Housekeeping

I will post my answers at the end of this week to the Philips Electronics case study mentioned here: http://wp.me/p1PgpH-r2. Readers feel free to post your analysis.

 

Investment Book Recommendation

Normally I am not a huge fan of investment books since many are poor substitutes for the classics.

The Investment Checklist The_Investment_Checklist by Michael Shearn (2012) gives new and intermediate investors a more programmed approach to analyzing investments including competitive advantages. I have no affiliation with the author, but I recommend.  Is the book perfect? No. Figuring out if management is motivated is harder than the checklist approach would make it seem. However, you will benefit by being relentlessly thorough BEFORE you invest.

Two reviews below.

Anyone wishing to utilize a disciplined method for investing should read this book by Shearn.
Good investing mean avoiding mistakes and taking calculated risks. Identification of risk involves deep thinking about “what can go wrong?”. This is where this book shines, since it forces you to adopt a structured approach of working through a checklist of the possible unknowns.  Too many unanswered items? – Take a pass until you can complete the checklist.

What I really liked about the book are the tons of real life examples of exactly what he means.  You look at investor conference calls in a different way, as it has an exhaustive section on evaluating management and their responses. Are they honest? Are the overly promotional? What are they trying to hide? You see real life examples of both sides – the good and the bad ones.

The book made me think of many situations in the past that were strong clues about excessive risk.

Another useful aspect of the book is that it provides many outside sources (websites, etc) to check your facts. Investing in teen retailers? Shearn provides a number of free sources to verify and understand trends.

I’ve no doubt that this book will make me better at researching a company.
For anyone not employing a checklist – the Shearn checklist provides a great template to success.

R. Michael Knipp
Private Investor

Good book – a little discussion on valuation would have been nice,January 4, 2012
By Andrew Wesley McDill (Chicago, Illinois United States) – See all my reviews

Overall, I thought the book was very interesting and well written. It did a nice job of helping people learn how to think about businesses from a strategic and competitive point of view. The one thing that would have made the book better would have been some discussion to tie the strategic analysis of the company to some valuation frameworks. There was some mention of what the author and his firm were paying for certain companies when they purchased the stock, but it was not a complete discussion of valuation and the related value investing concept of a margin of safety. With that said, I do think that the anecdotes included in the book were helpful and added good context.

Questions on Chapter 7: Production Advantages Lost: Compact Discs, Data Switches and Toasters

If it’s a penny for your thoughts and you put in your two cents worth, then someone, somewhere is making a penny.” –Steven Wright

Chapter 7: Philips and Cisco in Competition Demysitified

The questions are on Chapter 7 (pages 137 to 159) from Competition Demystified. Also, read: An Open Letter to Warren Buffett Re: Cisco Systems http://www.capatcolumbia.com/Articles/Reports/Buffett.pdf and Philips Case Study: http://www.scribd.com/doc/81400135/pcd

Question 1: Discuss first mover conditions that Philips might have considered in entering the compact disc and compact disc player markets. Consider: market growth, establishment of standards specs, patents, customer captivity, economies of scale.

Question 2: Why was Cisco able to dominate the router market in the 1980s and 1990s in a way that Philips was not in the compact disc market?

Question 3: Explain the statment, “No matter how complex and unique products seem at the start, in the long run they are all toasters.”

We will follow up by the end of the week.

Answers to Chapter 6 Questions

“I just got out of the hospital. I was in a speed reading accident. I hit a book mark and flew across the room.” –Steven Wright

Q: What competitive advantages does Microsoft enjoy in the operating system industry?

The only segments within the PC world with features suggesting that there are barriers to entry protecting incumbent firms from new entrants are operating systems and CPUs. In both there are a small number of competitors and stable market share. Microsoft enjoys both customer captitivy and economies of scale in the operating systems business. Customers prefer to stick with what they know, especially regarding software. Swithching costs can be prohibitive when many users have to be taught to use unfamiliar programs. Search costs also inhibit change because the buyer has to have confidence in the reliability of the new system and the survivability of its creators.

