黃 金 冒 險 號 08 年 11 月 15 日
格 林 斯 潘 認 錯 ， 說 他 本 來 以 為 ， 不 要 干 預 規 管 銀 行 ， 銀 行 為 了 利 益 ， 絕 對 不 會 胡 亂 借 貸 。 錯 在 什 麼 地 方 ？
錯 在 所 謂 銀 行 ， 只 是 一 幢 大 廈 ， 不 是 一 個 人 。 決 定 借 貸 批 款 的 ， 不 是 銀 行 ， 而 是 在 銀 行 工 作 的 人 。 人 是 有 私 心 的 ， 他 會 先 想 到 自 己 的 佣 金 ， 想 到 年 終 花 紅 ， 他 也 想 在 三 十 二 歲 退 休 ， 在 南 太 平 洋 的 大 溪 地 擁 有 一 座 海 濱 別 墅 ， 擁 抱 幾 個 土 女 。
格 林 斯 潘 以 為 ， 銀 行 為 了 利 益 ， 必 然 對 無 力 還 款 的 人 有 所 制 約 ， 不 會 輕 易 批 放 貸 款 ， 政 府 不 要 指 導 銀 行 怎 樣 做 生 意 ， 此 一 意 念 ， 本 來 是 對 的 ， 但 當 「 政 府 不 要 指 導 銀 行 怎 樣 做 生 意 」 ， 成 為 一 種 所 謂 「 意 識 型 態 」 ， 叫 做 「 自 由 市 場 經 濟 」 ， 就 演 變 為 災 難 。
意 念 （ Idea ） 是 人 類 的 創 作 ， 但 當 意 念 變 成 「 意 識 型 態 」 （ Ideology ） ， 就 僵 化 為 條 。 意 念 可 以 挑 戰 ， 一 旦 硬 結 成 「 意 識 型 態 」 ， 則 不 容 異 議 ， 就 變 成 可 蘭 經 的 原 旨 。
「 意 識 型 態 」 是 一 個 很 討 厭 的 名 詞 。 自 由 市 場 是 意 念 ， 變 成 「 意 識 型 態 」 的 時 候 ， 就 變 成 宗 。 格 林 斯 潘 沒 有 想 到 過 ： 聖 經 本 來 也 導 人 向 善 ， 但 中 世 紀 的 廷 ， 執 行 聖 經 ， 卻 執 行 出 一 個 火 燒 異 端 的 黑 暗 時 代 。
當 一 個 意 念 ， 變 成 「 主 義 」 的 時 候 ， 就 要 小 心 了 。 社 會 主 義 和 共 產 主 義 ， 都 變 成 吃 人 的 條 。 當 前 也 有 一 樣 ， 叫 做 「 保 護 主 義 」 ─ ─ 連 彭 定 康 也 向 美 國 叫 喊 ： 不 要 搞 保 護 主 義 ， 這 樣 會 令 世 界 蒙 受 損 失 。
然 而 ， 當 美 國 已 經 不 再 是 霸 主 ， 關 起 大 門 ， 也 是 很 自 然 的 事 。 從 前 全 球 出 口 都 靠 美 國 ， 因 為 美 國 人 擁 有 強 大 的 消 費 力 。 就 像 一 家 富 豪 ， 他 有 錢 ， 他 打 開 大 門 ， 夜 夜 宴 客 ， 你 把 廉 價 貨 品 輸 出 給 他 ， 他 獨 力 通 殺 ， 讓 你 也 賺 錢 。
現 在 ， 富 豪 破 產 了 ， 他 不 再 請 客 ， 大 家 以 後 要 各 散 東 西 ， 你 指 他 的 大 門 罵 街 ， 問 他 為 什 麼 不 請 客 了 。
請 客 是 天 公 地 道 的 嗎 ？ 中 國 崛 起 ， 如 果 想 取 代 美 國 ， 不 妨 也 像 戰 後 六 十 年 的 美 國 一 樣 ， 不 要 搞 「 保 護 主 義 」 好 了 ─ ─ 但 中 國 對 荷 里 活 電 影 有 配 額 ， 對 澳 門 的 美 資 賭 場 ， 心 情 不 好 ， 也 一 樣 關 閘 阻 撓 官 員 和 國 民 來 威 尼 斯 人 賭 錢 ， 這 不 是 保 護 主 義 是 什 麼 ？
自 家 快 要 破 產 ， 保 護 家 小 ， 是 一 種 本 能 。 保 護 還 成 為 「 主 義 」 ， 輸 打 贏 要 的 人 發 明 這 個 名 詞 。 美 國 衰 落 了 ， 他 只 能 保 護 自 己 ， 沒 有 義 務 照 顧 別 人 ， 保 護 本 國 的 失 業 者 ， 他 連 勒 緊 褲 頭 愛 國 的 自 由 也 沒 有 ， 美 國 讓 人 欺 負 得 多 慘 ？ 不 請 客 就 不 請 ， 欠 誰 的 ？ 大 難 臨 頭 ， 各 自 討 食 ， 阿 爺 不 管 用 了 ， 這 是 一 個 亂 世 。
2008年9月28日星期日
股神巴菲特18億入股比亞迪股份
新浪財經訊
據海外媒體披露，“股神”巴菲特今日將斥資18億港元入股內地在港上市公司比亞迪股份(1211.HK)。這也是股神在繼大手筆投資中石油(12.84,-0.17,-1.31%,吧)之後再次出手內地在港上市公司，同時，此次投資也是巴菲特在美國次貸危機轉為信貸危機之後，進行的第二筆重大投資。上周巴菲特所屬的伯克希爾•哈撒韋公司公司剛剛宣佈以至少50億美元的代價入股美國第一大投行高盛。
“股神”再度出手，並在此嚴峻形勢下選擇入股中資公司，意欲何為？比亞迪股份以充電電池以及汽車業務為主，在電動汽車領域的開拓亦較優秀。此番入股無疑顯示了巴菲特對此行業的信心。
BusinessWire報導稱，日前，美國著名投資者、“股神”巴菲特的投資旗艦伯克希爾-哈撒韋公司旗下附屬公司MIDAMERICAN ENERGY HOLDINGS COMPANY(“MIDAMERICAN”)與比亞迪股份有限公司(“比亞迪”1211.HK)簽署了策略性投資及股份認購協定，根據協定，MIDAMERICAN將以每股港幣8元的價格認購2.25億股比亞迪公司的股份，約占比亞迪本次配售後10%的股份比例，本次交易價格總金額約為港幣18億元。
伯克希爾-哈撒韋公司CEO巴菲特先生表示：能夠作為比亞迪和中國人的合作夥伴，我們對此非常興奮，王傳福先生具備獨特的管理運營能力和優良記錄，我們盼望著和他的合作。
MidAmerican主席 David Sokol先生表示：非常高興能有機會投資像比亞迪這樣優秀的企業, 他們的產品對於環境保護作出了傑出的貢獻。比亞迪的創新技術在全球持續探討的全球氣候轉變及環保方面的課題上，均擔當重要的角色。
比亞迪主席王傳福先生非常欣喜地表達了謝意，稱比亞迪非常歡迎像Berkshire Hathaway和MidAmerican這樣的長期投資戰略夥伴，該投資將幫助比亞迪新能源汽車及其它環保產品在全球的推動具備戰略意義。
2008年9月29日，MIDAMERICAN將和比亞迪公司共同召開新聞發佈會，MIDAMERICAN主席David L. Sokol先生將親臨香港與比亞迪主席王傳福先生聯合主持該新聞發佈會並向媒體進行詳細說明協定的內容以及本次認購的相關資訊。
比亞迪公司
比亞迪創立於一九九五年，並於二零零二年在香港上市，目前主要擁有IT、汽車兩大產業。比亞迪在廣東、北京、上海和西安等地區建有七大生產基地，總面積將近1,000萬平方米，並在美國、歐洲、日本、韓國、印度、臺灣、香港等地設有分公司或辦事處，員工總數已超過13萬人。特別是電動汽車領域，比亞迪具有全球領先的電池技術優勢和整車生產平臺。
http://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock/ggscyd/20080927/12145350510.shtml
據海外媒體披露，“股神”巴菲特今日將斥資18億港元入股內地在港上市公司比亞迪股份(1211.HK)。這也是股神在繼大手筆投資中石油(12.84,-0.17,-1.31%,吧)之後再次出手內地在港上市公司，同時，此次投資也是巴菲特在美國次貸危機轉為信貸危機之後，進行的第二筆重大投資。上周巴菲特所屬的伯克希爾•哈撒韋公司公司剛剛宣佈以至少50億美元的代價入股美國第一大投行高盛。
“股神”再度出手，並在此嚴峻形勢下選擇入股中資公司，意欲何為？比亞迪股份以充電電池以及汽車業務為主，在電動汽車領域的開拓亦較優秀。此番入股無疑顯示了巴菲特對此行業的信心。
BusinessWire報導稱，日前，美國著名投資者、“股神”巴菲特的投資旗艦伯克希爾-哈撒韋公司旗下附屬公司MIDAMERICAN ENERGY HOLDINGS COMPANY(“MIDAMERICAN”)與比亞迪股份有限公司(“比亞迪”1211.HK)簽署了策略性投資及股份認購協定，根據協定，MIDAMERICAN將以每股港幣8元的價格認購2.25億股比亞迪公司的股份，約占比亞迪本次配售後10%的股份比例，本次交易價格總金額約為港幣18億元。
伯克希爾-哈撒韋公司CEO巴菲特先生表示：能夠作為比亞迪和中國人的合作夥伴，我們對此非常興奮，王傳福先生具備獨特的管理運營能力和優良記錄，我們盼望著和他的合作。
MidAmerican主席 David Sokol先生表示：非常高興能有機會投資像比亞迪這樣優秀的企業, 他們的產品對於環境保護作出了傑出的貢獻。比亞迪的創新技術在全球持續探討的全球氣候轉變及環保方面的課題上，均擔當重要的角色。
比亞迪主席王傳福先生非常欣喜地表達了謝意，稱比亞迪非常歡迎像Berkshire Hathaway和MidAmerican這樣的長期投資戰略夥伴，該投資將幫助比亞迪新能源汽車及其它環保產品在全球的推動具備戰略意義。
2008年9月29日，MIDAMERICAN將和比亞迪公司共同召開新聞發佈會，MIDAMERICAN主席David L. Sokol先生將親臨香港與比亞迪主席王傳福先生聯合主持該新聞發佈會並向媒體進行詳細說明協定的內容以及本次認購的相關資訊。
比亞迪公司
比亞迪創立於一九九五年，並於二零零二年在香港上市，目前主要擁有IT、汽車兩大產業。比亞迪在廣東、北京、上海和西安等地區建有七大生產基地，總面積將近1,000萬平方米，並在美國、歐洲、日本、韓國、印度、臺灣、香港等地設有分公司或辦事處，員工總數已超過13萬人。特別是電動汽車領域，比亞迪具有全球領先的電池技術優勢和整車生產平臺。
http://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock/ggscyd/20080927/12145350510.shtml
2008年9月18日星期四
Warren Buffett said at 2008 AGM of Berkshire Hathaway ...
In fact, that was one of the interesting things that was said in testimony before the Senate finance committee. I think two of the witnesses (Bear Stearns) said: "We understood we couldn't borrow money unsecured if people started looking at us askance. But we never dreamed that we couldn't borrow money secured." Well we found that out at Solomon 17 years earlier, when we were having trouble borrowing money secured.
When the world doesn't want to lend you money, 10 or 20 or 50 basis points - or a bigger haircut on collateral - doesn't do much. They'll only lend you money if they want to lend you money.
And if you're dependent on borrowed money every day, you have to wake up in the morning hoping the world thinks well of you. And there was a period a couple of months ago when almost every investment bank in the United States was plenty worried about whether people were going to think well of them the next morning.
When the world doesn't want to lend you money, 10 or 20 or 50 basis points - or a bigger haircut on collateral - doesn't do much. They'll only lend you money if they want to lend you money.
And if you're dependent on borrowed money every day, you have to wake up in the morning hoping the world thinks well of you. And there was a period a couple of months ago when almost every investment bank in the United States was plenty worried about whether people were going to think well of them the next morning.
