Category Archives: Investor Psychology

Lincoln, Start of Civil War, Analyzing Companies

If you study history or companies, always seek to read original documents. Read the actual speeches, the annual reports, the proxies rather than rely on what a reporter, analyst or your history teacher says about a historical event or company.  Read for yourself.  Note in a prior post, http://csinvesting.org/2011/09/21/learning-the-importance-of-studying-history/ Buffett studied the Great Depression by sitting in the Columbia Business School library reading through the newspapers of that period including the ads!

I learned in ninth-grade American history class that the American Civil
War (1861-1865) was started over the issue of slavery. As a good little boy, I
regurgitated back the facts and received an A in history.  Twenty years later, I became a fanatical Civil War buff and perused everything I could on that period. What I learned shocked me; I was bamboozled as a kid. I was not taught the true reason for the start of the Civil War which led to about 650,000 killed and millions more maimed. The Civil War was one of the defining historical events in U.S. history and its effects linger to this day.

Read Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address at the link below:

http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/1inaug.htm

If you were living in any of the southern states in 1861 and you read or
heard Lincoln’s speech, what would you think and feel? Remember that the Southern states were primarily exporters of cotton and other agricultural goods to the Northern states and Europe. What then started the Civil War? As history teaches over and over again, once war erupts, ending war is difficult.

I place my interpretation below along with historical context, but do not
read it until you form your own opinions based on the document you have read. Where do you disagree with my interpretations?

Defense of Slavery

The first point President Lincoln made was to defy anyone to find any evidence in any of his speeches or statements that he ever had any intention at all to disturb Southern slavery. He pledged his undying support for the protection of southern slavery, and said that it would be criminal
of him to not do so. In his own words, he quoted from an old speech of his: “I
have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of
slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do
so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

Furthermore, he said, the Republican Party was certainly aware that he did not favor interfering with Southern slavery when it nominated him. “Those who nominated and elected me did so with full knowledge that I had made this and many similar declarations and had never recanted them.”

To make the point even more forcefully, Lincoln quoted the Republican Party Platform plank which pledged the defense of southern slavery: “Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential . . . and we do denounce the lawless invasion by armed force of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter what pretext,
as among the gravest of crimes” (emphasis added). “Domestic
institutions,” of course, meant slavery.

“I now reiterate these statements,” Lincoln then announced to the world. He next pledged his “cheerful” enforcement of the constitutional protection of slavery, including the Fugitive Slave Act. He mentioned that all members of Congress swore an oath to obey the Constitution, which included the Fugitive Slave Clause, and proposed that a law be passed to further codify the responsibility of the federal government to see to it that runaway slaves were “delivered up” to their owners, as he put it. Such a law, he said, would command
unanimous support. (Keep in mind that, on the day of Lincoln’s first
inauguration, the seven states of the lower south had seceded and their
senators and representatives had left Washington). The overwhelming majority of Congress was composed of northerners who, Lincoln was sure, would unanimously support the stronger enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Clause.

Indeed, just two days earlier the Northern-dominated U.S. Senate passed a proposed constitutional amendment that would have forbidden the federal government from ever interfering with Southern slavery. This “first thirteenth amendment” read: “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State’ (U.S. House of Representatives, 106th Congress,
2nd Session, The Constitution of the United States of America: Unratified Amendments, Document No. 106-214, presented by Congressman Henry Hyde (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 31, 2000).

This amendment had passed the Northern-dominated House of Representatives on February 28, 1861. Two days after the amendment passed the Senate; Lincoln pledged his support for it in his first inaugural address: “I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution . . . has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose, not to speak of particular amendments, so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable” (emphasis added). Coming from the president of the
United States, this was a much stronger defense of slavery than was ever made by John C. Calhoun or any other southerner.

Higher Tariffs Imposed

On the same day that the U.S. Senate passed this “first thirteenth amendment,” President James Buchanan signed into law the Morrill Tariff, which more than doubled the average tariff rate. The U.S. House of Representatives had passed the bill during the 1859—60 session, long before Lincoln’s election or the secession of any southern state. It received only one vote from a congressman from one of the states that would eventually secede (Tennessee).

