon. But in the more general merchandise categories that increasingly make up Amazon’s sales, it’s hard to see how to insert such a loyalty device.

Stewart’s argument seems in part based on the notion that, forgoing current profits, Amazon must be managing for the long term. But if your very pricey stock is reliant on spectacular revenue growth, a cynic might reason that a strategy of adding sales — even if they’re increasingly less profitable (or money-losing) – appears short-term and somewhat desperate.

Amazon management is smart, as is Jim Stewart, and investors could be inviting ruin by shorting Amazon shares. But to us, the company hasn’t made a persuasive case that it’s building a moat – just that it’s delivering great service and selling stuff cheaper than the next guy.   End.

Let’s revisit our study of whether Amazon has a competitive advantage or not after we finish our study of Competition Demystified (in the VALUE VAULT).

Good Companies on Sale and Tutorial on Net/Nets

                           Bernanke’s christmas present

If you can break away from the holiday cheer you might enjoy these articles. 

Good Companies on Sale

Yes, there is uncertainty, fear and bad news but this article has a good point:

Americas best companies are cheap, so Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year: http://www.gurufocus.com/news/156195/americas-best-companies-are-cheap–so-merry-christmas-and-a-prosperous-new-year

I can’t vouch for all the companies on the list, but you understand the general idea. Many great companies are relatively cheap compared to their historical valuations and current investment alternatives. Quality on sale. However, their valuations are down because investors view the future as slow growth and troubled.

Tutorial in Net/Nets

There are those of us who combine a portfolio of great companies at the right price (easier said than done!) with some asset-type of investments like net/nets.

If you go to www.gannononinvesting.com you can read his series on Net/Nets. A tutorial if you follow the links.

Back to the spiked eggnog.

Happy Holidays!

A good conscience is a continual Christmas. Benjamin Franklin

I must help Santa load the sleigh . I will return to posting after Christmas.

We will focus on competitive analysis starting with economies of scale.   In our study we want to identify the general principles behind why firms behave as they do, not in trying to develop lists of characteristics that lead to automatic success. There is no such list.  Perhaps you can tell I am not a fan of Jim Collins’ book, Good to Great or his other works. His books may be a commercial success because people want cookie-cutter, paint-by-numbers solutions to complex business problems. Good luck.

So get ready to work hard.

Meanwhile, I hope you don’t come across a Bad Santa:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx0B61X-aFE&feature=fvsr

Merry Christmas to all!

Misery, First Solar (FSLR), Invert

Johnson spoke well when he said that life is hard enough to swallow without squeezing in the bitter rind of resentment.  Charlie Munger

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

How to Guarantee Misery in Your Life

Below are tips from the great and the not-so-great on how to guarantee misery and second-rate achievement in your life.

Johnny Carson says,

  1. Ingesting chemicals in an effort to alter mood or perception;
  2. Envy, and
  3. Resentment.

John Chew pleads: Meet my Ex.    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5OlolbLXvw.    Not to be watched if squeamish.

Charlie Munger intones:

  1. Be unreliable. Do not faithfully do what you have engaged to do.
  2. Learn everything you possibly can from your own experience, minimizing what you learn vicariously from the good and bad experience of others, living and dead.
  3. Go down and stay down when you get your first, second, or third severe reverse in the battle of life.
  4. Avoid thinking creatively about problems. Never invert.

First Solar

Now to put our lessons to the test…

I read the news this morning…Oh boy. –The Beatles.

This morning I read a Bloomberg story discussing First Solar’s attractive valuation following its recent selloff.  Also analysts have rekindled takeover chatter. “First Solar is still profitable,” a Kaufman analyst explains. “So you are buying the best in the industry at a discount price. Certainly for both GE and Siemens (SI), it would diversify their energy platform.” FSLR trades at 60% of book value and 5 or 6 times trailing earnings.

If the Kaufman analyst said that to me, this is exactly how I would respond. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eXFxttxeaA

Why?  What is the strategic thinking you would need to do before considering this as an investment?

How could you have avoided this house of pain before the price drop?