大 龜 潛 水
什 麼 是 貧 富 懸 殊 ？ 就 是 雷 曼 兄 弟 和 AIG 破 產 ， 可 以 向 美 國 聯 邦 儲 備 局 呼 救 ， 當 你 閣 下 經 營 的 那 家 雲 吞 店 因 業 主 加 租 無 以 為 生 ， 叫 政 府 出 手 相 救 ？ 政 府 不 會 睬 你 ！
這 就 叫 「 竊 者 誅 ， 竊 國 者 侯 」 。 雷 曼 兄 弟 倒 下 ， 就 是 全 球 的 金 融 崩 潰 了 。 雷 曼 兄 弟 銀 行 發 放 的 貸 款 ， 主 要 限 於 美 國 ， 但 倫 敦 的 金 融 城 ， 由 於 與 「 國 際 」 掛 上 了 號 ， 雷 曼 兄 弟 完 了 蛋 ， 金 融 城 有 五 千 名 精 英 要 裁 員 。
這 五 千 人 ， 全 是 牛 津 劍 橋 和 哈 佛 MBA 的 驕 子 ， 貌 似 曉 格 蘭 或 伊 雲 麥 葵 格 ， 在 泰 晤 士 河 邊 有 一 座 高 瞰 河 景 的 Penthouse ， 一 個 模 特 兒 同 居 女 友 ， 一 輛 開 篷 平 治 加 一 輛 保 持 捷 ， 午 膳 時 解 開 領 帶 結 ， 豪 邁 地 飲 盡 一 杯 喜 力 啤 ， 去 上 海 公 幹 開 一 次 會 ， 當 夜 就 搭 上 一 件 貌 似 章 子 怡 的 中 國 女 人 共 上 君 悅 酒 店 的 行 政 套 房 的 那 種 人 。
每 十 位 這 樣 的 金 融 精 英 失 業 ， 據 統 計 ， 還 有 圈 外 另 外 七 個 職 位 也 跟 裁 掉 ， 像 辦 公 室 的 吸 塵 機 女 工 和 餐 廳 侍 應 。 精 英 們 沒 得 喝 啤 酒 豪 氣 了 ， 附 近 的 酒 吧 和 壽 司 店 跟 關 門 ， 要 出 售 河 畔 的 豪 宅 ， 室 內 設 計 師 也 跟 失 業 。
英 國 倫 敦 百 萬 鎊 價 格 的 房 地 產 ， 一 向 由 金 融 精 英 居 住 ， 已 經 慘 跌 了 五 成 ， 因 為 雷 曼 兄 弟 事 件 ， 明 年 底 之 前 ， 倫 敦 的 房 價 還 會 下 跌 二 成 五 ， 英 鎊 跟 跌 ， 未 來 兩 年 ， 可 以 買 進 英 鎊 ， 等 到 樓 價 下 挫 五 成 時 ， 再 在 倫 敦 房 地 產 「 執 平 貨 」 ， 看 二 ○ 一 二 年 的 倫 敦 世 運 會 。
問 題 是 ： 未 來 一 兩 年 ， 誰 還 會 有 現 金 ？ 早 就 跟 大 潮 流 「 入 市 」 了 。 兩 個 月 前 拋 了 貨 的 ， 今 天 就 做 了 金 錢 之 王 。 貧 富 懸 殊 ， 這 個 世 界 本 來 就 是 一 場 不 公 平 的 遊 戲 ─ ─ 同 樣 是 美 國 的 藍 籌 企 業 ， 聯 儲 局 不 救 雷 曼 兄 弟 ， 卻 出 手 救 AIG ， 因 為 雷 曼 兄 弟 的 房 地 產 借 貸 投 資 ， 主 要 在 美 國 ， 但 AIG 保 險 卻 是 美 國 在 全 球 的 生 意 。 內 外 有 別 ， AIG 垮 台 ， 香 港 也 會 爆 發 擠 提 。
企 業 越 大 ， 生 意 王 國 的 版 圖 越 寬 廣 ， 越 可 以 不 負 責 任 ， 因 為 他 可 以 與 你 同 歸 於 盡 。 明 擺 的 道 理 ： 不 是 人 人 都 說 ， 中 國 奧 運 之 後 會 「 爆 煲 」 嗎 ？ 一 點 也 沒 錯 ， 北 京 奧 運 結 束 ， 是 美 國 帶 頭 爆 煲 ， 從 陰 謀 論 來 看 ， 外 有 俄 國 侵 略 格 魯 吉 亞 ， 內 有 金 融 風 暴 ， 美 國 人 的 愛 國 心 激 發 起 來 ， 就 會 選 軍 人 麥 堅 當 總 統 。
一 石 二 鳥 ， 也 給 中 國 一 點 顏 色 ： 美 國 人 自 顧 不 暇 ， 消 費 在 衰 退 中 下 降 ， 中 國 的 出 口 堵 塞 ， 加 上 毒 奶 粉 風 暴 ， 來 得 正 好 。 美 國 這 隻 大 烏 ， 現 在 要 潛 水 了 ， 在 背 上 的 小 動 物 ， 也 要 跟 閉 氣 下 水 。 曾 蔭 權 政 府 懂 水 性 嗎 ？
摘自《黃金冒險號》2008/9/18
這 就 叫 「 竊 者 誅 ， 竊 國 者 侯 」 。 雷 曼 兄 弟 倒 下 ， 就 是 全 球 的 金 融 崩 潰 了 。 雷 曼 兄 弟 銀 行 發 放 的 貸 款 ， 主 要 限 於 美 國 ， 但 倫 敦 的 金 融 城 ， 由 於 與 「 國 際 」 掛 上 了 號 ， 雷 曼 兄 弟 完 了 蛋 ， 金 融 城 有 五 千 名 精 英 要 裁 員 。
這 五 千 人 ， 全 是 牛 津 劍 橋 和 哈 佛 MBA 的 驕 子 ， 貌 似 曉 格 蘭 或 伊 雲 麥 葵 格 ， 在 泰 晤 士 河 邊 有 一 座 高 瞰 河 景 的 Penthouse ， 一 個 模 特 兒 同 居 女 友 ， 一 輛 開 篷 平 治 加 一 輛 保 持 捷 ， 午 膳 時 解 開 領 帶 結 ， 豪 邁 地 飲 盡 一 杯 喜 力 啤 ， 去 上 海 公 幹 開 一 次 會 ， 當 夜 就 搭 上 一 件 貌 似 章 子 怡 的 中 國 女 人 共 上 君 悅 酒 店 的 行 政 套 房 的 那 種 人 。
每 十 位 這 樣 的 金 融 精 英 失 業 ， 據 統 計 ， 還 有 圈 外 另 外 七 個 職 位 也 跟 裁 掉 ， 像 辦 公 室 的 吸 塵 機 女 工 和 餐 廳 侍 應 。 精 英 們 沒 得 喝 啤 酒 豪 氣 了 ， 附 近 的 酒 吧 和 壽 司 店 跟 關 門 ， 要 出 售 河 畔 的 豪 宅 ， 室 內 設 計 師 也 跟 失 業 。
英 國 倫 敦 百 萬 鎊 價 格 的 房 地 產 ， 一 向 由 金 融 精 英 居 住 ， 已 經 慘 跌 了 五 成 ， 因 為 雷 曼 兄 弟 事 件 ， 明 年 底 之 前 ， 倫 敦 的 房 價 還 會 下 跌 二 成 五 ， 英 鎊 跟 跌 ， 未 來 兩 年 ， 可 以 買 進 英 鎊 ， 等 到 樓 價 下 挫 五 成 時 ， 再 在 倫 敦 房 地 產 「 執 平 貨 」 ， 看 二 ○ 一 二 年 的 倫 敦 世 運 會 。
問 題 是 ： 未 來 一 兩 年 ， 誰 還 會 有 現 金 ？ 早 就 跟 大 潮 流 「 入 市 」 了 。 兩 個 月 前 拋 了 貨 的 ， 今 天 就 做 了 金 錢 之 王 。 貧 富 懸 殊 ， 這 個 世 界 本 來 就 是 一 場 不 公 平 的 遊 戲 ─ ─ 同 樣 是 美 國 的 藍 籌 企 業 ， 聯 儲 局 不 救 雷 曼 兄 弟 ， 卻 出 手 救 AIG ， 因 為 雷 曼 兄 弟 的 房 地 產 借 貸 投 資 ， 主 要 在 美 國 ， 但 AIG 保 險 卻 是 美 國 在 全 球 的 生 意 。 內 外 有 別 ， AIG 垮 台 ， 香 港 也 會 爆 發 擠 提 。
企 業 越 大 ， 生 意 王 國 的 版 圖 越 寬 廣 ， 越 可 以 不 負 責 任 ， 因 為 他 可 以 與 你 同 歸 於 盡 。 明 擺 的 道 理 ： 不 是 人 人 都 說 ， 中 國 奧 運 之 後 會 「 爆 煲 」 嗎 ？ 一 點 也 沒 錯 ， 北 京 奧 運 結 束 ， 是 美 國 帶 頭 爆 煲 ， 從 陰 謀 論 來 看 ， 外 有 俄 國 侵 略 格 魯 吉 亞 ， 內 有 金 融 風 暴 ， 美 國 人 的 愛 國 心 激 發 起 來 ， 就 會 選 軍 人 麥 堅 當 總 統 。
一 石 二 鳥 ， 也 給 中 國 一 點 顏 色 ： 美 國 人 自 顧 不 暇 ， 消 費 在 衰 退 中 下 降 ， 中 國 的 出 口 堵 塞 ， 加 上 毒 奶 粉 風 暴 ， 來 得 正 好 。 美 國 這 隻 大 烏 ， 現 在 要 潛 水 了 ， 在 背 上 的 小 動 物 ， 也 要 跟 閉 氣 下 水 。 曾 蔭 權 政 府 懂 水 性 嗎 ？
摘自《黃金冒險號》2008/9/18
2008年9月14日星期日
2008年8月28日星期四
反彈同當頭起有咩分別？
一、當頭起升幅最少20%；
二、一浪高于一浪（即喺次低點才入市）；
三、50天移動平均線重返250天線之上；
四、當頭起喺熊三出現后先出現（熊三P/E喺八至十二倍之間）。
摘錄自28/08/08信報《投資者日記》
二、一浪高于一浪（即喺次低點才入市）；
三、50天移動平均線重返250天線之上；
四、當頭起喺熊三出現后先出現（熊三P/E喺八至十二倍之間）。
摘錄自28/08/08信報《投資者日記》
2008年8月26日星期二
冬天嚟到，春天仲會遠咩？
油價終於由7月18日嘅147美元回落，美國經濟三股頂頭風其中一股已減弱；至於信貸危機相信喺9月底前兩房問題應有定案；最後只餘下樓市呢股頂頭風。最終問題必須解決，作為投資者需要嘅係耐性。
例如1982年9月中國政府宣布，喺1997年7月收番香港主權、到1984年7月中英雙方簽訂聯合聲明，時間上總共二十三個月。
1997年7月亞洲金融風暴到1998年9月東南亞亦開始解決，需時十四個月。
2000年3月科網股泡沫爆破到2002年10月納指止跌回升，需時三十一個月。
去年11月開始嘅次按危機，最終必須解決。問題係要幾耐，同埋點樣收科。
冬天嚟到，春天仲會遠咩？
如大家已及時止蝕、冇溝落，唔係只着條泳褲過冬季，便可以耐心地等；可能係明年第一季，又可能再長一D，但春天一定會番嚟；反之，只有一條泳褲就凍死都未天光。
摘錄自26/08/08信報《投資者日記》
例如1982年9月中國政府宣布，喺1997年7月收番香港主權、到1984年7月中英雙方簽訂聯合聲明，時間上總共二十三個月。
1997年7月亞洲金融風暴到1998年9月東南亞亦開始解決，需時十四個月。
2000年3月科網股泡沫爆破到2002年10月納指止跌回升，需時三十一個月。
去年11月開始嘅次按危機，最終必須解決。問題係要幾耐，同埋點樣收科。
冬天嚟到，春天仲會遠咩？
如大家已及時止蝕、冇溝落，唔係只着條泳褲過冬季，便可以耐心地等；可能係明年第一季，又可能再長一D，但春天一定會番嚟；反之，只有一條泳褲就凍死都未天光。
摘錄自26/08/08信報《投資者日記》
2008年8月19日星期二
An Inspirational Speech that is Worth Keeping in Mind
I don't know what to say really.
我不曉得該說什麼
Three minutes
三分鐘
to the biggest battle of our professional lives,
到我們職業生涯中最大的戰役
all comes down to today.
都在今天
And either
除非
we heal
我們團結 (因為劇情裡球隊有被弄得四分五裂, 所以用heal(治療)來當團結的字)
as a team
成一個團隊
or we are going to crumble.
不然我們將會被擊倒
Inch by inch,
一吋又一吋
play by play,
一次又一次
till we're finished.
直到我們完全失敗
We are in hell right now, gentlemen.
我們現在在地獄裡, 紳士們
Believe me.
相信我
And
而且
we can stay here
我們可以留在這裡
get the shit kicked out of us
慘敗
or
或是
we can fight our way back
我們可以一路打回去
into the light.
回到光明裡
We can climb out of hell.
我們可以從地獄裡爬出來
One inch, at a time.
一次一寸的爬
Now, I can't do it for you.
聽這, 我沒辦法幫你.
I'm too old.
我太老了
I look around and I see these
我向四周看了一下, 我看到這些
young faces and I think
年輕的面孔, 我在想
I mean
我的意思是
I made every wrong choice a middle age man can make.
一個中年人全部能犯的錯誤的選擇我都犯了
I uh.....
我.....
I pissed away all my money.
我把我的錢都浪費光了
Believe it or not.
不管你信不信
I chased off anyone who has ever loved me.
我把所有曾經愛我的人都嚇走了
And lately,
然後最近,
I can't even stand the face I see in the mirror.
我無法忍受我在鏡子裡看到的那張臉
You know when you get old in life things get taken from you.
你知道, 當你變老的時候, 你的東西會被一件一件的拿走
That's ..... that's part of life.
那是人生的必經過程
But, you only learn that when you start losing stuff.
可是, 你只有在失去東西以後才會領悟到
You find out that life is a game of inches.
人生是一個為英吋奮鬥的遊戲
So is football.
美式足球也是
Because in either game
因為在任何一個比賽
life or football
人生或是美式足球
the margin for error is so small.
對於犯錯的容忍度是多麼小
I mean
我的意思是
one half step too late or too early
半步太慢或太快
you don't quite make it.
你到達不了你的目標
One half second too slow or too fast
半秒太慢或太快
and you don't quite catch it.
你接不到球
The inches we need are everywhere around us.
我們所需要來贏的英吋在我們的周遭
They are in ever break of the game
它們在每一場比賽的關鍵時刻
every minute, every second.
在每一分, 每一秒
On this team, we fight for that inch
在這個團隊裡, 我們為那個英吋奮鬥
On this team, we tear ourselves, and everyone around us to pieces for that inch.
在這個團隊裡, 我們為了那個英吋我們可以撕裂我們自己跟周遭的人
We CLAW with our finger nails for that inch.