Lincoln was a protectionist for all of his political life; he owed his nomination to Pennsylvania protectionists; told a Pittsburgh audience two weeks before his inaugural that no issue — none — is more important to Congress than raising the tariff rate; and would further raise the tariff rate ten times during his administration. He was also aware that the last time the Whigs — which by then had been politically morphed into Republicans — attempted to double the average tariff rates, South Carolinians nullified the tariff, refused to collect it, and forced President Andrew Jackson to compromise and lower the hated 1828 “Tariff of Abominations.” Lincoln, however, was not about to back down as Andrew Jackson had done. On the issue of slavery, he was one hundred percent accommodating, even going so far as to support the enshrinement of southern slavery explicitly in the Constitution. But on the issue of tax collection he was one hundred percent uncompromising. Pay up or die,” he essentially told the South. Not in these exact words, but any Southerner might have taken that meaning.

Here’s what he actually said: “[T]here needs to be no bloodshed or
violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority.”
And how might it be “forced”? Failure on the part of any state to collect the newly doubled tariff, that’s how. After stating that he assumed the power to “possess the property and places belonging to the Government,” he said he was also obligated “to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using force against or among the people anywhere.”

The Confederates had offered to pay for any federal property on southern soil (federal forts were there for their protection anyway), as well as their share of the federal debt. Lincoln refused to even discuss this with them. Fully 95 percent of all federal revenue came from tariffs in 1860, and with the southern states seceding a large portion of that amount would go uncollected. The seceded states were not about to send any checks to Washington, D.C.  Fail to pay  the doubled tariff tax, Lincoln said, and there will be an  invasion. He would not back down to the South Carolina tax resisters, as Andrew Jackson did. (Two weeks after Fort Sumter, where no one was wounded or killed, Lincoln announced a naval blockade of the southern ports and gave only one reason for it: tariff collection).

Compared to Today

This would be the equivalent of President Obama saying, “My fellow Americans, we have decided to double everyone’s federal income tax rate. And if you refuse to pay, federal soldiers will be sent en mass to make you pay, burning out your homes and destroying your cities, towns, business and farms if necessary.” The south refused to pay, and Lincoln kept his word, launching a full-scale invasion of all the southern states and waging total war on them for four years, eventually killing 300,000 of them out of a population of approximately 9 million. This was three percent of the southern population. Standardizing for today’s population of
roughly 300 million that would be the equivalent of 8,800,000 American deaths.

States Joined the Union Voluntarily, But Forced to be in Perpetual Union?

Lincoln proclaimed that the Union, which he always spelled with capital letters, was “mystic.” This was a surprise to most Americans at the time, who believed that the union was voluntary and not mystical and perpetual. Indeed, when the Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union the words “perpetual union” were dropped and appear nowhere in the Constitution. This sudden insistence on keeping the union, which was in reality a compact of the free, independent, and sovereign states, intact at any price, only makes sense in light of Lincoln’s statements and actions regarding the tariff. Slavery was
more secure in the union than out of it, as both the abolitionist William Lloyd
Garrison and Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens publicly admitted.

But the union needed to be kept intact if sufficient taxes were to be collected for success of the Republican Party in fulfilling is 1860 Platform promise of massive corporate welfare spending on the railroad corporations and road-building companies (“internal improvements”). Without southern tariff collection this
could not be accomplished. Worse yet, the Confederate Constitution had outlawed protectionist tariffs altogether, creating a free-trade zone in the South. Much of the commerce of the world would have been diverted from Northern to Southern ports, which is why Republican Party-affiliated newspapers were calling for the bombardment of southern ports before Fort Sumter. Abraham Lincoln’s political career would have been ruined, and that was just unacceptable.[1]

Is Lincoln’s legacy drenched in blood?

10th Anniversary of Enron’s Collapse: Video

If you studied the prior post on the case study, then you know to do your own work in evaluating a company, ask simple questions, walk away if you are confused or uncertain, and do not blindly follow “expert” opinions.

If you have ever watched CNBC’s market experts (watching for extended periods of time could cause serious brain impairment), do you notice that never do you hear them say, “I don’t have the faintest clue where the economy or market is going.”  Few admit that they know they don’t know (Socrates).  This should leave you thinking, “If the people that know, don’t say, then the people who don’t know have the floor to themselves.”

