Rest in Peace Steve Jobs, an Entrepreneur

RIP Steve Jobs.

Entrepreneurs drive this world not politicians or tyrants.

Human Action, carves out a special place for entrepreneurs in the world of economics. At econlib.org there is a searchable copy of Human Action –

Mises on entrepreneurship

The entrepreneur is the agency that prevents the persistence of
a state of production unsuitable to fill the most urgent wants of the consumers
in the cheapest way. All people are anxious for the best possible satisfaction
of their wants and are in this sense striving after the highest profit they can
reap. The mentality of the promoters, speculators, and entrepreneurs
is not different from that of their fellow men. They are merely superior to the
masses in mental power and energy. They are the leaders on the way toward
material progress. They are the first to understand that there is a discrepancy between what is done and what could be done. They guess what the consumers would like to have and are intent upon providing them with these things.

Like every acting man, the entrepreneur is always a speculator. He deals with the uncertain conditions of the future. His success or failure depends on the correctness of his anticipation of uncertain events. If he fails in his understanding of things to come, he is doomed. The only source from which an entrepreneur’s profits stem is his ability to anticipate better than other people the future demand of the consumers.

If all entrepreneurs were to anticipate correctly the future state of the market, there would be neither profits nor losses. The prices of all the factors of production would already today be fully adjusted to tomorrow’s prices of the products.

Editor: Since the future is unknowable how can the market be efficient?

A Great Investor Discusses his Approach and Philosophy

Another in a series of lectures given over several years by an investor whom Warren Buffett called, “The Ted Williams of Investing.” I heard this from a secondary source, so take it with a grain of salt. But, regardless, this lecture will give you insight into an intelligent investor.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/67802194/GI-2004-Lecture-Discusses-Approach-and-Philosophy

A Great Investor Lecture 2007: An Investor Evolves

I will be posting a series of lectures by an outstanding investor who evolved from a deep cyclical value investor to buying good business at the proper prices.

You will learn from someone who began as a securities analyst, then ran a hedge fund, and finally invests as an independent investor.

Go here for the link to the 28-page document:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/67676334/Great-Investor-Lecture-on-Mar-27-2007

I would be interested in your thoughts.

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?

Joel Greenblatt, His Magic Formula, and the Bargains Today

Ben Graham: “It is fortunate for Wall Street as an institution, that a small minority of people can trade successfully, and that many others think they can.”

You can learn about the attitude and philosophy of a successful value investor by viewing CNBC’s interview with Joel Greenblatt.

CNBC Interviews Joel Greenblatt on September 28th, 2011

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000047297

Also, Forbes Interview a few months ago: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/inidaily/ini-fullvideo-joel-greenblatt-market-secrets

Figure it out what it is worth and pay a lot less—Joel Greenblatt

Transcript of Interview:

The hedge fund manager behind the magic formula investing strategy, Joel Greenblatt (JG), has delivered impressive returns. His firm Gotham Capital delivered 50% annual returns for about a decade– late last year he launched a family of four mutual funds called formula investing.

The key here is value investing, buy stocks cheaply, and return on capital. What about the global economic weakness and European debt crisis woes? Did the Magic Formula outperform that situation? Let’s ask Joel Greenblatt. It’s great to see you.

JG: Thank you.

CNBC: Talk about the formula. Is it yield over some sort of return? What’s magic about it?

JG: well,  unfortunately it’s not really magic, but it does work quite well over the long-term. We’re trying to do two things:

  1. Buy something cheap. Ben Graham  said figure out what it is worth and pay a lot less. What we look at is free cash flow to the price we’re paying.
  1. Ben Graham’s best student, Warren Buffett, added a twist to that. He said cheap is nice, but if I can buy a good company (defined for Buffett as high and consistent ROE unlevered) cheap, that is even better. We try to get the best combination of cheap and good.

CNBC: What do you think about this market right here? I would think for a value
investor, there appears to be a lot of value, or is this a value trap?

JG: Well, we have looked at trailing free cash flow yields over the last 20 years. Right now stocks are priced somewhere around the 95 percentile toward cheap—meaning it is one of the cheapest periods both for the market and for our value portfolios that we can put together. If you really look at that, what that said a year ahead of these levels of valuation, the market could be up 15% or 20%; at least that’s what’s happened in the past. The value portfolios could be up in the mid-30s percentage return or so. You know, it’s a very scary time to invest. That’s when you get your best bargains.

Stocks are reflecting a lot of skepticism right now, and usually it doesn’t
look this good unless things look terrible.