我們用我們的指甲抓那個英吋
Because we know when we add up all those inches
因為我們知道當我們把那些英吋加起來的時候,
that's going to make the fucking difference
那將會決定
between WINNING and LOSING
成功或失敗
between LIVING and DYING.
生存或死亡
I'll tell you this
我可以肯定的告訴你
in any fight
在任何戰鬥裡
it is the guy who is willing to die
永遠是那個願意戰到死的人
who is going to win that inch.
能爭取到那個英吋
And I know if I am going to have any life anymore
而且我知道, 假如我還活著
it's because, I am still willing to fight,
是因為我還願意去奮鬥,
and die for that inch
而且願意為了贏到那個英吋而死
because that is what LIVING is.
因為那就是人生的意義
The six inches in front of your face.
那個在你面前的六英吋
Now I can't make you do it.
我不能強迫你去戰鬥
You gotta look at the guy next to you.
你必須看看你旁邊的人
Look into his eyes.
看這他們的眼睛
Now I think you are going to see a guy who will go that inch with you.
我想你會看到一個願意跟你一起為那個英吋奮鬥的人
You are going to see a guy
你將會看到一個
who will sacrifice himself for this team
願意為這個團隊犧牲的人,
because he knows when it comes down to it,
因為他知道當時候來臨時,
you are gonna do the same thing for him.
你也會為他犧牲
That's a team, gentlemen
那就是團隊, 紳士們
And either we heal now, as a team,
除非我們現在團結成一個團隊
or we will die as individuals.
我們將會一個個獨自的死去
That's football guys.
這就是美式足球
That's all it is.
就是這樣而已
Now, whattaya gonna do?
那現在, 你們要怎麼做?
我不曉得該說什麼
Three minutes
三分鐘
to the biggest battle of our professional lives,
到我們職業生涯中最大的戰役
all comes down to today.
都在今天
And either
除非
we heal
我們團結 (因為劇情裡球隊有被弄得四分五裂, 所以用heal(治療)來當團結的字)
as a team
成一個團隊
or we are going to crumble.
不然我們將會被擊倒
Inch by inch,
一吋又一吋
play by play,
一次又一次
till we're finished.
直到我們完全失敗
We are in hell right now, gentlemen.
我們現在在地獄裡, 紳士們
Believe me.
相信我
And
而且
we can stay here
我們可以留在這裡
get the shit kicked out of us
慘敗
or
或是
we can fight our way back
我們可以一路打回去
into the light.
回到光明裡
We can climb out of hell.
我們可以從地獄裡爬出來
One inch, at a time.
一次一寸的爬
Now, I can't do it for you.
聽這, 我沒辦法幫你.
I'm too old.
我太老了
I look around and I see these
我向四周看了一下, 我看到這些
young faces and I think
年輕的面孔, 我在想
I mean
我的意思是
I made every wrong choice a middle age man can make.
一個中年人全部能犯的錯誤的選擇我都犯了
I uh.....
我.....
I pissed away all my money.
我把我的錢都浪費光了
Believe it or not.
不管你信不信
I chased off anyone who has ever loved me.
我把所有曾經愛我的人都嚇走了
And lately,
然後最近,
I can't even stand the face I see in the mirror.
我無法忍受我在鏡子裡看到的那張臉
You know when you get old in life things get taken from you.
你知道, 當你變老的時候, 你的東西會被一件一件的拿走
That's ..... that's part of life.
那是人生的必經過程
But, you only learn that when you start losing stuff.
可是, 你只有在失去東西以後才會領悟到
You find out that life is a game of inches.
人生是一個為英吋奮鬥的遊戲
So is football.
美式足球也是
Because in either game
因為在任何一個比賽
life or football
人生或是美式足球
the margin for error is so small.
對於犯錯的容忍度是多麼小
I mean
我的意思是
one half step too late or too early
半步太慢或太快
you don't quite make it.
你到達不了你的目標
One half second too slow or too fast
半秒太慢或太快
and you don't quite catch it.
你接不到球
The inches we need are everywhere around us.
我們所需要來贏的英吋在我們的周遭
They are in ever break of the game
它們在每一場比賽的關鍵時刻
every minute, every second.
在每一分, 每一秒
On this team, we fight for that inch
在這個團隊裡, 我們為那個英吋奮鬥
On this team, we tear ourselves, and everyone around us to pieces for that inch.
在這個團隊裡, 我們為了那個英吋我們可以撕裂我們自己跟周遭的人
We CLAW with our finger nails for that inch.
我們用我們的指甲抓那個英吋
Because we know when we add up all those inches
因為我們知道當我們把那些英吋加起來的時候,
that's going to make the fucking difference
那將會決定
between WINNING and LOSING
成功或失敗
between LIVING and DYING.
生存或死亡
I'll tell you this
我可以肯定的告訴你
in any fight
在任何戰鬥裡
it is the guy who is willing to die
永遠是那個願意戰到死的人
who is going to win that inch.
能爭取到那個英吋
And I know if I am going to have any life anymore
而且我知道, 假如我還活著
it's because, I am still willing to fight,
是因為我還願意去奮鬥,
and die for that inch
而且願意為了贏到那個英吋而死
because that is what LIVING is.
因為那就是人生的意義
The six inches in front of your face.
那個在你面前的六英吋
Now I can't make you do it.
我不能強迫你去戰鬥
You gotta look at the guy next to you.
你必須看看你旁邊的人
Look into his eyes.
看這他們的眼睛
Now I think you are going to see a guy who will go that inch with you.
我想你會看到一個願意跟你一起為那個英吋奮鬥的人
You are going to see a guy
你將會看到一個
who will sacrifice himself for this team
願意為這個團隊犧牲的人,
because he knows when it comes down to it,
因為他知道當時候來臨時,
you are gonna do the same thing for him.
你也會為他犧牲
That's a team, gentlemen
那就是團隊, 紳士們
And either we heal now, as a team,
除非我們現在團結成一個團隊
or we will die as individuals.
我們將會一個個獨自的死去
That's football guys.
這就是美式足球
That's all it is.
就是這樣而已
Now, whattaya gonna do?
那現在, 你們要怎麼做?
2008年7月12日星期六
Warren Buffett MBA Talk
Video of Warren Buffett talk at University of Florida. Enjoy!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6231308980849895261
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6231308980849895261
2008年6月29日星期日
Wanniski.com has come to an end.....
Jude Wanniski is one of my greatest teachers. I learnt a lot of fundamental knowledge in financial history, such as gold standard and inflation, from his website, http://www.wanniski.com. After his death a few years ago, the website continued to run until it has stopped recently.
Fortunately, his essays and teaching are still available on a new website: http://www.polyconomics.com/ssu.html
Please spend some time and check it out.
Fortunately, his essays and teaching are still available on a new website: http://www.polyconomics.com/ssu.html
Please spend some time and check it out.
2008年6月28日星期六
2008年6月6日星期五
多 難 豆 腐 渣
胡 錦 濤 是 幹 實 事 的 ， 並 非 演 藝 界 一 員 ， 遣 詞 造 句 ， 政 治 100% 正 確 到 不 得 了 ， 所 以 永 遠 不 會 向 災 民 許 下 「 認 定 了 這 是 一 輩 子 的 承 諾 」 。 反 觀 溫 家 寶 ， 左 一 句 政 府 會 管 好 你 們 ， 右 一 句 政 府 會 照 顧 你 們 ， 讓 人 差 點 以 為 ， 512 關 愛 行 動 那 首 主 題 曲 是 他 老 人 家 幕 後 操 刀 填 詞 。 溫 總 在 黑 板 奮 書 「 多 難 興 邦 」 ， 滿 懷 書 生 悲 國 難 的 熱 血 腔 ， 胡 主 席 沒 這 麼 浪 漫 ， 他 一 言 九 鼎 的 是 「 一 方 有 難 ， 八 方 支 援 ， 自 力 更 生 ， 艱 苦 奮 鬥 」 。 用 廣 東 話 解 讀 ， 就 是 叫 你 自 己 執 生 ！ 油 尖 潮 語 講 法 ， 就 是 請 閣 下 「 食 自 己 」 ， 自 己 看 辦 ， 阿 爺 射 唔 住 你 ！
多 難 興 邦 ， 難 免 落 入 日 劇 化 的 對 白 的 窠 臼 ， 追 本 溯 源 ， 多 難 的 源 頭 是 豆 腐 渣 工 程 ， 讓 辛 苦 把 孩 子 送 入 學 校 念 書 的 家 長 ， 希 望 瞬 間 化 為 烏 有 。 是 誰 讓 邦 國 多 難 ？ 就 是 一 方 有 難 ， 自 己 率 先 逃 離 現 場 的 那 批 豆 腐 渣 工 程 主 謀 人 。 育 部 沒 有 負 責 人 因 為 九 千 多 條 學 童 的 人 命 而 丟 官 ， 多 難 興 旺 了 的 ， 是 不 要 臉 的 幹 部 和 跟 他 們 有 裙 帶 關 係 包 攬 豆 腐 渣 工 程 直 接 殺 害 學 童 的 這 些 人 。 孩 子 死 了 ， 家 長 捧 遺 照 在 校 外 守 了 三 日 三 夜 的 靈 ， 哪 裏 見 到 有 關 領 導 人 去 向 問 候 一 聲 ？ 中 央 台 集 中 重 播 的 是 「 陳 堅 最 後 72 小 時 」 和 解 放 軍 戰 士 救 災 扶 危 的 報 道 ， 陳 堅 遭 救 援 人 員 心 外 壓 時 壓 得 胸 腔 怪 響 的 鏡 頭 叫 人 看 得 會 倒 背 了 ， 中 央 台 幾 時 才 會 對 豆 腐 渣 下 的 亡 魂 ， 有 個 「 說 法 」 ？
陳也 - 蘋果日報
多 難 興 邦 ， 難 免 落 入 日 劇 化 的 對 白 的 窠 臼 ， 追 本 溯 源 ， 多 難 的 源 頭 是 豆 腐 渣 工 程 ， 讓 辛 苦 把 孩 子 送 入 學 校 念 書 的 家 長 ， 希 望 瞬 間 化 為 烏 有 。 是 誰 讓 邦 國 多 難 ？ 就 是 一 方 有 難 ， 自 己 率 先 逃 離 現 場 的 那 批 豆 腐 渣 工 程 主 謀 人 。 育 部 沒 有 負 責 人 因 為 九 千 多 條 學 童 的 人 命 而 丟 官 ， 多 難 興 旺 了 的 ， 是 不 要 臉 的 幹 部 和 跟 他 們 有 裙 帶 關 係 包 攬 豆 腐 渣 工 程 直 接 殺 害 學 童 的 這 些 人 。 孩 子 死 了 ， 家 長 捧 遺 照 在 校 外 守 了 三 日 三 夜 的 靈 ， 哪 裏 見 到 有 關 領 導 人 去 向 問 候 一 聲 ？ 中 央 台 集 中 重 播 的 是 「 陳 堅 最 後 72 小 時 」 和 解 放 軍 戰 士 救 災 扶 危 的 報 道 ， 陳 堅 遭 救 援 人 員 心 外 壓 時 壓 得 胸 腔 怪 響 的 鏡 頭 叫 人 看 得 會 倒 背 了 ， 中 央 台 幾 時 才 會 對 豆 腐 渣 下 的 亡 魂 ， 有 個 「 說 法 」 ？
陳也 - 蘋果日報
2008年5月21日星期三
地震雲
Today I found another interesting article on pre-earthquake phenomenon, known as EARTHQUAKE CLOUD.