To reinforce the above principles click below on the Marketwatch video discussing analysts biases in the history of Enron’s failure.

http://www.marketwatch.com/video/asset/10-years-ago-enron-scandal-changed-wall-street-2011-09-13/1218C6DE-6342-474A-8C71-FE341D3A376E#!1218C6DE-6342-474A-8C71-FE341D3A376E

If you still doubt the wisdom of not following analysts’ recommendations, you should go here:  http://www.turtletrader.com/analysts-bias.html

Of course, security analysts who work for underwriters are biased to give buy recommendations, but many investors do not realize that analysts have no clue how to value companies. Instead, these analysts futively attempt to guess next quarter’s earnings which may be meaningless to estimating the intrinsic value of a company.

Another problem with analyst “research” is that too often Wall Street analysts filter down information from the management of the company that they follow. In order to maintain a friendly relationship and stay “tuned in” as a respected source on a company, it is difficult for the analyst to reach negative conclusions that contradict management’s optimism. An industry analyst can ill afford to lose contact with the management of a significant company within an industry the analyst follows.

If you think this writer is a hardened cynic, I beg to differ. Wall Street has always worked this way. Go here: http://www.amazon.com/Where-Are-Customers-Yachts-Investment/dp/0471770892/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317224465&sr=8-1

The book is a humourous take on the lunacy of Wall Street in the 1920s and a great read. Same as it ever was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-io-kZKl_BI   (Click on minute 1.40)

To reiterate, if you do your own work then you won’t blindly be making the mistakes of another person, and–most importantly–you can correct your own mistakes. Minimizing errors is more helpful to long-term investment returns than picking winners. Long-term performance is highly correlated with error avoidance.

A valuable source of lessons on how to analyze companies and read annual reports can be found below–sorry, copy and paste into your url:

www.olsteinfunds.com/pdf/olstein_anniversary.pdf

Also, think of the time you save by not watching CNBC, reading security analysts’ reports and, instead, study Value-Line tear sheets and company annual reports to find investments (We will cover in a future post).  What you do not do is as important as what you do.

Feedback, criticism and complaints are  always welcome.

I want to take a moment to thank the one person reading this blog. Thanks Mom!

 

 

Answer to Case Study: So What Is It Worth?

If you haven’t tried the case study, go here:

http://csinvesting.org/2011/09/19/so-what-is-it-worth/

After 20 minutes to complete the case study, go here for my comments and analysis:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/66676207/Enron-Case-Study-So-What-is-It-Worth

The above scribd document has an Appendix on page 20 where you can find other links to more indepth studies of the company. A diligent student can continue to hone their analytical skills.

If you are not willing to read the primary documents like a company’s 10-K to understand the operational and financial characteristics of the company, then be prepared to feel like this (without a parachute) when investing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go9uekKOcKM&feature=fvst

Again, this case study should drive home the points of asking simple questions, walking away from the difficult and finally, showing humility. The legions of MBA and CFA analysts who blew up their clients may have more to do with the fact that they have neither competence nor humility rather than pure intelligence.

Update: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/lopsidedly-bullish-consensus-on-apple-2012-09-19?link=MW_story_popular

 

Learning: The Importance of Studying History

The Best Way to Learn?

Is this the best way to learn? Turn up the volume and watch the 61 second video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eXFxttxeaA

Immediate feedback is the best way to learn in a command and control situation. If you make a mistake in war, you may endanger your comrades.  Gomer Pyle’s error received swift punishment—slaps across the face. The sergeant may be harsh, but he is effective.

Investing is a more complex endeavor. You may act improperly (buy a stock after Cramer recommends it on CNBC) and make a profit, but lose money in the short-run while executing the proper process. One way to improve your perspective and discipline is to study history. You need a theory to place historical facts into a coherent understanding of reality.  If not, you could end up in hell like Mr. Alan Greenspan testifying before Congress in 2008. Go here and click on minute 49.30 (49th minute, 30th second).