The most important advantage is economies of scale. Writing complicated software keeps expensive engineers at their terminals and benches for hundreds of thousands of work hours. On the other hand, the marginal costs of the next unit of the operating system can be low as zero, and seldom more than a few dollars, even when burned on a CD and boxed with a manual.

Network effects enhance both customer captivity and economies of scale.

Q2: Why have “box makers” not been able to establishy a competitive advqtage over other competitors? Why was the enormous growth in the market for PCs such a problem for Compaq specifically? Did it have any alternatives that might have worked out better than its chosen strategy? Did Apple?

The Compaq story is so interwined with the hsitory of the PC that it is easy to miss the more general significance. It lost its competitive advantage and the resulting high levels of profitability as the markets grew and allowed competitors to develop equivalent economies of scale. Rosen, the venture capitalist, was astute to recognize that the quality and economies of scale advantages of Compaq benefited from in the 1980s were now history, and that unless Compaq changed its business plan, it was going to be fighting against lower-cost but qualitatively equal competitors. He and his team pursued the operational efficiency in the absence of competitive advantage.

Apple confronted a grim situation. In the two market segments–microprocessors and operating systems–there were powerful competitive advantages, enjoyed by Intel and Microsoft, based on economies of scale, supplemented by captive customers and some proprietary production technologies. The other segments were highly competitive.

Apple operated, either by itself or in partnership with Motorola, in five market segments within the PC universe. Apple did not possess a competitive advantage. Tying those segments together in the name of “synergy” did not help. Also, the evolution of the industry toward separate maor players in each segment argued strongly against the existence of significant advant5ages from vertical integration. Apple held only 10% of the PC market so it had no bargaining power in alliances.

Apple should have specialized and focused on operational efficiency at least to where it could have earned its cost of capital.

END

Housekeeping

This blog is slowly being reorganized. This weekend I will post the answers to the questions posed for Chapter 6 in Competition Demystified. Readers have already posted excellent analysis. The readers here far surpass the “professor.”

I will write-up study questions for the funeral case studies. If you don’t have those cases simply email: aldridge56@aol.com with FUNERAL HOMES in the subject line.

And finally, I will have new cases for Chapter 7 and 8 in Competition Demystified next week.  We must move forward.

WHY we study Strategic Logic

Valuation formula:  Earnings next year/(Cost of Capital – Perpetual Growth Rate) = Intrinsic Value.   Or $1 in earnings/(10% – 5%) = $20.00

It takes two minutes to learn how to use the formula but a lifetime to know what to plug into the formula.

The Economics of a P.O.W. Camp or What is Money?

”I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.” -Étienne de La Boétie

Fiat Currency

Do you see any flaws in the author’s argument. If not, then read the next article on the Economics of a P.O.W camp.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/a-short-history-of-american-money-from-fur-to-fiat/252620/

What do animal pelts, tobacco, fake wampum, gold, and cotton-paper bank notes have in common? At one point or another, they’ve all stood for the same thing: U.S. currency.

IN DOLLARS WE TRUST

The dollar, meanwhile, remained the anchor currency of the world: the one ring that kinda rules them all. Other governments hold on to dollars and use them for paying debts, and in the aisles of the global supermarket of goods, most items are priced in U.S. dollars.

This is what’s so weird about commentators in the U.S. proudly declaring that the dollar is the most stable currency in the world, as if this were because of American economic policy today, when it’s really just the result of negotiations a few generations ago that made it the backbone of the whole system. The greenback is stable because the U.S. economy is huge and the United States is a terrific republic–OK. But it’s also stable because everyone else’s well-being depends on it, and on belief in its stability. That may be changing, though.

As for paper money itself, the end of the gold standard meant that cash had become a total abstraction. Its value now comes from fiat, government mandate. It’s a Latin word meaning let there be. In God we better trust.

From The End of Money: Counterfeiters, Preachers, Techies, Dreamers–and the Coming Cashless Society by David Wolman. Reprinted courtesy of Da Capo Press.