早在17世紀中國古籍中就有“晝中或日落之後，天際晴朗，而有細雲如一綫，甚長，震兆也”的記載，1935年我國寧夏的隆德縣《重修隆德縣志》中記載有“天晴日暖，碧空清淨，忽見黑雲如縷，婉如長蛇，橫臥天際，久而不散，勢必爲地震”
但是，世界各國對于地震雲的研究還是最近幾年的事，其中以我國和日本處于領先地位，我國對地震雲的研究始于1976年唐山大地震之後，目前成功的例證有十餘個，日本利用地震雲預報地震成功的例證有上百個，有趣的是，首先提出“地震雲”這個名字的不是地震學者，而是一政治家，他就是日本前福岡市市長鍵田忠三郎，他曾經親身經曆過日本福岡1956年的7級地震，幷且在地震時親眼看到天空中有一種非常奇特的雲，以後只要這種雲出現，總有地震相應發生，所以他就把這樣的雲稱爲“地震雲”。
那麽，什麽樣的雲才是地震雲呢？這種雲的最大特點在于“奇”，與一般的雲有著明顯的區別。
蔚藍的天空中有時會留下一條飛機的尾迹，常見的條帶狀地震雲很像飛機的尾迹，不過更加厚實和豐滿些，它一般預示震中處于雲向的垂直綫上。
另外有一種輻射狀的地震雲，則有數條的帶狀雲同時相交在一點，猶如一把沒有扇面的扇骨鋪在空中，雲的交點垂直于地面就是震中所在地。
此外還有一種條紋狀地震雲，形似人的兩排肋骨，根據此雲判斷震中較爲複雜。
地震雲出現的時間以早上和傍晚居多，地震雲持續的時間越長，則對應的震中就越近，地震雲的長度越長，則距離發生地震的時間就越近，地震雲的顔色看上去越令人KB，則所對應的地震强度就越强。
目前，對于地震雲的形成原因衆說紛談，雖然各有道理，但是都不能完整的解釋地震前出現的這種現象，所以至今還是個謎，而且地震本身是個非常複雜的過程，所以預報地震，最好采用綜合法。
http://www.takungpao.com/news/08/05/13/ZM-904496.htm
早在17世紀中國古籍中就有“晝中或日落之後，天際晴朗，而有細雲如一綫，甚長，震兆也”的記載，1935年我國寧夏的隆德縣《重修隆德縣志》中記載有“天晴日暖，碧空清淨，忽見黑雲如縷，婉如長蛇，橫臥天際，久而不散，勢必爲地震”
但是，世界各國對于地震雲的研究還是最近幾年的事，其中以我國和日本處于領先地位，我國對地震雲的研究始于1976年唐山大地震之後，目前成功的例證有十餘個，日本利用地震雲預報地震成功的例證有上百個，有趣的是，首先提出“地震雲”這個名字的不是地震學者，而是一政治家，他就是日本前福岡市市長鍵田忠三郎，他曾經親身經曆過日本福岡1956年的7級地震，幷且在地震時親眼看到天空中有一種非常奇特的雲，以後只要這種雲出現，總有地震相應發生，所以他就把這樣的雲稱爲“地震雲”。
那麽，什麽樣的雲才是地震雲呢？這種雲的最大特點在于“奇”，與一般的雲有著明顯的區別。
蔚藍的天空中有時會留下一條飛機的尾迹，常見的條帶狀地震雲很像飛機的尾迹，不過更加厚實和豐滿些，它一般預示震中處于雲向的垂直綫上。
另外有一種輻射狀的地震雲，則有數條的帶狀雲同時相交在一點，猶如一把沒有扇面的扇骨鋪在空中，雲的交點垂直于地面就是震中所在地。
此外還有一種條紋狀地震雲，形似人的兩排肋骨，根據此雲判斷震中較爲複雜。
地震雲出現的時間以早上和傍晚居多，地震雲持續的時間越長，則對應的震中就越近，地震雲的長度越長，則距離發生地震的時間就越近，地震雲的顔色看上去越令人KB，則所對應的地震强度就越强。
目前，對于地震雲的形成原因衆說紛談，雖然各有道理，但是都不能完整的解釋地震前出現的這種現象，所以至今還是個謎，而且地震本身是個非常複雜的過程，所以預報地震，最好采用綜合法。
http://www.takungpao.com/news/08/05/13/ZM-904496.htm
2008年5月20日星期二
Study Warned of China Quake Risk Nearly a Year Ago
I think it is more appropriate for me to talk about geopraphic rather than economics.
Kevin Holden Platt in Beijing for National Geographic News
May 16, 2008
Just ten months before a deadly earthquake struck Sichuan Province's Beichuan county on May 12, a scientific study warned that the Chinese region was ripe for a major quake.
After examining satellite images and conducting on-the-ground inspections of deep, active faults in Sichuan Province for more than a decade, scientists issued a warning.
"The faults are sufficiently long to sustain a strong ground-shaking earthquake, making them potentially serious sources of regional seismic hazard," the Chinese, European, and U.S. geoscientists wrote in the mid-July 2007 edition of the journal Tectonics.
They concluded that clashing tectonic forces were growing in Beichuan, ready to burst in an explosion of seismic energy.
With precision and what now seems like eerie foresight, the researchers charted the active faults on multicolored maps of Beichuan, which turned out to be the epicenter of the recent earthquake.
"As far as I know, this is the only investigation of these active faults," said study co-author Michael Ellis of the Center for Earthquake Research and Information at the University of Memphis in Tennessee.
(Related: "China Quake Delivered Seismic One-Two Punch" [May 15, 2008].)
The magnitude 7.9 quake that struck on May 12 almost entirely leveled parts of Sichuan Province. Chinese officials today estimated that the death toll would reach 50,000 and that nearly five million people are homeless.
(See photos of the earthquake's destruction.)
"Locked in a Journal"
There is little reason to believe Chinese officials were aware of the July 2007 report, or that it would have made much difference if they had been.
"We had certainly identified the potential of these active faults," Ellis said. "But that information was effectively locked in an academic journal."
Ellis hopes that replacing the collapsed buildings with earthquake-proof structures could prevent future tragedies.
"I've been to these little towns [before the quake]," Ellis said. "Most of the houses are built of unreinforced masonry, and you can see little brick factories all around this area.
"It is more expensive to build earthquake-proof structures," he added. And the vast majority of people in Sichuan Province are anything but rich.
The Science Behind the Quake
Earthquake activity is nothing new in Beichuan.
"We have shown evidence for surface-rupturing earthquakes along the Beichuan fault since 12,000-13,000 years ago," Ellis and colleagues reported last summer.
Speaking with National Geographic News, Ellis said, "Ultimately, the [2008] earthquake is related to the continuing and inexorable collision of India with Asia, which is occurring at a rate of about 20 to 22 milimeters [just under an inch] per year."
This collision started more than 50 million years ago, when the tectonic plate beneath India crashed into the Eurasian plate. (Watch how the plates slammed into each other.)
"The Himalayas and all of Tibet was created by this collision," Ellis added.
As the Indian plate continues its slow-motion crash into Asia—sometimes in jerks marked by earthquakes—it is pushing the entire Tibetan Plateau northward.
"This earthquake was the Tibetan mountains moving east over the plains of Chengdu [the capital of Sichuan Province]," said Roger Bilham, a geoscientist at the University of Colorado who was not involved in the July 2007 study.
Not Just Sichuan's Problem
Study co-author Ellis said that, as the Tibetan Plateau moves northward, "the interior parts of Tibet are collapsing, rather like a soufflé taken out of the oven into cold air."
Faults along the southern, Himalayan edge of Tibet present hazards as great as those underlying the Sichuan temblor, Ellis said.
"Risk associated with the loss of collateral and lives is very high along the Himalaya, because so many people live there or immediately downstream," Ellis added.
"The risk is similarly high in Sichuan [to the east], because of the population and, like India and Nepal, the relatively poor building standards," he said.
And as India continues to pound into Tibet, "it is still creating new fault lines"—and new dangers.
Kevin Holden Platt in Beijing for National Geographic News
May 16, 2008
Just ten months before a deadly earthquake struck Sichuan Province's Beichuan county on May 12, a scientific study warned that the Chinese region was ripe for a major quake.
After examining satellite images and conducting on-the-ground inspections of deep, active faults in Sichuan Province for more than a decade, scientists issued a warning.
"The faults are sufficiently long to sustain a strong ground-shaking earthquake, making them potentially serious sources of regional seismic hazard," the Chinese, European, and U.S. geoscientists wrote in the mid-July 2007 edition of the journal Tectonics.
They concluded that clashing tectonic forces were growing in Beichuan, ready to burst in an explosion of seismic energy.
With precision and what now seems like eerie foresight, the researchers charted the active faults on multicolored maps of Beichuan, which turned out to be the epicenter of the recent earthquake.
"As far as I know, this is the only investigation of these active faults," said study co-author Michael Ellis of the Center for Earthquake Research and Information at the University of Memphis in Tennessee.
(Related: "China Quake Delivered Seismic One-Two Punch" [May 15, 2008].)
The magnitude 7.9 quake that struck on May 12 almost entirely leveled parts of Sichuan Province. Chinese officials today estimated that the death toll would reach 50,000 and that nearly five million people are homeless.
(See photos of the earthquake's destruction.)
"Locked in a Journal"
There is little reason to believe Chinese officials were aware of the July 2007 report, or that it would have made much difference if they had been.
"We had certainly identified the potential of these active faults," Ellis said. "But that information was effectively locked in an academic journal."
Ellis hopes that replacing the collapsed buildings with earthquake-proof structures could prevent future tragedies.
"I've been to these little towns [before the quake]," Ellis said. "Most of the houses are built of unreinforced masonry, and you can see little brick factories all around this area.
"It is more expensive to build earthquake-proof structures," he added. And the vast majority of people in Sichuan Province are anything but rich.
The Science Behind the Quake
Earthquake activity is nothing new in Beichuan.
"We have shown evidence for surface-rupturing earthquakes along the Beichuan fault since 12,000-13,000 years ago," Ellis and colleagues reported last summer.
Speaking with National Geographic News, Ellis said, "Ultimately, the [2008] earthquake is related to the continuing and inexorable collision of India with Asia, which is occurring at a rate of about 20 to 22 milimeters [just under an inch] per year."
This collision started more than 50 million years ago, when the tectonic plate beneath India crashed into the Eurasian plate. (Watch how the plates slammed into each other.)
"The Himalayas and all of Tibet was created by this collision," Ellis added.
As the Indian plate continues its slow-motion crash into Asia—sometimes in jerks marked by earthquakes—it is pushing the entire Tibetan Plateau northward.
"This earthquake was the Tibetan mountains moving east over the plains of Chengdu [the capital of Sichuan Province]," said Roger Bilham, a geoscientist at the University of Colorado who was not involved in the July 2007 study.
Not Just Sichuan's Problem
Study co-author Ellis said that, as the Tibetan Plateau moves northward, "the interior parts of Tibet are collapsing, rather like a soufflé taken out of the oven into cold air."
Faults along the southern, Himalayan edge of Tibet present hazards as great as those underlying the Sichuan temblor, Ellis said.
"Risk associated with the loss of collateral and lives is very high along the Himalaya, because so many people live there or immediately downstream," Ellis added.
"The risk is similarly high in Sichuan [to the east], because of the population and, like India and Nepal, the relatively poor building standards," he said.
And as India continues to pound into Tibet, "it is still creating new fault lines"—and new dangers.
2008年5月7日星期三
Buffett advice: Buy smart...and low
Warren Buffett said investors should think independently when making buying choices. The Korean market trumps American banks.
Jason Zweig, Money Magazine senior writer/columnist
Last Updated: May 6, 2008: 1:15 PM EDT
OMAHA (Money Magazine) -- On Sunday, May 4, I attended the press conference where Berkshire Hathaway Chief Executive Warren Buffett and vice chairman Charlie Munger took questions from print reporters for two hours, then went off and did more interviews for TV.
Buffett, who composes his thoughts at blazing speed and speaks in long and complex paragraphs, spent the entire weekend talking. Munger, who is as laconic as Buffett is loquacious, saves his voice - speaking, as always, only a handful of words at a time.
Buffett and Munger, aged 77 and 84 respectively, have the mental energy and sharpness of someone half their age.
Here are some highlights.
Building a philosophy
In response to a question from Barbara Kiviat of Time on how he and Munger control their emotions, Buffett replied: "[It] comes about from having an investment philosophy grounded in the idea that a stock is a piece of a business. If you look at it that way, there's no reason to get excited whether some analyst is recommending it or the company is splitting the shares two-for-one, or whatever. The only way to drive the extraneous thoughts out of your mind is to have a philosophy. And for us that philosophy comes from Benjamin Graham and The Intelligent Investor, especially chapters 8 and 20. It's not very complicated stuff."
"You have to have the right temperament. I tell the students who come visit me that if you have more than 120 or 130 I.Q. points, you can afford to give the rest away. You don't need extraordinary intelligence to succeed as an investor. You need a philosophy and the ability to think independently...It doesn't make any difference what other people think of a stock. What matters is whether you know enough to evaluate the business," he opined.
"You should be able to write down on a yellow sheet of paper, 'I'm buying General Motors at $22, and GM has [566] million shares for a total market value of $13 billion, and GM is worth a lot more than $13 billion because _______________." And if you can't finish that sentence, then you don't buy the stock. [Note: Buffett mentioned GM for illustrative purposes only.] All this requires some temperamental detachment from other people's behavior. Both Charlie and I have a natural instinct in that direction. We value our opinions more than others' -- perhaps to an extreme!"
Kiviat followed up by asking whether they mind being regarded as "a bastion of calm" by others. Buffett simply stated, "I think they're probably right," while Munger was more loquacious: "Not only are they right, but it's a huge advantage to us to get the reputation of being wiser and stronger than other places. Would any of you object to being considered wiser and stronger when you're trying to get anything in life? The key is not to be seduced by crazy ideas, but instead just stick to the fundamentals year after year. Academia doesn't get too interested in us -- we're too simple. What would the professors do? A great many of the formulas [they use to analyze securities and markets] are dead wrong. They exist purely to give the intellectual class something to do. We don't do anything just exercise our intellectual proclivity for mathematical formulas."
Then Buffet said one of the most remarkable things I've ever heard him say: "There's no reason we should become fearful if a stock goes down. If a stock goes down 50%, I'd look forward to it. In fact, I would offer you a significant sum of money if you could give me the opportunity for all of my stocks to go down 50% over the next month."
Look at that sentence again. What Buffett is actually saying is that most people's emotions work backwards: They get greedy when stock prices go up and fearful when they go down. Instead, if you are a true investor, you should shop for stocks the same way you shop for anything else: Look for sale prices, and never regard falling prices as inherently bad news. Instead, falling prices create the opportunity to buy even more of something that was already worth owning.
In that single sentence Buffett captured the difference between investing and speculating: An investor, like Buffett, wants the price of a stock to fall below the value of its underlying business so he can buy even more and hold for as long as possible. A speculator (like Jim Cramer) only wants the price of a stock to go up, with no regard for the value of the underlying business at all, so he can sell as fast as possible. To the investor, the market's opinions do not matter. To the speculator, they are the only thing that matters.
Bond insurers beware
In what may spell trouble for bond insurers MBIA and AMBAC, Buffett said, "We see every day that people are coming to us and paying more than they paid the original bond insurer to see that they have an insurer." Berkshire wrote $400 million in municipal-bond insurance in the first quarter of 2008 and is already licensed to operate in 49 states. "This is entirely a secondary-market business," said Buffett, "where people are telling us, 'We'll pay you just to back them up.' "
Note carefully what is going on here: People who already have insurance on a very low-risk investment (municipal bonds) are coming to Buffett and asking him to ensure that their existing insurance will be adequate. It is like a man who is already wearing a belt paying you to put a pair of suspenders on him. This is the kind of business that Buffett loves. Without naming names, he criticized MBIA and AMBAC for ravaging their own capital by insuring too much dicey mortgage debt: "If they keep writing the business at any price, eventually the secondary market is likely to reflect that in the price [of bonds that carry their insurance]. And if you're writing business to pay for yesterday's losses, you'll be sorry."