Greenspan in hell http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/

Mr. Greenspan admits that his “model” of reality had a “flaw” in it.  He can barely speak cogently. Gee, I wonder why we are in a mess now. The entire video is worth watching but here again without a theoretical grasp of what causes booms and busts you would be persuaded that derivatives and their lack of regulation were the main causes of the crisis. Derivatives were  a tool used to hide or magnify leverage, but they were not the cause of the crisis. That is like saying machine guns cause murder. No, people who commit the crime using guns cause murder.

Death Therapy

It is too late for Mr. Greenspan. The solution for him is Death Therapy, a guaranteed cure:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?vw_bxkVFK3Wc&feature=related

You, the reader, have other options. Download A Study of Market History below:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/65814320/A-Study-of-Market-History-Through-Graham-Babson-Buffett-and-Others

I hope you begin your history lessons.

So What is it Worth?

Let’s take 15 minutes to look at assessing, valuing or passing on the case study with the link below:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/65500378/Case-Study-So-What-is-It-Worth

If you do the work, you will learn many moral, philosophical and business lessons from this case. I promise.

I will post late this week the “answer” or my analysis with further links on this company. We’ll have fun with this one.

The Secret of Successful Investing or A Pig Farmer Makes a Killing

Eventually we will discuss investable ideas but now we have to develop a reference library of readings and case studies to have a framework to place investments into context. Most of the investing public craves immediate gratification or as this song says, “Show me the money!” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaiSHcHM0PA. The goal of this blog is to teach others to fish not be given fish.

As Seth A. Klarman points out, “The real secret to investing is that there is no secret to investing. Every important aspect of value investing has been made available to the public many times over, beginning in 1934 with the First Edition of Security Analysis (1934). That so many people fail to follow this timeless and almost foolproof approach enables those who adopt it to remain successful.  The foibles of human nature that result in the mass pursuit of instant wealth and effortless gain seem certain to be with us forever. So long as people succumb to this aspect of their natures, value invest will remain, as it has been for 75 years, a sound and low-risk approach to successful long-term investing.” [1]

This post will help beginners learn more about how to think about prices. For  amusement let’s read what two writers describe as the “secret to investing.”

Advice  from Where Are the Customer’s Yachts? by Fred Schwed, Jr., 1940 (pages 180-182). A fantastic little book on the psychology of investing.

“For no fee at all I am prepared to offer to any wealthy person an investment program which will last a lifetime and will not only preserve the estate but greatly increase it. Like other great ideas, this one is simple:

When there is a stock-market boom, and everyone is scrambling for common stocks, take all your common stocks and sell them. Take the proceeds and buy conservative bonds. No doubt the stocks you sold will go higher. Pay no attention to this—just wait for the depression which will come sooner or later. When this depression—or panic—becomes a national catastrophe, sell out the bonds (perhaps at a loss) and buy back the stocks. No doubt the stocks will go still lower. Again pay no attention. Wait for the next boom. Continue to repeat this operation as long as you live, and you will have the pleasure of dying rich.

A glance at financial history will show that there never was a generation for whom this advice would not have worked splendidly. But it distresses me to report that I have never enjoyed the social acquaintance of anyone who managed to do it. It looks as easy as rolling off a log, but it isn’t. The chief difficulties, of course, are psychological.

It requires buying bonds when bonds are generally unpopular, and buying stocks when stocks are universally detested.

I suspect that there are actually a few people who do something like this, even though I have never had the pleasure of meeting them. I suspect it because someone must buy the stock that the suckers sell at those awful prices—a fact usually outside the consciousness of the public and of financial reporters.   An experienced reporter’s poetic account in the paper following a day of terrible panic reads this way:

Large selling was in evidence at the opening bell and gained steadily in volume and violence throughout the morning session. At noon a rally, dishearteningly brief, took place as a result of short covering. But a new selling wave soon threw the market into utter chaos, and during the final hour equities were thrown overboard in huge lots, without regard for price or value.

The public reads the papers, and reading the foregoing, it gets the impression that on that catastrophic day everyone sold and nobody bought, except that little band of shorts (who most likely didn’t exist). Of course, there is just no truth in that at all. If on that day the terrific “selling” amounted to seven million, three hundred and sixty-five thousand shares, the volume of the buying can also be calculated.   In this case it was 7,365,000 shares.”

