Cedric Chin Profile picture
Jun 4, 2020 13 tweets 4 min read
Half the people in this thread understand the capital allocator playbook.

The other half do not.

And Andrew is laughing all the way to the bank.
The capital allocator playbook is simple to grok. Build a free cash flow generating business. Wait. Take the FCF and then use it to purchase another FCF-generating business. Wait. Use those cash flows to buy yet another FCF generating business. Wait.

Rinse and repeat.
There are many variations of this, of course. The model I described above is pretty much the one @awilkinson uses; it's also the Berkshire model.

Many more variations in amazon.com/Outsiders-Unco…
In software, the two companies that are most famous for using this playbook are Robert Smith's Vista Equity Partners (uses a lot of debt) and Mark Leonard's Constellation Software (uses equity sales).

Still, similar playbook: acquire defensible high FCF businesses. Use FCF.
Smith is operationally excellent, though. He has a team in Vista that slashes costs and moves engineering to cheaper cities. He then uses the FCF from the business to service the debt load. It's a more typical PE playbook. Only diff is that it's software — so high, high margins.
Leonard's trick is looking for 'vertical market' software companies. Think: power plant software. Who's going to throw out and switch their power plant software provider? Nobody. So it's got a moat.

Same playbook, with variations: Constellation sold equity to fund purchases.
More info on Leonard: 25iq.com/2018/04/07/bus…

And Smith: 25iq.com/2018/03/23/bus…

Both from the inimitable @trengriffin.
Another solid book on this topic is @farnamjake1's The Rebel Allocator. It's written as a novel, so it's easy to read. Worth the 10 bucks!

People in startups don't usually see this side of the business world, I think.

But the playbook is public if you know where to look.
Whoops, totally forgot to link to it: amazon.com/Rebel-Allocato…
One possible reason people in startupland don't get the capital allocator playbook is that it's not really an operator-oriented worldview.

Nearly everyone I've mentioned in the thread above sets up their org so that other people run their companies. They themselves do not.
So: Smith has an ops arm, Leonard, Wilkinson, Buffett and, urm, every CEO mentioned in The Outsiders delegated the operator function to someone else. They just ran capital allocation decisions.
Two more, just for fun:

Jeff Bezos runs Amazon with bits borrowed from the capital allocator playbook. (Why does he insist on absolute free cash flow?)

Barry Diller runs IAC similarly, but divests successful, FCF-producing subsidiaries after they hit a certain scale.
Sorry, *absolute dollar free cash flow, to be exact. 25iq.com/2014/04/26/a-d… (Google "Tren Griffin + Bezos + absolute dollar free cash flow" and you'll get a number of hits)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Cedric Chin

Cedric Chin Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @ejames_c

Feb 9
1/ Let's talk about how note taking can help you accelerate expertise.

Yes, I know how that sounds like.

No, this isn't hype.

There's some solid cognitive science here, and it has FASCINATING things to say about the nature of learning in messy, real world domains.
2/ The theory I'm going to talk about is Cognitive Flexibility Theory, originally published by Spiro, Coulson, Feltovich and Anderson in a 1988 paper.

The theory has 30 years of ACTUAL system implementations. We're going to talk about those in a sec.

researchgate.net/publication/27…
3/ What is CFT? CFT is a theory that asks: "how do experts deal with novelty?"

Some domains are well-structured, like chess. But other domains, like business or medicine, are ill-structured.

CFT is a theory about this second type of domain. It comes from medical education.
Read 28 tweets
Jan 23
1/ There’s an element of mentorship that I don’t see discussed a lot.

(Yes, finding a mentor is a whole other story, and much advice focuses on that).

But the key to a good mentor relationship is that you *actually take action* on the advice you’ve been given.
2/ As an old boss puts it, “you must be someone that’s helpable.” Which is a corollary to “only help others who can be helped.”

The trick isn’t that you MUST put everything the mentor tells you to action.

The trick is that you find SOME aspect of the advice and apply that.
3/ Why is this important?

Or rather, why do mentors give their time and energy to help “only those who can be helped?”

The answer is what the mentor gets out of the relationship, right?

A mentor doesn’t want to feel like they’re wasting their time.
Read 12 tweets
Jan 17
If you want to build a cognitive flexibility theory 'learning network', it seems the Oxford Handbook of Expertise has a chapter on CFT with a short set of instructions.
The tl;dr seems to be —

1. Collect 10-20 'crossroad cases', which are cases that are densely packed with conceptual features core to the domain.
2. Mark up the concepts across this set (perhaps using tags or backlinks?)
3. Link back to crossroad cases when adding new cases.
4. At some point you will overlearn the crossroad cases and hit something called 'epitome mode', where a small distinctive part of a case will evoke the rest of the case.
5. You can then layer in more complex questions around the cases, like (cont.)
Read 6 tweets
Jan 17
Most of us think that applied knowledge consists of learning generalisable principles and THEN looking for places to apply them.

In this view, cases are simply examples of the principle in action.

But check this out:
The source is Spiro et al’s Cognitive Flexibility Theory, and most of the examples in the paper are about medical education. (A highly applied field, albeit on a messy, complex biological system — but at least with some settled science!)

researchgate.net/publication/27…
Now consider how this might apply when talking about business education.

Business is messier — there isn’t ‘settled science’.

So there’s probably more to be said for reading messy business biographies + the ‘case method’ over imbibing contextless business frameworks.
Read 13 tweets
Jan 17
The opening of Naming the Mind is a REMARKABLE anecdote:

Danzinger walks into an Indonesian university, realises that there is a 'Western psychology' class and an 'Eastern psychology' class, and proposes to do a combined seminar ...

And then fails to find any common ground.
For context, I'm reading this because Lisa Feldman Barrett assigns it to everyone in her lab:
"Chinese thinking often gives no attention to distinctions which for Western minds are so traditional and so firmly established in thought and language, that we neither question them nor even become aware of them as distinctions."
Read 7 tweets
Jan 11
This week's Commonplace post is about the limitations of using gaming analogies when talking about life: commoncog.com/blog/dangers-t…
This has mostly to do with our discussion about Playing to Play and Playing to Win — which, as you may recall, introduced the concept of a 'scrub'.

The problem with this is that what might be scrub behaviour in one game might NOT be scrub behaviour in someone else's game. Image
That old essay on Playing to Play vs Playing to Win may be found here: commoncog.com/blog/playing-t…

It was mostly reader feedback as a result of that essay that lead to this week's piece.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(