Then Buffett marveled at the fact that "You have one bond insurer whose stock went from $96 to $4 [AMBAC (ABK)] and they're still rated AAA. The other one issued 14% paper with Treasuries at 4% [MBIA (MBI)] and they're still rated AAA." At that point, Munger elicited laughter from the room by intoning, "The rating agencies, with 20-20 hindsight, could have done better."
Korea and China vs. U.S. regional banks
When a Korean journalist asked whether Berkshire would buy any other Korean companies in addition to its existing holding in steelmaker Posco, Buffett revealed that he had bought "a number of" Korean stocks for his personal portfolio "a few years ago," when "that stock market got about as cheap as any market I've seen in my lifetime."
But most Korean stocks are too small to have a significant impact on Berkshire's portfolio, so Buffett and Munger don't expect to put much money there. Nevertheless, "Korea represents sound value," said Munger, and Buffett added: "It's one of the better stock markets in the world."
Later, in answering a question about whether the credit crisis has turned regional bank stocks into good values, Buffett said: "It's hard to get much conviction on how [the management] will behave and whether they tell the truth. There's a lot of leeway [in the accounting procedures and the reported financial statements]. Talking to the CEOs isn't very useful. When they're lying, they believe it themselves a lot of the time. I want to see how people behave in different situations."
In short, Buffett is not bullish on regional banks. Munger, however, was more upbeat: "For somebody who's very diligent, you've identified a prospecting territory that has some promise. It wouldn't necessarily work for us [because BRK needs to buy very large blocks of stock], but it might work for others."
Buffett wasn't done criticizing the impervious financial statements of US banks: "If you had $1 million," he retorted to Munger, "it would be easier to go through a manual of Korean stocks than to select a few good American banks." This time Munger agreed: "I'd take the Korean stock market so much faster than the American banks that it'd make your head spin."
I don't think, by the way, that Buffett and Munger were trying to say that the Korean stock market is a steal. They were, instead, merely pointing out that investors need to think for themselves and to cast a wide net. If you run out today and buy a bunch of Korean stocks without researching them first, you're not following Buffett and Munger's advice, you're violating it.
A Chinese reporter asked whether Berkshire will be buying more stocks in China now that its market has fallen by almost half, and what the next year will hold for Chinese investors. Buffett's answer held a lesson for investors based anywhere. "We're not in the business of forecasting what the market will do in the next year," said Buffett. "But if a market goes down, we like that. There's no way Charlie and I get upset when stocks go down. We like it, because falling prices give us the opportunity to buy more good businesses at better prices."
"We don't predict stock prices," he went on to day. "All we know is, the lower they go, the more interesting they get. I think it was Agatha Christie, who was married to an archeologist, who said: 'I don't mind getting older, because the older I get, the more interested my husband becomes in me.' Well, the lower stock prices go, the more interested we get in them...We are not looking at any stocks in China now, but China will always be on our radar screen."
Valuing stocks
Asked how he evaluates financial stocks when so many have balance sheets complicated by derivatives, Buffett said: "There are some that I can't value. I probably couldn't value them even if I worked there, even if I were in charge, and even if I had a year to do it. It's just too complicated [with such large positions in complex derivatives]....Most of them, I'm agnostic. I guess that means I don't trust them. When you're buying stock in a financial institution, you should have a reason to be quite comfortable with the risk-assessment capabilities of the people in charge...to have a real fix on the people running the institution. We can't do that with a lot of [banks]. We just can't figure out what they're doing most of the time.... [the accounting doesn't] really spell out where the institution stands. So you'd better know more about the people running it than any set of figures can give you."
Buffett added that not long ago, he read the 270-page 10-K annual report of a bank he was curious about. "After a couple of hours," he said, "I had about 25 pages marked with big question marks that I couldn't answer." (This raises the obvious question: If Warren Buffett can't understand the financial statements of big banks with derivatives, who can?)
Munger summed up the complexity of derivatives this way: "Wall Street is always going to go where the money is and not worry about the consequences. First they invent things they shouldn't sell to anybody, then they end up selling them to their grandmothers."
Munger commented later, "Many of the present troubles were richly deserved. A lot of financial institutions behaved with a combination of stupidity and over-reaching, and that's not a good combination. I think the world is right to exact a large penalty. Capitalism wouldn't exist without failure."
Added Buffett: "Capitalism without failure is like Christianity without hell. These institutions not only brewed the Kool-Aid but drank it. [Some of the banks and mortgage companies] were like an arsonist who got caught in the house after he set it on fire."
Munger's final word on the subject: "In some of these institutions, the main product is not banking, it's testosterone."
http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/05/news/companies/buffet.pm.wrap/
Jason Zweig, Money Magazine senior writer/columnist
Last Updated: May 6, 2008: 1:15 PM EDT
OMAHA (Money Magazine) -- On Sunday, May 4, I attended the press conference where Berkshire Hathaway Chief Executive Warren Buffett and vice chairman Charlie Munger took questions from print reporters for two hours, then went off and did more interviews for TV.
Buffett, who composes his thoughts at blazing speed and speaks in long and complex paragraphs, spent the entire weekend talking. Munger, who is as laconic as Buffett is loquacious, saves his voice - speaking, as always, only a handful of words at a time.
Buffett and Munger, aged 77 and 84 respectively, have the mental energy and sharpness of someone half their age.
Here are some highlights.
Building a philosophy
In response to a question from Barbara Kiviat of Time on how he and Munger control their emotions, Buffett replied: "[It] comes about from having an investment philosophy grounded in the idea that a stock is a piece of a business. If you look at it that way, there's no reason to get excited whether some analyst is recommending it or the company is splitting the shares two-for-one, or whatever. The only way to drive the extraneous thoughts out of your mind is to have a philosophy. And for us that philosophy comes from Benjamin Graham and The Intelligent Investor, especially chapters 8 and 20. It's not very complicated stuff."
"You have to have the right temperament. I tell the students who come visit me that if you have more than 120 or 130 I.Q. points, you can afford to give the rest away. You don't need extraordinary intelligence to succeed as an investor. You need a philosophy and the ability to think independently...It doesn't make any difference what other people think of a stock. What matters is whether you know enough to evaluate the business," he opined.
"You should be able to write down on a yellow sheet of paper, 'I'm buying General Motors at $22, and GM has [566] million shares for a total market value of $13 billion, and GM is worth a lot more than $13 billion because _______________." And if you can't finish that sentence, then you don't buy the stock. [Note: Buffett mentioned GM for illustrative purposes only.] All this requires some temperamental detachment from other people's behavior. Both Charlie and I have a natural instinct in that direction. We value our opinions more than others' -- perhaps to an extreme!"
Kiviat followed up by asking whether they mind being regarded as "a bastion of calm" by others. Buffett simply stated, "I think they're probably right," while Munger was more loquacious: "Not only are they right, but it's a huge advantage to us to get the reputation of being wiser and stronger than other places. Would any of you object to being considered wiser and stronger when you're trying to get anything in life? The key is not to be seduced by crazy ideas, but instead just stick to the fundamentals year after year. Academia doesn't get too interested in us -- we're too simple. What would the professors do? A great many of the formulas [they use to analyze securities and markets] are dead wrong. They exist purely to give the intellectual class something to do. We don't do anything just exercise our intellectual proclivity for mathematical formulas."
Then Buffet said one of the most remarkable things I've ever heard him say: "There's no reason we should become fearful if a stock goes down. If a stock goes down 50%, I'd look forward to it. In fact, I would offer you a significant sum of money if you could give me the opportunity for all of my stocks to go down 50% over the next month."
Look at that sentence again. What Buffett is actually saying is that most people's emotions work backwards: They get greedy when stock prices go up and fearful when they go down. Instead, if you are a true investor, you should shop for stocks the same way you shop for anything else: Look for sale prices, and never regard falling prices as inherently bad news. Instead, falling prices create the opportunity to buy even more of something that was already worth owning.
In that single sentence Buffett captured the difference between investing and speculating: An investor, like Buffett, wants the price of a stock to fall below the value of its underlying business so he can buy even more and hold for as long as possible. A speculator (like Jim Cramer) only wants the price of a stock to go up, with no regard for the value of the underlying business at all, so he can sell as fast as possible. To the investor, the market's opinions do not matter. To the speculator, they are the only thing that matters.
Bond insurers beware
In what may spell trouble for bond insurers MBIA and AMBAC, Buffett said, "We see every day that people are coming to us and paying more than they paid the original bond insurer to see that they have an insurer." Berkshire wrote $400 million in municipal-bond insurance in the first quarter of 2008 and is already licensed to operate in 49 states. "This is entirely a secondary-market business," said Buffett, "where people are telling us, 'We'll pay you just to back them up.' "
Note carefully what is going on here: People who already have insurance on a very low-risk investment (municipal bonds) are coming to Buffett and asking him to ensure that their existing insurance will be adequate. It is like a man who is already wearing a belt paying you to put a pair of suspenders on him. This is the kind of business that Buffett loves. Without naming names, he criticized MBIA and AMBAC for ravaging their own capital by insuring too much dicey mortgage debt: "If they keep writing the business at any price, eventually the secondary market is likely to reflect that in the price [of bonds that carry their insurance]. And if you're writing business to pay for yesterday's losses, you'll be sorry."
Then Buffett marveled at the fact that "You have one bond insurer whose stock went from $96 to $4 [AMBAC (ABK)] and they're still rated AAA. The other one issued 14% paper with Treasuries at 4% [MBIA (MBI)] and they're still rated AAA." At that point, Munger elicited laughter from the room by intoning, "The rating agencies, with 20-20 hindsight, could have done better."
Korea and China vs. U.S. regional banks
When a Korean journalist asked whether Berkshire would buy any other Korean companies in addition to its existing holding in steelmaker Posco, Buffett revealed that he had bought "a number of" Korean stocks for his personal portfolio "a few years ago," when "that stock market got about as cheap as any market I've seen in my lifetime."
But most Korean stocks are too small to have a significant impact on Berkshire's portfolio, so Buffett and Munger don't expect to put much money there. Nevertheless, "Korea represents sound value," said Munger, and Buffett added: "It's one of the better stock markets in the world."
Later, in answering a question about whether the credit crisis has turned regional bank stocks into good values, Buffett said: "It's hard to get much conviction on how [the management] will behave and whether they tell the truth. There's a lot of leeway [in the accounting procedures and the reported financial statements]. Talking to the CEOs isn't very useful. When they're lying, they believe it themselves a lot of the time. I want to see how people behave in different situations."
In short, Buffett is not bullish on regional banks. Munger, however, was more upbeat: "For somebody who's very diligent, you've identified a prospecting territory that has some promise. It wouldn't necessarily work for us [because BRK needs to buy very large blocks of stock], but it might work for others."
Buffett wasn't done criticizing the impervious financial statements of US banks: "If you had $1 million," he retorted to Munger, "it would be easier to go through a manual of Korean stocks than to select a few good American banks." This time Munger agreed: "I'd take the Korean stock market so much faster than the American banks that it'd make your head spin."
I don't think, by the way, that Buffett and Munger were trying to say that the Korean stock market is a steal. They were, instead, merely pointing out that investors need to think for themselves and to cast a wide net. If you run out today and buy a bunch of Korean stocks without researching them first, you're not following Buffett and Munger's advice, you're violating it.
A Chinese reporter asked whether Berkshire will be buying more stocks in China now that its market has fallen by almost half, and what the next year will hold for Chinese investors. Buffett's answer held a lesson for investors based anywhere. "We're not in the business of forecasting what the market will do in the next year," said Buffett. "But if a market goes down, we like that. There's no way Charlie and I get upset when stocks go down. We like it, because falling prices give us the opportunity to buy more good businesses at better prices."
"We don't predict stock prices," he went on to day. "All we know is, the lower they go, the more interesting they get. I think it was Agatha Christie, who was married to an archeologist, who said: 'I don't mind getting older, because the older I get, the more interested my husband becomes in me.' Well, the lower stock prices go, the more interested we get in them...We are not looking at any stocks in China now, but China will always be on our radar screen."
Valuing stocks
Asked how he evaluates financial stocks when so many have balance sheets complicated by derivatives, Buffett said: "There are some that I can't value. I probably couldn't value them even if I worked there, even if I were in charge, and even if I had a year to do it. It's just too complicated [with such large positions in complex derivatives]....Most of them, I'm agnostic. I guess that means I don't trust them. When you're buying stock in a financial institution, you should have a reason to be quite comfortable with the risk-assessment capabilities of the people in charge...to have a real fix on the people running the institution. We can't do that with a lot of [banks]. We just can't figure out what they're doing most of the time.... [the accounting doesn't] really spell out where the institution stands. So you'd better know more about the people running it than any set of figures can give you."
Buffett added that not long ago, he read the 270-page 10-K annual report of a bank he was curious about. "After a couple of hours," he said, "I had about 25 pages marked with big question marks that I couldn't answer." (This raises the obvious question: If Warren Buffett can't understand the financial statements of big banks with derivatives, who can?)
Munger summed up the complexity of derivatives this way: "Wall Street is always going to go where the money is and not worry about the consequences. First they invent things they shouldn't sell to anybody, then they end up selling them to their grandmothers."
Munger commented later, "Many of the present troubles were richly deserved. A lot of financial institutions behaved with a combination of stupidity and over-reaching, and that's not a good combination. I think the world is right to exact a large penalty. Capitalism wouldn't exist without failure."