— 

How Mr. Womack Made a Killing by John Train (1978)

The man never had a loss on balance in 60 years.

His technique was the ultimate in simplicity. When during a bear market he would read in the papers that the market was down to new lows and the experts were predicting that it was sure to drop another 200 points in the Dow, the farmer would look through a S&P Stock Guide and select around  30 stocks that had fallen in price below $10—solid, profit making, unheard of companies (pecan growers, home furnishings, etc.) and paid dividends. He would come to Houston and buy a $25,000 “package” of them.

And then, one, two, three or four years later, when the stock market was bubbling and the prophets were talking about the Dow hitting 1500, he would come to town and sell his whole package. It was as simple as that.

He equated buying stocks with buying a truckload of pigs. The lower he could buy the pigs, when the pork market was depressed, the more profit he would make when the next seller’s market would come along. He claimed that he would rather buy stocks under such conditions than pigs because pigs did not pay a dividend. You must feed pigs.

He took “a farming” approach to the stock market in general. In rice farming, there is a planting season and a harvesting season, in his stock purchases and sales he strictly observed the seasons.

Mr. Womack never seemed to buy stock at its bottom or sell it at its top. He seemed happy to buy or sell in the bottom or top range of its fluctuations. He had no regard whatsoever for the cliché’—Never send Good Money After Bad—when he was buying. For example, when the bottom fell out of the market of 1970, he added another $25,000 to his previous bargain price positions and made a virtual killing on the whole package.

I suppose that a modern stock market technician (on CNBC) could have found a lot of alphas, betas, contrary opinions and other theories in Mr. Womack’s simple approach to buying and selling stocks. But none I know put the emphasis on “buy price” that he did.

I realize that many things determine if a stock is a wise buy. But I have learned that during a depressed stock market, if you can get a cost position in a stock’s bottom price range it will forgive a multitude of misjudgments later.

During a market rise, you can sell too soon and make a profit, sell at the top and make a very good profit. So, with so many profit probabilities in your favor, the best cost price possible is worth waiting for.

Knowing this is always comforting during a depressed market, when a “chartist” looks at you with alarm after you buy on his latest “sell signal.”

In sum, Mr. Womack didn’t make anything complicated out of the stock market. He taught me that you can’t be buying stocks every day, week or month of the year and make a profit, any more than you could plant rice every day, week or month and make a crop. He changed my investing lifestyle and I have made a profit ever since.

As another example of such an investment strategy, note John Templeton in the book, Investing the Templeton Way by Lauren C. Templeton (2008) is quoted
as saying, “People are always asking me where the outlook is good, but that is
the wrong question. The right question is: Where is the outlook most miserable….There is only one reason a stock is being offered at a bargain price: because other people are selling. There is no other reason. To get a bargain price, you have to look where the public is most frightened and pessimistic.

Mr. Templeton made a successful career out of being on the other side of panicked sellers and euphoric buyers. He could focus on probable future events rather than react on the basis of current events.

Of course after reading those pieces, you realize there is no secret to investing. All the principles are laid out in Security Analysis and The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham. The application and evolution of value investing principles are laid out each year in Mr. Buffett’s shareholder letters. The study, application and discipline are up to you, but then who would want it any other way?

Enjoy your journey!


[1] Preface to the Sixth Edition, page XL in Security Analysis (2009)

Timeout for reading about investment perspective and attitude

The primary attribute of a value investor is to seek bargains with a margin of safety. The reading: Margin of Safety by Seth Klarman will help give you the proper persective; click on this link http://www.my10000dollars.com/MS.pdf.   I am happy to lend you my book which has cleaner copy, just return it.

I recommend that you read that along with The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/64882486/Chapter-20-Margin-of-Safety-Concept

Some investors believe Benjamin Graham’s books and writings are outdated, but his perspective and attitude towards investing are timeless.   You are better off reading and rereading Buffett’s shareholder letters, Philip Fisher’s books, Graham’s textbooks and Klarman’s thoughts than reading all the other books on investing.  The difficulty lies in taking the principles to the opportunities that suit you.