The Economics of a P.O.W. Camp

http://mindhacks.com/2008/07/06/the-economics-of-a-prisoner-of-war-camp/ and PDF article here (excellent!) http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~hfoad/e111su08/Radford.pdf

Commodity money is money whose value comes from a commodity out of which it is made. It is objects that have value in themselves as well as for use as money.[1]

Examples of commodities that have been used as mediums of exchange include gold, silver, copper, peppercorns, large stones (such as Rai stones), decorated belts, shells, alcohol, cigarettes, cannabis, candy, barley etc. These items were sometimes used in a metric of perceived value in conjunction to one another, in various commodity valuation or price system economies.

Commodity money is to be distinguished from representative money which is a certificate or token which can be exchanged for the underlying commodity, but only as the trade is good for that source and the product. A key feature of commodity money is that the value is directly perceived by the users of this money, who recognize the utility or beauty of the tokens as they would recognize the goods themselves. That is, the effect of holding a token for a barrel of oil must be the same economically as actually having the barrel at hand. This thinking guides the modern commodity markets, although they use a sophisticated range of financial instruments that are more than one-to-one representations of units of a given type of commodity.

Since payment by commodity generally provides a useful good, commodity money is similar to barter, but is distinguishable from it in having a single recognized unit of exchange. (Radford 1945) described the establishment of commodity money in P.O.W camps

Logic Course

To learn more about avoiding fallacious thinking* take a course in logic from an outstanding professor, David Gordon. I have taken this course–recommended for those who have never taken logic. http://academy.mises.org/courses/logic/

Baseless Assertions

The author in the first article makes an assertion without logic or evidence to back up the statement. Money doesn’t have value just because the government says it does. Obvious proof of that is the German Hyper-Inflation in the 1920s when the currency went to worthlessness. A monetary crack-up.

Strategic Logic on Conglomerates: Limited Upside with Increased Downside

One reason so few of us achieve what we truly want is that we never direct our focus; we never concentrate our power. Most people dabble their way through life, never deciding to master anything in particular. –Tony Robbins

The Limits of Diversification

The article below reinforces our studies in strategic logic. Corporate diversification destroys value. “Diworsification” says the famous money manager, Peter Lynch. Teledyne posted here: http://wp.me/p1PgpH-2c) proves the rule.

https://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Corporate_Finance/M_A/

Testing_the_limits_of_diversification_2924.  The exhibit shows how the total return to shareholders of conglomerates has capped upside but unlimited downside.

Limited upside, unlimited downside

The argument that diversification benefits shareholders by reducing volatility (beta!) was never compelling. The rise of low-cost mutual funds underlined this point, since that made it easy even for small investors to diversify on their own. At an aggregate level, conglomerates have underperformed more focused companies both in the real economy (growth and returns on capital) and in the stock market. From 2002 to 2010, for example, the revenues of conglomerates grew by 6.3 percent a year; those of focused companies grew by 9.2 percent. Even adjusted for size differences, focused companies grew faster. They also expanded their returns on capital by three percentage points, while the ROCs of conglomerates fell by one percentage point. Finally, median total returns to shareholders (TRS) were 7.5 percent for conglomerates and 11.8 percent for focused companies.

As usual, the median doesn’t tell the entire story: some conglomerates did outperform many focused companies. And while the median return from conglomerates is lower, the distribution’s shape tells an instructive story: the upside is chopped off, but not the downside (exhibit). Upside gains are limited because it’s unlikely that all of a diverse conglomerate’s businesses will outperform at the same time. The returns of units that do are dwarfed by underperformers and therefore probably won’t affect the entire conglomerate’s returns in a meaningful way.

Moreover, conglomerates are usually made up of relatively mature businesses, well beyond the point where they would be likely to generate unexpected returns. But the downside isn’t limited, because the performance of the more mature businesses found in most conglomerates can fall a lot further than it can rise.