Added Buffett: "Capitalism without failure is like Christianity without hell. These institutions not only brewed the Kool-Aid but drank it. [Some of the banks and mortgage companies] were like an arsonist who got caught in the house after he set it on fire."
Munger's final word on the subject: "In some of these institutions, the main product is not banking, it's testosterone."
http://money.cnn.com/2008/05/05/news/companies/buffet.pm.wrap/
2008年4月18日星期五
Buffett's on "Mr. Market"
Whenever Charlie and I buy common stocks for Berkshire's insurance companies (leaving aside arbitrage purchases, discussed later) we approach the transaction as if we were buying into a private business. We look at the economic prospects of the business, the people in charge of running it, and the price we must pay. We do not have in mind any time or price for sale. Indeed, we are willing to hold a stock indefinitely so long as we expect the business to increase in intrinsic value at a satisfactory rate. When investing, we view ourselves as business analysts - not as market analysts, not as macroeconomic analysts, and not even as security analysts.
Our approach makes an active trading market useful, since it periodically presents us with mouth-watering opportunities. But by no means is it essential: a prolonged suspension of trading in the securities we hold would not bother us any more than does the lack of daily quotations on World Book or Fechheimer. Eventually, our economic fate will be determined by the economic fate of the business we own, whether our ownership is partial or total.
Ben Graham, my friend and teacher, long ago described the mental attitude toward market fluctuations that I believe to be most conducive to investment success. He said that you should imagine market quotations as coming from a remarkably accommodating fellow named Mr. Market who is your partner in a private business. Without fail, Mr. Market appears daily and names a price at which he will either buy your interest or sell you his.
Even though the business that the two of you own may have economic characteristics that are stable, Mr. Market's quotations will be anything but. For, sad to say, the poor fellow has incurable emotional problems. At times he feels euphoric and can see only the favorable factors affecting the business. When in that mood, he names a very high buy-sell price because he fears that you will snap up his interest and rob him of imminent gains. At other times he is depressed and can see nothing but trouble ahead for both the business and the world. On these occasions he will name a very low price, since he is terrified that you will unload your interest on him.
Mr. Market has another endearing characteristic: He doesn't mind being ignored. If his quotation is uninteresting to you today, he will be back with a new one tomorrow. Transactions are strictly at your option. Under these conditions, the more manic-depressive his behavior, the better for you.But, like Cinderella at the ball, you must heed one warning or everything will turn into pumpkins and mice: Mr. Market is there to serve you, not to guide you. It is his pocketbook, not his wisdom, that you will find useful. If he shows up some day in a particularly foolish mood, you are free to either ignore him or to take advantage of him, but it will be disastrous if you fall under his influence. Indeed, if you aren't certain that you understand and can value your business far better than Mr. Market, you don't belong in the game. As they say in poker, "If you've been in the game 30 minutes and you don't know who the patsy is, you're the patsy."
Ben's Mr. Market allegory may seem out-of-date in today's investment world, in which most professionals and academicians talk of efficient markets, dynamic hedging and betas. Their interest in such matters is understandable, since techniques shrouded in mystery clearly have value to the purveyor of investment advice. After all, what witch doctor has ever achieved fame and fortune by simply advising "Take two aspirins"?
The value of market esoterica to the consumer of investment advice is a different story. In my opinion, investment success will not be produced by arcane formulae, computer programs or signals flashed by the price behavior of stocks and markets. Rather an investor will succeed by coupling good business judgment with an ability to insulate his thoughts and behavior from the super-contagious emotions that swirl about the marketplace. In my own efforts to stay insulated, I have found it highly useful to keep Ben's Mr. Market concept firmly in mind.
Following Ben's teachings, Charlie and I let our marketable equities tell us by their operating results - not by their daily, or even yearly, price quotations - whether our investments are successful. The market may ignore business success for a while, but eventually will confirm it. As Ben said: "In the short run, the market is a voting machine but in the long run it is a weighing machine." The speed at which a business's success is recognized, furthermore, is not that important as long as the company's intrinsic value is increasing at a satisfactory rate. In fact, delayed recognition can be an advantage: It may give us the chance to buy more of a good thing at a bargain price.
Our approach makes an active trading market useful, since it periodically presents us with mouth-watering opportunities. But by no means is it essential: a prolonged suspension of trading in the securities we hold would not bother us any more than does the lack of daily quotations on World Book or Fechheimer. Eventually, our economic fate will be determined by the economic fate of the business we own, whether our ownership is partial or total.
Ben Graham, my friend and teacher, long ago described the mental attitude toward market fluctuations that I believe to be most conducive to investment success. He said that you should imagine market quotations as coming from a remarkably accommodating fellow named Mr. Market who is your partner in a private business. Without fail, Mr. Market appears daily and names a price at which he will either buy your interest or sell you his.
Even though the business that the two of you own may have economic characteristics that are stable, Mr. Market's quotations will be anything but. For, sad to say, the poor fellow has incurable emotional problems. At times he feels euphoric and can see only the favorable factors affecting the business. When in that mood, he names a very high buy-sell price because he fears that you will snap up his interest and rob him of imminent gains. At other times he is depressed and can see nothing but trouble ahead for both the business and the world. On these occasions he will name a very low price, since he is terrified that you will unload your interest on him.
Mr. Market has another endearing characteristic: He doesn't mind being ignored. If his quotation is uninteresting to you today, he will be back with a new one tomorrow. Transactions are strictly at your option. Under these conditions, the more manic-depressive his behavior, the better for you.But, like Cinderella at the ball, you must heed one warning or everything will turn into pumpkins and mice: Mr. Market is there to serve you, not to guide you. It is his pocketbook, not his wisdom, that you will find useful. If he shows up some day in a particularly foolish mood, you are free to either ignore him or to take advantage of him, but it will be disastrous if you fall under his influence. Indeed, if you aren't certain that you understand and can value your business far better than Mr. Market, you don't belong in the game. As they say in poker, "If you've been in the game 30 minutes and you don't know who the patsy is, you're the patsy."
Ben's Mr. Market allegory may seem out-of-date in today's investment world, in which most professionals and academicians talk of efficient markets, dynamic hedging and betas. Their interest in such matters is understandable, since techniques shrouded in mystery clearly have value to the purveyor of investment advice. After all, what witch doctor has ever achieved fame and fortune by simply advising "Take two aspirins"?
The value of market esoterica to the consumer of investment advice is a different story. In my opinion, investment success will not be produced by arcane formulae, computer programs or signals flashed by the price behavior of stocks and markets. Rather an investor will succeed by coupling good business judgment with an ability to insulate his thoughts and behavior from the super-contagious emotions that swirl about the marketplace. In my own efforts to stay insulated, I have found it highly useful to keep Ben's Mr. Market concept firmly in mind.
Following Ben's teachings, Charlie and I let our marketable equities tell us by their operating results - not by their daily, or even yearly, price quotations - whether our investments are successful. The market may ignore business success for a while, but eventually will confirm it. As Ben said: "In the short run, the market is a voting machine but in the long run it is a weighing machine." The speed at which a business's success is recognized, furthermore, is not that important as long as the company's intrinsic value is increasing at a satisfactory rate. In fact, delayed recognition can be an advantage: It may give us the chance to buy more of a good thing at a bargain price.
2008年4月4日星期五
Warren Buffett MBA Talk
This is essentially similar to Warren Buffett's philosophy from the books on my recommended book list.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfuXKpMFUjc
Enjoy it!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DfuXKpMFUjc
Enjoy it!
2008年2月24日星期日
Notes From Buffett Meeting 2/15/2008
Note: Students from Emory's Goizueta Business School and McCombs School of Business at UT Austin were invited to come visit Mr. Buffett for a Q&A session. These notes were reproduced to the best of my ability as I heard and as I could recall them from a collection of mine and other students' notes. There is no guarantee that this was exactly what was said, but the intent was to preserve the spirit of the message. Enjoy.
Emory:
With the popularity of "Fortune's Formula" and the Kelly Criterion, there seems to be a lot of debate in the value community regarding diversification vs. concentration. I know where you side in that discussion, but was curious if you could tell us more about your process for position sizing or averaging down.
With the popularity of "Fortune's Formula" and the Kelly Criterion, there seems to be a lot of debate in the value community regarding diversification vs. concentration. I know where you side in that discussion, but was curious if you could tell us more about your process for position sizing or averaging down.
Buffett:
I have 2 views on diversification. If you are a professional and have confidence, then I would advocate lots of concentration. For everyone else, if it's not your game, participate in total diversification. The economy will do fine over time. Make sure you don't buy at the wrong price or the wrong time. That's what most people should do, buy a cheap index fund and slowly dollar cost average into it. If you try to be just a little bit smart, spending an hour a week investing, you're liable to be really dumb.
I have 2 views on diversification. If you are a professional and have confidence, then I would advocate lots of concentration. For everyone else, if it's not your game, participate in total diversification. The economy will do fine over time. Make sure you don't buy at the wrong price or the wrong time. That's what most people should do, buy a cheap index fund and slowly dollar cost average into it. If you try to be just a little bit smart, spending an hour a week investing, you're liable to be really dumb.
If it's your game, diversification doesn't make sense. It's crazy to put money into your 20th choice rather than your 1st choice. "Lebron James" analogy. If you have Lebron James on your team, don't take him out of the game just to make room for someone else. If you have a harem of 40 women, you never really get to know any of them well.
Charlie and I operated mostly with 5 positions. If I were running 50, 100, 200 million, I would have 80% in 5 positions, with 25% for the largest. In 1964 I found a position I was willing to go heavier into, up to 40%. I told investors they could pull their money out. None did. The position was American Express after the Salad Oil Scandal. In 1951 I put the bulk of my net worth into GEICO. Later in 1998, LTCM was in trouble. With the spread between the on-the-run versus off-the-run 30 year Treasury bonds, I would have been willing to put 75% of my portfolio into it. There were various times I would have gone up to 75%, even in the past few years. If it's your game and you really know your business, you can load up.
Over the past 50-60 years, Charlie and I have never permanently lost more than 2% of our personal worth on a position. We've suffered quotational loss, 50% movements. That's why you should never borrow money. We don't want to get into situations where anyone can pull the rug out from under our feet.
In stocks, it's the only place where when things go on sale, people get unhappy. If I like a business, then it makes sense to buy more at 20 than at 30. If McDonalds reduces the price of hamburgers, I think it's great.
Austin:
What industry will be the next growth driver in the 21st century and what do you see that supports that?
Buffett:
We don't worry too much about that. If you'd look at the 1930s, nobody could have predicted how much the automobile and airplane would transform the world. There were 2000 car companies, but now only 3 left in the US and they are hanging on barely. It was tremendous for society, but horrible for investors. Investors would have had to not only identify the right companies, but also identify the right time. The net wealth creation in airlines since Orville Wright has been next to zero. If a capitalist had been at Kitty Hawk and shot him down, would have done us a huge favor. Or look at TV manufacturers. There are hundreds of millions of TV's, RCA & GE used to produce them, but now there are no American manufacturers left.
We don't worry too much about that. If you'd look at the 1930s, nobody could have predicted how much the automobile and airplane would transform the world. There were 2000 car companies, but now only 3 left in the US and they are hanging on barely. It was tremendous for society, but horrible for investors. Investors would have had to not only identify the right companies, but also identify the right time. The net wealth creation in airlines since Orville Wright has been next to zero. If a capitalist had been at Kitty Hawk and shot him down, would have done us a huge favor. Or look at TV manufacturers. There are hundreds of millions of TV's, RCA & GE used to produce them, but now there are no American manufacturers left.
If you want a great business, take Coca-Cola. The product is unchanged, they sell 1.5 billion 8 ounce servings per day 122 years later. They have a moat; if you have a castle, someone's going to come after you.
Gillette accounts for 70% of razor sales at 80% gross margins and it is the same over time. Men don't change much. Shaving might be the only creative thing they do, like painting the Sistine Chapel.
Snickers has been the #1 candy bar for the past 40 years. If you gave me $1 billion to knock off Snickers, I can't do it. That's the test of a good business. You don't knock off Coke or Gilette. Richard Branson is a marketing genius. He came in with Virgin Cola, we're not sure what the name means, perhaps it turns you back into one, but he couldn't knock off Coke. We look for wide moats around great economic castles. Growth is good too, but we prefer strong economics. In the upcoming annual report I have a section titled "The Great, the Good, and the Gruesome" where I talk about these.
Emory:
How do you define happiness and what about your life makes you most happy? When you make good on an investment, do you allow yourself to enjoy that success by getting excited - and on the flip-side, when an investment turns down, do you find yourself equally disappointed - or do you try to remove emotion from your work, as much as possible?
Buffett:
I enjoy what I do, I tap dance to work every day. I work with people I love, doing what I love. The only thing I would pay to get rid of is firing people. I spend my time thinking about the future, not the past. The future is exciting. As Bertrand Russell says, "Success is getting what you want, happiness is wanting what you get." I won the ovarian lottery the day I was born and so did all of you. We're all successful, intelligent, educated. To focus on what you don't have is a terrible mistake. With the gifts all of us have, if you are unhappy, it's your own fault.
I enjoy what I do, I tap dance to work every day. I work with people I love, doing what I love. The only thing I would pay to get rid of is firing people. I spend my time thinking about the future, not the past. The future is exciting. As Bertrand Russell says, "Success is getting what you want, happiness is wanting what you get." I won the ovarian lottery the day I was born and so did all of you. We're all successful, intelligent, educated. To focus on what you don't have is a terrible mistake. With the gifts all of us have, if you are unhappy, it's your own fault.