 

http://ycharts.com/:

Subsidy Orgy Ending, First Solar’s Hangover is Just Beginning By Jeff Bailey

Ever been to a sporting event where, during a break in the action, they wheel out that clear booth, stick some poor sucker from the crowd inside, and cash is blown into the enclosure for a brief period of shameless money-grabbing?

The global boom in government subsidies to the solar panel industry went something like that, and one can see the brief and frenzied joy of that period in First Solar’s (FSLR) up-and-down stock chart, with today’s price a steep 90% or so below the peak.

The good times were good. Malaysia was handing out huge tax holidays for manufacturers, so First Solar built plants there. Germany seemed intent on covering every roof with solar panels, paid for in part by government subsidy, so First Solar sales were huge there. And not to be left out, the U.S., during its giddy economic stimulus days, offered cash grants for solar installations. Party on.

But, as with past alternative-energy orgies, the good times must come to an end. Goodbye to First Solar’s market cap of $20 billion. Jimmy Carter’s Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, known as PURPA, led to tens of billions of dollars of alternative energy projects, including some early and costly solar. But paying above-market electricity rates to subsidize the projects became so costly that PURPA was eventually curtailed.

Poor politicians can’t help themselves. They love stuff like solar and wind, which generate manufacturing and construction jobs and makes everyone involved seem so with it. More efficient energy projects – like ones that reduce consumption – are by comparison so boring, even if they make more sense.

Last week, in announcing reduced earnings projections for 2011 and 2012, First Solar’s CEO Mike Ahearn said, “we are recalibrating our business to focus on building and serving sustainable markets rather than pursuing subsidized markets.” Investors can count on thinner margins and all the hassles and expenses that go with building and operating huge energy projects. And solar remains a relatively expensive way to make power. Unless the brent crude oil price chart goes to $200 a barrel.

In the meantime, the stock is bound to look super cheap by some measures. A trailing PE of 5, of course, suggests some big adjustments ahead to the E.

But it won’t be until 2014, Ahearn said in a statement, that First Solar’s will “earn substantially all” of its revenues from non-subsidized markets. So the results until then are nothing to make long-term bets on. The last of the party is still winding down. End.

Thoughts on First Solar and Competitive Advantage

OK, I am not saying First Solar is not a buy at any price, but what did the Wall Street “analysts” not analyze.

Studying competitive advantage will help us as much in avoiding a house of pain as in finding profitable investments.

Fundamental Investors Struggle in 2011, Central Banks and Europe, Cholesterol

“Fullness of knowledge always and necessarily means some understanding of the depths of our ignorance, and that is always conducive to both humility and reverence.” — Robert A. Millikan

Do you wish to be great? Then begin by being. Do you desire to construct a vast and lofty fabric? Think first about the foundations of humility. The higher your structure is to be, the deeper must be its foundation. –Saint Augustine

Fundamental Value Investors Struggle This Year

http://www.frankvoisin.com/2011/12/21/hedge-fund-performance-by-strategy/

I am puzzled by the performance graph as compared to the S&P 500; the Index, not including dividends, is flat for the year.  How can the performance of so many money managers be so negative? Fundamental investors (whoever they are?) are down 20% or more! Thoughts? My guess is that managers had to liquidate on the violent sell-offs throughout the year due to client redemptions.

Are there any lessons here? If a money manager had simply held stocks and done nothing all year, clients’ accounts would be in the black with dividends included.

More on Central Banks in Europe:

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/in-brief/european-central-bank-turns-to-credit-expansion/

Lessons in Economics

Interest rates in a gold coin standard: http://lewrockwell.com/north/north1075.html An article on understanding interest rates. What would interest rates be under an expanding economy with no currency debasement?

A lecture on Keynes and Social credit. This lecture is really about how Central Banks “pay off” government debts through inflation. A lesson on how production creates demand. Productivity (Says Law) drives wealth creation and economic growth not consumption. http://www.garynorth.com/public/8874.cfm

Interesting Charts and Graphs this Past Year

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2011/12/atlantic-most-important-graphs-of-2011.html  Click on the links within this article. Remember correlation is not causation.

Health

With all the spiked eggnog you will be drinking over the holidays, you will need to know How to Interpret Cholesterol Test Results 

Can I hear your Primal Scream?