Consider a simple mathematical example: if a business unit accounting for a third of a conglomerate’s value earns a 20 percent TRS while other units earn 10 percent, the weighted average will be about 14 percent. But if that unit’s TRS is negative 50 percent, the weighted average TRS will be dragged down to about 2 percent, even before other units are affected. In addition, the poor aggregate performance can affect the motivation of the entire company and how the company is perceived by customers, suppliers, and potential employees.

Marketpsych on The Facebook IPO

A brand is no longer what we tell the consumer it is – it is what consumers tell each other it is.” –Scott Cook

IPOs such as Facebook indicate a much warmer market. For those who might enjoy reading more on a psychological perspective: http://blog.marketpsych.com/2012_02_01_archive.html

Musings about the latest happenings in the fields of investor psychology, behavioral finance, and neuro-finance. We’ll explain what the latest research means for you and your bottom-line.

Be skeptical……….

 

Buffett on Inflation or Why Stocks Beat Gold and Bonds

Investing is often described as the process of laying out money now in the expectation of receiving more money in the future. At Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA) we take a more demanding approach, defining investing as the transfer to others of purchasing power now with the reasoned expectation of receiving more purchasing power — after taxes have been paid on nominal gains — in the future. More succinctly, investing is forgoing consumption now in order to have the ability to consume more at a later date. –Warren Buffett

Warren Buffett: Why stocks beat gold and bonds

In an adaptation from his upcoming shareholder letter, the Oracle of Omaha explains why equities almost always beat the alternatives over time.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/09/warren-buffett-berkshire-shareholder-letter/?section=money_topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fmoney_topstories+%28Top+Stories%29

Obviously, the readers of this blog are aware of the Federal Reserves easy monetary policy–growing monetary aggregates, zero interest rate policy, and high reserves in the banking system. However, as followers of Austrian economics (some of us), we realize that there is no perfect correlation between X growth in money supply and Y increase in nominal stock prices. The world is an extremely complex place and to model precision and prediction is MADNESS. However, you can gain a sense of how the wind blows. If people wish to hold lower cash balances then the effects of inflation will be increased.

Learn more here about monetary policy: www.economicpolicyjournal.com and www.mises.org and http://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/

Inflation Swindles the Equity Investor

 

I strongly urge you to read one of the greatest articles on investing by Buffett, How Inflation Swindles the Equity Investor. HERE: http://www.scribd.com/doc/65198264/Inflation-Swindles-the-Equity-Investor

We spoke at length about investing and inflation during this post: http://wp.me/p1PgpH-1h

A Course on Mental Models–Helping Us All to Decide and Think Better

Perfect solutions of our difficulties are not to be looked for in an imperfect world.–Winston Churchill

Model Thinking

If you haven’t signed up, then here is another chance. I signed up; I need all the help possible.

Hi Everyone,

Good News!!! The course ‘Model Thinking’ will go live very shortly. When it does go live, we’ll be asking you to officially register and agree to some standard terms and conditions. In the interim, you can now go to the site, at http://www.coursera.org/modelthinking/lecture/preview and watch the first two sets of lectures. The first set of lectures covers the benefits of modeling and provides a framework for the course. The second set covers Thomas Schelling’s seminar model of segregation as well as a model of standing ovations that I developed with John Miller of Carnegie Mellon University.

The full site with quizzes, discussion forums, and all the other bells and whistles will be operational very shortly. I thank you all for your patience. Enjoy the first few lectures!!

As we say in Ann Arbor… Go Blue!!!

Scotte

Interesting Free Investing Newsletters and Links

Just in case you missed these:

Ask for a free quarterly newsletter by emailing: Hewitt.Heiserman@EarningsPower.com,

Ask to be on his email list: kessler@robotti.com,

and his weekly emailings:sfriedman@gmail.com  There will be overlap, but you will find interesting articles, videos and value investors. Read ruthlessly, however, I don’t bother to read about Fairholme’s investment in BAC or AIG, because those companies are out of my circle of competence. Only read what benefits YOU.

Recommended blogs:

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

http://www.simoleonsense.com/weekly-roundup-16-a-curated-linkfest-for-the-smartest-people-on-the-web/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SimoleonSense+%28Simoleon+Sense%29