I know a woman in her 80's, a Polish Jew woman forced into a concentration camp with her family but not all of them came out. She says, "I am slow to make friends because when I look at people, I have one question in mind; would they hide me?" If you get to be my age, or younger for that matter, and have a lot of people that would hide you, then you can feel pretty good about how you've lived your life. I know people on the Forbes 400 list whose children would not hide them. "He's in the attic, he's in the attic." Some of them keep compensating by joining board seats or getting honorary degrees, but it doesn't change the fact that no one will give a damn when they are gone. The most powerful force in the world is unconditional love. To horde it is a terrible mistake in life. The more you try to give it away, the more you get it back. At an individual level, it's important to make sure that for the people that count to you, you count to them.
What if you could buy 10% of one of your classmates and their future earnings? You wouldn't buy the ones with the highest IQ, the best grades, etc, but the most effective. You like people who are generous, go out of their way, straight shooters. Now imagine that you could short 10% of one of your classmates. This part is usually more fun as you start looking around the room. You wouldn't choose the ones with the poorest grades. Look for people nobody wants to be around, that are obnoxious or like to take all the credit. If you have a 500 HP engine and only get 50 HP out of it, you'll be beat by someone else that has a 300 HP engine but gets 250 HP output. The difference between potential and output comes from human qualities. You can make a list of the qualities you admire and those you despise. To turn the tables, think if this is the way I react to the qualities on the list, which is the way the world will react to me. You can learn to turn on those qualities you want and turn off those qualities you wish to avoid. The chains of habit are too light to be felt until they are too heavy to be broken. You can't change at 60; the time to look at that list is now.
Austin:
Why do you think that despite making your methods publicly available, that relatively few people have been able to emulate your success?
Buffett:
I asked Graham the same question. Everyone took his class at Columbia Business School. He used current examples, and by the end of the semester you would have a portfolio that would've made you money. Graham lived a life of sharing. He may have had more money hoarding, but lived happier because of it. The money's just a figure in the paper, perhaps he would've died with 86 million instead of 42 million, but it doesn't really matter. 90% of the people that took his class ended up doing something else.
I asked Graham the same question. Everyone took his class at Columbia Business School. He used current examples, and by the end of the semester you would have a portfolio that would've made you money. Graham lived a life of sharing. He may have had more money hoarding, but lived happier because of it. The money's just a figure in the paper, perhaps he would've died with 86 million instead of 42 million, but it doesn't really matter. 90% of the people that took his class ended up doing something else.
At age 11 I started investing, purchasing three shares of Cities Service Preferred. I had read every book on investing in the Omaha library. I was really into charting and technical analysis. I loved it, but didn't make any money from it. At 19 I read Graham's "The Intelligent Investor" and it changed my world. Did Ben lose because I read his book? Maybe we competed and he made less money, but it didn't matter to Graham.
The philosophy either takes immediately or it doesn't at all. The reason gets down to temperament. People want to make money fast, but it doesn't happen that way. Graham's philosophy doesn't promise enough for many people. You don't know when it will happen, but you just wait for the fat pitches within your circle of competence. It's not as exciting as guessing whether the stock price will go up the next day. Most investors in internet companies didn't know the market cap. They were buying because they thought the stock would move, but if you asked them to write "I would buy XYZ company for $6 billion because", they wouldn't get halfway through the sentence. It's the classic tortoise versus hare, bound to work over time. Charlie and I have educated competitors. Most don't compete with us, though. It's fine, we have more than enough money.
Emory:
What qualities in managers set them apart as great leaders, in essence, where do you find the right balance between "hard" and "soft" skills?
Buffett:
We have 45 managers. Some of them we communicate with once a year, some once a month, some everyday. I usually have dinner with the Blumkins every month, and we go on vacation, because we're friends. What we look for in managers is a passion for the business. They usually come to us. I've never bought from a financial seller. We can't run the business so I am counting on them to behave well; we have very little in the form of contracts. The business needs to continue just the same after I hand them the check as before. My big question is whether he will still get up at 6 AM just the same with $500 million, and continue to send money to Omaha. I have to look them in the eye and decide whether they love the business or they love the money. It's fine if they love the money, but they have to love the business more. Why do I come in at 7 every morning, can't wait to get to work. It's because I get to paint my own painting and I like applause.
We have 45 managers. Some of them we communicate with once a year, some once a month, some everyday. I usually have dinner with the Blumkins every month, and we go on vacation, because we're friends. What we look for in managers is a passion for the business. They usually come to us. I've never bought from a financial seller. We can't run the business so I am counting on them to behave well; we have very little in the form of contracts. The business needs to continue just the same after I hand them the check as before. My big question is whether he will still get up at 6 AM just the same with $500 million, and continue to send money to Omaha. I have to look them in the eye and decide whether they love the business or they love the money. It's fine if they love the money, but they have to love the business more. Why do I come in at 7 every morning, can't wait to get to work. It's because I get to paint my own painting and I like applause.
We bought a jeweler, Ben Bridge. It was a 4th generation company, with over 100 stores. They were only interested in selling to us. The family didn't want to sell to others, the employees didn't want it. I never met him. He didn't want to sell either, but the family needed it.
At Borsheims we have a woman from Zimbabwe. She didn't even have the benefit of an MBA. We didn't look at a resume, or grades, or HR recommendations, but were looking for passion and we'll pay fairly because we don't want the resent that comes with unfairness. We want people that will work regardless.
I got a fax from Pete at Forest River saying this is the type of business you would like to own. He didn't want to worry about if he died tomorrow, and left his wife and daughter behind. After we made the deal, we had dinner and I brought up the topic of salary. I told him to name whatever number he wanted and I would sign the check. He asked me what I made. I told him $100,000 and he said he didn't want to make more than me, so we settled on $100,000. Pete called yesterday, and said he wanted to make an offer for another business. We talked for five minutes, I gave him some advice, but I really give them a lot of freedom. I've spent $1.7 billion and I've never even been to the company, at least I hope it's there.
I can't look at this group and tell you which 3 are going to be great managers. I can see it after they've been doing it for a while. Look at Mrs. B. She had one son involved in the business and 3 daughters not involved. She wanted a way to fairly distribute the proceeds of the business and this solved her problem. She worked until she was 103, and died at 104. She lived two blocks from the store. She left price tags on the furniture at her home because it made her feel more comfortable, like she was in the store. She left Russia and landed in Fort Dodge, Iowa. She saved $500 for 16 years to start this business that has the top 2 furniture stores in the nation. You can't hire those kinds of people, no matter what you pay them. We've been lucky that we've never lost a manager to competitors since 1965. Some retire, some were fired, but we give them the opportunity to paint their own canvas.
Austin:
If you could have lunch with one person you have never met, who would it be and why?
Buffett:
I would have to say Isaac Newton or Benjamin Franklin. I've met a lot of interesting people and some uninteresting ones, too. The two men had a bigger grasp of the world they lived in. But I don't think I would pass up an opportunity with Sophia Loren.
Emory:
Mr. Buffett, do you believe that the Federal Reserve is fostering moral hazard thereby leading to the misallocation of capital and subsequent asset bubbles? If so, what are the long term risks?
I would have to say Isaac Newton or Benjamin Franklin. I've met a lot of interesting people and some uninteresting ones, too. The two men had a bigger grasp of the world they lived in. But I don't think I would pass up an opportunity with Sophia Loren.
Emory:
Mr. Buffett, do you believe that the Federal Reserve is fostering moral hazard thereby leading to the misallocation of capital and subsequent asset bubbles? If so, what are the long term risks?
Buffett:
There is always some introduction of moral hazard when government decides to act in favor of the common good versus letting someone fail. There was moral hazard with the bailout of LTCM and there is some aspect of that with the current situation. But it's hard to measure because the consequences are 15-20 years out. During the 1987 market crash, Greenspan was new to the job and unsure of what would happen. The specialist system got hit, most of them operated on very little capital and were broke. The Fed provided them with more capital. Will that change future behavior? Maybe, but at the time it was the right call. It's also resulted in the "Too Big to Fail" doctrine. The big banks, Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae figured the US Government wouldn't allow them to fail and the managements of those companies knew that. I would be disinclined to second guess the Fed, they have more information and are trying to do what's right.
There is always some introduction of moral hazard when government decides to act in favor of the common good versus letting someone fail. There was moral hazard with the bailout of LTCM and there is some aspect of that with the current situation. But it's hard to measure because the consequences are 15-20 years out. During the 1987 market crash, Greenspan was new to the job and unsure of what would happen. The specialist system got hit, most of them operated on very little capital and were broke. The Fed provided them with more capital. Will that change future behavior? Maybe, but at the time it was the right call. It's also resulted in the "Too Big to Fail" doctrine. The big banks, Freddie Mac, and Fannie Mae figured the US Government wouldn't allow them to fail and the managements of those companies knew that. I would be disinclined to second guess the Fed, they have more information and are trying to do what's right.
Austin:
Given your business success, your immense fortune, and your celebrity status, how do you stay so down to earth and humble? Are there specific people or lessons you have learned throughout your life that enable you to maintain this outlook?
Buffett:
I was lucky to have the right heroes. Tell me who your heroes are and I'll tell you how you'll turn out to be. One of your most important jobs in life will be raising your children. They will learn more from you than they will in graduate school. My father was a huge influence, and later on Graham came along. I was also never let down by my heroes.
I was lucky to have the right heroes. Tell me who your heroes are and I'll tell you how you'll turn out to be. One of your most important jobs in life will be raising your children. They will learn more from you than they will in graduate school. My father was a huge influence, and later on Graham came along. I was also never let down by my heroes.
I had nothing to do with my own success. My father was a securities broker and after the Great Crash, he had no one to call. Consequently, I was born in 1930 in the United States during the time of one of the greatest capital markets. I was born with the wiring for capital asset allocation. I had the right wiring at the right time. Temperament is a large part of my wiring. I was naturally good at it, and I used some feedback to develop it better. There is nothing to be arrogant about. Gates says if I had been born earlier, I would've been some animal's lunch. I can't run, I can't climb. I'd be talking about allocating capital and the animal would think, "Those are the kind that taste the best." You have all won the ovarian lottery. There is no reason to feel guilty about it.
I have never given away a dime that has any meaning on how I live. There are people that go to church and they put money in the offering plate that truly makes a difference in how they will live their lives, what they will eat, what presents they will buy for their children. There's no reason to get puffed up over things you didn't control.
Emory:
Due to the credit crisis and consequently large write-downs, banks have made it more difficult to lend healthy businesses capital for increasing efficiency, expansion, new projects, etc., thereby potentially becoming the primary agents restricting growth. What are your thoughts on liquidity in the marketplace and the possibly of it contributing to a recession? Also, do you see a potential for financial institutions not currently in the lending business stepping in to take advantage of the reduced supply of capital?
Buffett:
What we are seeing is a huge repricing and evaluation of risk, correcting for problems of the past. I don't know of good credit propositions that are going unfulfilled. There's lots of cheap credit for sensible deals, which I don't define as anything that happened over the last 12, 18 months. A lot of things that didn't make sense are being washed out of the system. It is painful for bad decisions. Comparatively, this is not a credit crunch. In 1982 the prime rate was 22% and money was very expensive. In the late 60's, we made a sound deal there wasn't any money to be had. That's not the case now. The Fed has opened the window, and rates are down. It doesn't mean there won't be a major recession.
What we are seeing is a huge repricing and evaluation of risk, correcting for problems of the past. I don't know of good credit propositions that are going unfulfilled. There's lots of cheap credit for sensible deals, which I don't define as anything that happened over the last 12, 18 months. A lot of things that didn't make sense are being washed out of the system. It is painful for bad decisions. Comparatively, this is not a credit crunch. In 1982 the prime rate was 22% and money was very expensive. In the late 60's, we made a sound deal there wasn't any money to be had. That's not the case now. The Fed has opened the window, and rates are down. It doesn't mean there won't be a major recession.
Austin:
What are some of your biggest mistakes or regrets?
Buffett:
We've made lots of mistakes, but they don't bother me. We've had no regrets. We are in the business of making many decisions and there are bound to be mistakes. There are $10 billion mistakes of omission that no one knows about; they don't show up in the accounting. In 1994 we paid $400 worth of Berkshire stock for a shoe company. The company is now worth 0, but the stock is worth $3.5 billion. So now, I'm happy to see Berkshire go down since it reduces the size of my mistake. In 1973 Tom Murphy offered us NBC for $35 million, but we turned it down. That was a huge mistake of omission.
We've made lots of mistakes, but they don't bother me. We've had no regrets. We are in the business of making many decisions and there are bound to be mistakes. There are $10 billion mistakes of omission that no one knows about; they don't show up in the accounting. In 1994 we paid $400 worth of Berkshire stock for a shoe company. The company is now worth 0, but the stock is worth $3.5 billion. So now, I'm happy to see Berkshire go down since it reduces the size of my mistake. In 1973 Tom Murphy offered us NBC for $35 million, but we turned it down. That was a huge mistake of omission.
In my personal life, there are always things I could've done differently. But so many good things have happened. It just doesn't pay to dwell on the bad things. Finding the right spouse is 90% of it. If you are lucky on health and lucky on your spouse, you are a long way home. Getting turned down by HBS was one of the best things that could have happened to me, bad luck can turn out to be good.
Emory:
Could you comment on the current rise of sovereign wealth funds from the Middle East and Asia and how they are playing an increasing role in how corporations raise capital. Is competition from these sources for the cash flows of corporations affecting your investment strategies or opportunities?