CNBC: Some of your top holdings, Game Stop, American Eagle, Best Buy, Microsoft, HP, Wells Fargo, is there. Is there a narrative that runs through them other than the formula itself?

JG: The narrative is that each one of those companies is hated brutally by most people. Hewlett-Packard, I think we know the story, but the prices are cheap. HP is expected to earn $5 EPS and it is trading at about 4x EPS. You pay your money and you take your chances, but we think it is cheap. You can get your money back in four or five years and get the company for free. Because of metrics we used, we actually excluded financials. There was no projection that we would have a financial crisis. Just that one of the metrics we were using was earnings before interests and tax so you can’t look at a bank before interest. So we now include banks in our widely diversified portfolios because of our adjustments to our formula for financial companies.

CNBC: What do you say to those who say historical patterns are meaningless? Where we’re going to go through a looking glass if you assess the situation in Europe?

JG: Every time we’ve had valuations this low, the macro-environment has looked terrible. So at a minimum, you could say that prices reflect that people are skeptical. Prices (ALREADY) reflect that things might not be so great next year.

The magic formula takes out the emotion to buying plunging prices. We make sure the numbers are good in the present—we don’t project.

All I am trying to do is figure out what it is worth and buy it for a whole lot less. The great thing is that the Magic Formula doesn’t always work because if it did, then the formula would cease to work for the long-term.  But in
the long-term (two to three years to five years). This is how the market prices
stocks.  Yes, people are very emotional right now, but we think there are great bargain to be had today.

Editor: Wise words, but hard to put into practice consistently when you are affected by the noise and fear around you. Investing is simple but not easy.

Friendly’s Restaurant and Quiznos Sub-Sandwiches Chain in Decline

You can always be learning from the news around you. See the post below about the probable bankruptcy filings of two restaurant chains catering to middle America.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/30/friendlys-bankruptcy_n_988607.html

Friendly’s management states in a press release that rising costs are hurting their profits. When you hear that then you know the company is not a franchise. The business has little ability to pass on costs while still retaining its customers. The effects of inflation–rising food, energy and labor costs–can devastate profitability.  Too much debt would be lethal because these companies must continually invest to maintain quality to retain customers. If cash flows go to pay a large debt expense, then little is left to maintain the business.  These types of businesses can only earn their cost of capital over a full business cycle if they are efficiently run.

The history of Friendly’s Restaurant Chain is here: http://www.friendlys.com/about/.  The business thrived for over 50 years but it was run by two brothers, who were great entrepreneurial operators.  Without the loving attention to detail from owner-managers and the leveraging up of a commodity business to juice returns by a private equity firm, decline is deadly and perhaps inevitable.

This post complements the prior post here on inflation:

http://csinvesting.org/wp-admin/post.php?post=79&action=edit

There are several lessons.

  1. Inflation can hurt the bad business.
  2. Commodity-like restaurant chains have no competive advantages; therefore, debt can wipe out shareholders during a difficult business environment.
  3. Note that time is not on your side with non-compeititve businesses. The only way to salvage this business is to restructure the debt and bring in entrepreneurial management to better manage the assets. Or liquidate the company. Easier said than done!

Think hard about business failure.

Valuing Assets: Hudson General Valuation Case Study

When you look at a business, glance at the financial summary to gain a feel for the financial characteristics of the business, then go to the balance sheet. Or you can start with the balance sheet. Wall Street analysts often spend too much time on the income statement without looking at quantity and QUALITY of the assets that generate the income and cash flow.

Below is the link to the 1997 10-K of Hudson General Company.  Try to value this business and show your work.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/66990171/HUDSONGENERALCO10K405-1997

If you struggle, you can go to the book: Value Investing from Graham to Buffett and Beyond by Bruce C. N. Greenwald and read Chapter 4 starting on page 51.

The complete analysis will be posted in a few days.

June 4, 2012: Here is the analysis. (DON’T CHEAT. Try on your own first)

Hudson General Case Study_Read this Second

Valuing Hudson General and Analysis

Good luck

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

 

An Investor’s Poem-IF by Rudyard Kipling

My favorite poem. This poem places our times of toil and tribulation into perspective.  

                                                                  Rudyard Kipling
                                                                               If

If

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you;
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or, being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or, being hated, don’t give way to hating,
And yet don’t look too good, nor talk too wise;If you can dream – and not make dreams your master;
If you can think – and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with triumph and disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with wornout tools;If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: “Hold on”;

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings – nor lose the common touch;
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run –
Yours is the Earth and everything that’s in it,
And – which is more – you’ll be a Man my son!