Then I update them on my thinking about this business, management and valuation. This year, I spoke that (which I won't discuss here) and also about some additional lessons. Listing them here:
The importance of distinguishing between things that are under your control and those that you cannot control.
Things you can control include defining what kinds of business you will invest into and which ones you will ignore, how you will make conservative estimates of probable earning power a few years from now and how you will restrain yourself from projecting very high exit multiples.
The one thing over which you have no control is the changes in multiple because that will be decided by the market, which is like a very moody person.
If your expected return REQUIRES significant multiple rerating BEYOND what's warranted from a pure bond valuation (non-growing perpetuity) multiple, then you are exposing yourself to outcomes dependent on how OTHERS will behave.
On the other hand, if your expected return is coming primarily from dividend and earnings growth component and not a lot from multiple increases, then you are on much safer ground.
Expecting a great business selling at below a bond valuation multiple to sell for at least the bond valuation multiple is reasonable. Don't ask for much more and the chances that you will be disappointed go way down.
When you pay a high entry multiple for an outstanding business, then you have to count on REMAINING lucky - in the sense that you cannot really afford significant multiple declines and yet that is what happens when high PE stocks with embedded high earnings growth expectations.
Many of them end up experiencing a slow down in the growth or even a decline in earnings. If that latter situation transpires, then you will get a double whammy as EPS goes down AND PE multiple also contracts.
In contrast, when you buy a great business (Relaxo was one) at a BELOW bond valuation, then you only have to get lucky ONCE SOMETIME IN THE NEXT 5 YEARS (for the multiple to rise) to earn a good return.
It's far better to position yourself to BENEFIT from good luck than get UNNECESSARY exposure to bad luck that can result in value destruction.
If you use this framework, then you will have lots of errors of OMISSION but far fewer errors of COMMISSION. Errors of commission destroy capital and meaningful destruction can set you back by a decade or totally take you out.
It's ok to make errors of OMISSION and be paranoid about making errors of COMMISSION. And yet, no matter how careful you are, there will be errors of commission.
When they occur you have to act and you have to act fast. You know what's to be done. And then you have to move on. You will quantify the loss, frame it as a tuition fee and move on, and resolve never to make the same type of error again.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One student in my Forensic Accounting course wrote about manipulation in many large companies and how it pushes the retail investor into the corner. My (slightly edited) response:
All investing carries risk. Equity investing is no different. But look at the world around you. If you really want to compound your capital and beat inflation and make some real money, you have to invest in equities - which includes owning 100% of your own business by the way.
Yes, you will lose money because of misgovernance. But that does not mean that everyone is a crook. So you have to find ways to avoid getting stuck in businesses with governance issues. And even if you exercise all caution, you will still not be immune.
At one point during the talk, Neeraj showed an example when he deliberately asked a dumb question from the management of a company he was working on. Immediately I could relate this to Detective Columbo. See this: quora.com/How-has-the-Co…
One answer is that company engages in hedging by using derivatives as a legitimate business decision and claims the hedging cost as a tax-deductible expense.
I don’t think losses if any resulting from speculative trades using derivatives will be allowed as a tax-deductible expense.
Very valid points made by you. In the class, the example is a bit more elaborate. For example, I include "hafta" as a necessary expense. Now let me try to address your concerns.
In the original example the street vendor has fixed assets of 10k, inventory of 1k, margin over cost of 100%, and one day's revenue Rs 2k. Depreciation Rs 50. And Profit was Rs 950. Annual profit assuming 300 days of work was Rs 2.85 lacs. and the ROCE is an astonishing 2,590%
You said I did not count the salary of the person. Fair enough. So let's fix it. Let's retire the sole proprietor and replace him with an employee who will run the business for him for a salary. Today, you can hire security guards for INR 10k a month, and they have night duties.
One, there was pent up demand in Q2 because of shutdown in Q1. So earnings which would have occurred in Q1 moved to Q2. This is temporary.
Two, many costs were not incurred in Q2 or the money spent on them was much lower than what was spent in Q2 of the previous year. For example, travel and advertising and rents etc. Some of these cost savings may endure. Others won’t.
Power doesn’t always corrupt, and you can see it in the case of, for example, Al Smith or Sam Rayburn. There, power cleanses.
But what power always does is reveal, because when you’re climbing, you have to conceal from people what it is you’re really willing to do, what it is you want to do.
But once you get enough power, once you’re there, where you wanted to be all along, then you can see what the protagonist wanted to do all along, because now he’s doing it.