Buffett:
Any competition is competition. The situation of sovereign wealth funds is interesting. A lot of it is China bashing, OPEC bashing and plays right into politician's hands. Today, the US will buy $2 billion more from the world than they buy from us. In exchange we give them little pieces of paper and they have to buy assets. As long as we consume more than we produce we have to let the rest of the world invest in us. We created sovereign wealth funds and that $2 billion gains interest. US funds feel they can get the best terms from these foreign investors and lately, enticed them into buying equity. China wanted to buy Unocal, a 3rd rate oil producer with production overseas in places like India. US Congress went ape and 395 representatives signed an anti-Chinese resolution to block the deal. For 100 years the US companies went around buying the world's assets and bribing officials, but told China they couldn't buy Unocal. The Chinese took it, but they didn't like it. It doesn't make sense that we are buying foreign assets, and giving them pieces of paper and then telling them what they can't do with that money. We have created them and I have no objection to them. I recommend an index fund for these sovereign wealth funds. It gives them exposure to the US market, but they won't get taken by salespeople with bad deals. In economics you always want to say "And then what?"
Any competition is competition. The situation of sovereign wealth funds is interesting. A lot of it is China bashing, OPEC bashing and plays right into politician's hands. Today, the US will buy $2 billion more from the world than they buy from us. In exchange we give them little pieces of paper and they have to buy assets. As long as we consume more than we produce we have to let the rest of the world invest in us. We created sovereign wealth funds and that $2 billion gains interest. US funds feel they can get the best terms from these foreign investors and lately, enticed them into buying equity. China wanted to buy Unocal, a 3rd rate oil producer with production overseas in places like India. US Congress went ape and 395 representatives signed an anti-Chinese resolution to block the deal. For 100 years the US companies went around buying the world's assets and bribing officials, but told China they couldn't buy Unocal. The Chinese took it, but they didn't like it. It doesn't make sense that we are buying foreign assets, and giving them pieces of paper and then telling them what they can't do with that money. We have created them and I have no objection to them. I recommend an index fund for these sovereign wealth funds. It gives them exposure to the US market, but they won't get taken by salespeople with bad deals. In economics you always want to say "And then what?"
Austin:
Is the individual investor even capable of assessing the riskiness of securities given the large number of institutions/hedge funds in the market?
Buffett:
I don't think there is much being overlooked now, but I'm forced to look at big things. That's the advantage you have over me. A few years ago a friend of mine mentioned that I should look at Korea. We bought Posco for 3-4 times post-tax earnings. I found 20 other companies selling at 2-3 times earnings and strong balance sheets. I diversified because I didn't know the Korean market as well. We are looking for the very unusual. Occasionally things will happen in a securities market that are extraordinary. I like shooting fish in a barrel, but I like to make sure the water's drained out.
We had that situation a few years ago with the 30 year versus 29 ?year Treasury bonds. Because of less liquidity, the off-the-run bonds were selling for 30 basis points less, which translates into 3% of principal value. LTCM entered the trade at 10 basis points originally, but they overleveraged and were forced to unwind the position. If you went long/short you could make money really quickly.
I don't think there is much being overlooked now, but I'm forced to look at big things. That's the advantage you have over me. A few years ago a friend of mine mentioned that I should look at Korea. We bought Posco for 3-4 times post-tax earnings. I found 20 other companies selling at 2-3 times earnings and strong balance sheets. I diversified because I didn't know the Korean market as well. We are looking for the very unusual. Occasionally things will happen in a securities market that are extraordinary. I like shooting fish in a barrel, but I like to make sure the water's drained out.
We had that situation a few years ago with the 30 year versus 29 ?year Treasury bonds. Because of less liquidity, the off-the-run bonds were selling for 30 basis points less, which translates into 3% of principal value. LTCM entered the trade at 10 basis points originally, but they overleveraged and were forced to unwind the position. If you went long/short you could make money really quickly.
Markets are efficient most of the time about most things. But for these opportunities, nobody will tell you about them. They won't be on CNBC and they won't be in brokerage reports. You have to go find them yourself. In 1951, after I graduated from school, I used Moody's and S&P manuals as my sources of information. I went through them page by page. I was like a basketball coach looking for 7-footers. I still have to find out if he's coordinated, and can stay in school. But if someone comes up to me that's 5'6" and says, "Wait 'til you see me handle the ball", I say "No thanks". On page 1443 of Moody's, I found Western Insurance Securities. It had earned $21.66 per share 2 years ago, and earned $29.09 last year. Over the past year the stock was selling for between $3 and $13 per share. I still had to do the work to make sure the earnings were valid. The markets will get it right eventually. But they are there. You don't have to find too many. Finding 10 of these opportunities in your lifetime will make you so rich. But you can't be wrong. You can't have any zeroes. A list of big numbers multiplied by zero will equal zero. You can't go back to "Go".
Emory:
What do you think of aggregate infrastructure investment to stimulate the economy?
Buffett:
I think the best way to stimulate the economy is to give money to the poor. They will spend it. Don't give it to guys like me. Infrastructure investment makes sense, but we haven't done it in a while and it won't do anything for the next 6-12 months. Infrastructure is not big relative to GDP. We are a consumer-driven society, spending 106% of production.
I think the best way to stimulate the economy is to give money to the poor. They will spend it. Don't give it to guys like me. Infrastructure investment makes sense, but we haven't done it in a while and it won't do anything for the next 6-12 months. Infrastructure is not big relative to GDP. We are a consumer-driven society, spending 106% of production.
Austin:
Who do you think will be one of the next greatest investors and are you partial to favoring someone with a similar investment style as yours?
Buffett:
We just finished looking for someone. The Board has 3 candidates to replace me as CEO and 4 candidates to replace me as investor. They are all doing fine where they are, but they would be willing to come over to Berkshire for less pay.
We just finished looking for someone. The Board has 3 candidates to replace me as CEO and 4 candidates to replace me as investor. They are all doing fine where they are, but they would be willing to come over to Berkshire for less pay.
In 1969, I wound up my partnership and I had to help people find someone to manage their money. I recommended Bill Ruane of Sequoia Fund, Sandy Gottesman, who is currently on the board at Berkshire, and Walter Schloss, who I wrote about in "The Superinvestors of Graham and Dodds-ville". There's no way they could miss.
But I don't know many of the newer investors, they're not my contemporaries. It's not enough to just look at track records. They aren't predictive and there will always be a few people that do well. I know guys who can make 50% a year with $5 million, but not with $1 billion. The problem with guys that do well is they attract so much money that it neutralizes their advantage. It's hard to identify them, and even harder to make a deal to keep them from attracting other capital. It's like betting on a 12 year old horse that won at 3 years old. It's also important to avoid managers who use leverage. It's the reason that investors with 160 IQs flame out.
Emory:
At the Wesco annual meeting last year, Charlie said, "The best way to get success is to deserve success". Do you recall anything from your experience which best demonstrates how you were able to position yourself to deserve success, and do you have any advice for students on how they can position themselves to deserve success as well?
Buffett:
Behaving decent is a large part of it. Out of school I offered to work for Graham for free and he said I was overpriced. I tried to be useful and visible to him. I gave him stock tips and kept up with him. Almost always good things come from good behavior. Don't keep score in life. Tom Murphy does not keep score. He keeps doing 20 things for me and I can only hope to return the favor. Keeping score is terrible in marriage and terrible in business. I put myself in the seller's shoes. With most humans there is a great desire to reciprocate. If you do something for them, they will do 2X for you. How rare is it to work during lunch hours and be the first one there in the morning. You'll get noticed if you do something extra. It's good to have a willingness to pitch in when you aren't going to get credit for it. Charlie and I partnered up in 1959. We always both think we're right. We disagree but we've never fought. And we've never held past mistakes over each other's heads. I recommend reading "Poor Charlie's Almanack". It's amazing, has sold 50,000 copies and it's still sold independently.
Behaving decent is a large part of it. Out of school I offered to work for Graham for free and he said I was overpriced. I tried to be useful and visible to him. I gave him stock tips and kept up with him. Almost always good things come from good behavior. Don't keep score in life. Tom Murphy does not keep score. He keeps doing 20 things for me and I can only hope to return the favor. Keeping score is terrible in marriage and terrible in business. I put myself in the seller's shoes. With most humans there is a great desire to reciprocate. If you do something for them, they will do 2X for you. How rare is it to work during lunch hours and be the first one there in the morning. You'll get noticed if you do something extra. It's good to have a willingness to pitch in when you aren't going to get credit for it. Charlie and I partnered up in 1959. We always both think we're right. We disagree but we've never fought. And we've never held past mistakes over each other's heads. I recommend reading "Poor Charlie's Almanack". It's amazing, has sold 50,000 copies and it's still sold independently.
Austin:
Have there been instances in your career where you have been tempted to deviate from your strategy and if so, how did you handle that?
Buffett:
I'm not that type. I'm not disciplined. I just naturally want to do things that make sense. In my personal life too, I don't care what other rich people are doing. I don't want a 405 foot boat just because someone else has a 400 foot boat. Some of my friends have big boats where 55 people are serving 14. Of those 55, some will be stealing from you, some will be sleeping with each other, and I just don't want to deal with that. My friends have the boats, so I'm the ultimate freeloader. I don't need multiple houses. If I wanted to do something wild & crazy I could do it, but Anna Nicole Smith is gone. Reminds me of the story of the 60 year old man that got a 25 year old to marry him. When his friends asked how he did it, he replied, "I told her I was 90."
I'm not that type. I'm not disciplined. I just naturally want to do things that make sense. In my personal life too, I don't care what other rich people are doing. I don't want a 405 foot boat just because someone else has a 400 foot boat. Some of my friends have big boats where 55 people are serving 14. Of those 55, some will be stealing from you, some will be sleeping with each other, and I just don't want to deal with that. My friends have the boats, so I'm the ultimate freeloader. I don't need multiple houses. If I wanted to do something wild & crazy I could do it, but Anna Nicole Smith is gone. Reminds me of the story of the 60 year old man that got a 25 year old to marry him. When his friends asked how he did it, he replied, "I told her I was 90."
Emory:
It seems that the worldwide trend is towards lower corporate tax rates. Do you think that the US risks becoming less competitive if it maintains its current corporate tax rate?
Buffett:
Relative to GDP, government taxation is 18.5% and spending is 20%, so we borrow the balance. The national debt should not be a scary topic and the fact that it's gone up is fine as long as it's proportional to GDP. Where do we get that 18.5%? There's 2.7 trillion in government revenues. 2.2 trillion comes from individuals, and less than 1% of that comes from the estate tax. 1.1 trillion comes from income taxes, with payroll taxes consisting of 900 billion, but it's capped at the first $100,000 of salary. We want a tax system that encourages greater prosperity, but it needs to take care of the family.
Relative to GDP, government taxation is 18.5% and spending is 20%, so we borrow the balance. The national debt should not be a scary topic and the fact that it's gone up is fine as long as it's proportional to GDP. Where do we get that 18.5%? There's 2.7 trillion in government revenues. 2.2 trillion comes from individuals, and less than 1% of that comes from the estate tax. 1.1 trillion comes from income taxes, with payroll taxes consisting of 900 billion, but it's capped at the first $100,000 of salary. We want a tax system that encourages greater prosperity, but it needs to take care of the family.
We did an informal office survey by looking at the total tax footprint versus the total income. I earned 46 million and paid a tax rate of 17.5%. My rate was the lowest, the average was 33%, and my cleaning lady paid 40%. The system is tilted towards the rich. The Forbes 400 total net worth has gone from 220 billion to 1.54 trillion, an increase of 7-to-1. You see in legislature that there is lobbying carried on by the powerful over issues such as the estate tax and carried interest for private equity investments. We need to flatten income and payroll taxes, and those making under $30,000 shouldn't be bothered.
Let's imagine that 24 hours before you are born, a genie comes to you and tells you devise a social and economic system. The only catch is that after you designed the system, you would choose a paper from a barrel which would determine your demographics. What objectives would you want? You need to devise a system that creates prosperity. It needs to be a meritocracy, to put the right people in the right place. It needs to have a strong education system, and throw off lots of goods and services. It also needs to not discriminate against women or minorities. Even though the per capita GDP is $47,000, 20% of the population makes less than $20,000. We need to eliminate that fear of sickness or old age. A tax code is the codification of a country's values. But you can't kill the golden goose of prosperity.
Austin:
There is always mention that some of your success could be attributed to not buying in to the Wall Street mania b/c you are in Omahahat importance do you give to balance as it pertains to work and life and what do you do to maintain your appropriate balance?
Buffett:
I have so much fun that it's not work. I get to do what I want, where I want ?on a boat, wherever. My wife was responsible for bringing up the children. Neither of us had problems with that arrangement, and it made sense from an Adam Smith "division of labor" perspective. It will be a much tougher choice for women, and always be somewhat unequal. In my own life I did virtually no social functions or meetings that I didn't want to do. In my adult business life I have never had to make a choice of trading between professional and personal. I have simple pleasures. I play bridge online for 12 hours a week. Bill and I play, he's "chalengr" and I'm "tbone".
After a talk at Harvard, I told them to work for who they admired the most, so they all become self-employed. It's important to go to work for someone or some organization you admire. I've not seen many males having to make tough choices. But women are the ones who have tough situations.
I have so much fun that it's not work. I get to do what I want, where I want ?on a boat, wherever. My wife was responsible for bringing up the children. Neither of us had problems with that arrangement, and it made sense from an Adam Smith "division of labor" perspective. It will be a much tougher choice for women, and always be somewhat unequal. In my own life I did virtually no social functions or meetings that I didn't want to do. In my adult business life I have never had to make a choice of trading between professional and personal. I have simple pleasures. I play bridge online for 12 hours a week. Bill and I play, he's "chalengr" and I'm "tbone".
After a talk at Harvard, I told them to work for who they admired the most, so they all become self-employed. It's important to go to work for someone or some organization you admire. I've not seen many males having to make tough choices. But women are the ones who have tough situations.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)
