Mark Sellers once gave a famous speech to a group of Harvard MBAs. It was titled, "So You Want To Be The Next Warren Buffett? How’s Your Writing?"
In his speech, he equated writing well to being able to think clearly.
2/8 It makes intuitive sense, and in general, I agree.
If you want to be the next "Buffett", you probably do need to write clearly, speak eloquently, be quantitatively oriented, and perhaps more importantly, be lucky.
3/8 But I wonder whether it is harder for good writers to change their mind.
The whole thing sort of reminds me of competitive debates. During college, I got the opportunity to adjudicate competitive debates. I even went to World University Debating Championship.
4/8 In British Parliamentary format, four teams are given a motion i.e. topic just ~15 minutes before the debate starts. Two teams speak for the motion, and two against the motion.
As an adjudicator, you have to rank four teams after the debate and then explain it to them.
5/8 It was in competitive debate I truly understood that some people have an incredible gift in rhetoric that you can instantly give them any motion and any side (for/against) and they can still beat you in a debate in front of an audience.
6/8 The whole thing made me appreciate the power of rhetoric and be reluctant to equate truth to rhetoric.
Perhaps the same can be applied to writing as well. Some people are just gifted writers. They can play with words so well that people are tempted to equate that with truth.
7/8 If you write really well, it is perhaps not hard for you to make bull or bear case for any stock.
And since you write so well, you can always argue your way out of it unless you yourself are deeply interested/paranoid about knowing the truth.
8/8 It is also why I feel any investing research without skin in the game is like monopoly money. It can be fun to read, but hard to assign much value to it.
My personal portfolio is fairly concentrated with just 11 stocks, but top 4 is ~70% of total portfolio.
Is this level of concentration by choice? My guess is probably not. Here's why.
2/4 As an analyst, I probably know just 25-30 stocks reasonably well.
If you know just 25-30 stocks, do you have any other alternative than being concentrated?
Unless I am eliminating more stocks that I know fairly well, how much stock picking is really happening?
3/4 I wonder whether concentrated portfolio on fintwit is *mostly* a function of age.
Younger investors have little alternative than being concentrated. It is only the older investors (or anyone who actually understand a lot of companies) who probably have an actual choice.
I have listened to my fair share of podcasts related to $ETSY, but I thought @HarryStebbings interview of Josh Silverman, CEO of Etsy, was an exceptional one.
It not only helped me understand Josh better, but also gave a lot to ponder.
2/9 Josh categorically denies that Etsy is a niche e-commerce player focusing on handmade stuff.
He thinks Etsy is competing on the "special" segment which is anything but niche.
3/9 At the very end of the episode, he said something interesting. Let me quote him:
“I think there is an implicit notion in the market that there is going to be millions of individual places to buy things online. If you are following the market cap of Shopify, Wix, Stripe etc..
Claire is Managing Director (APAC) at Hines which manages >$144 Bn AUM. She finished her undergrad at Stanford in 2.5 yrs, was a professional track and field athlete for USA, and ran a marathon on Everest (what?!!).
2/ "So I think like a lot of investing, cities and real estate investing, it's about pattern recognition. Cities, a lot of them rhyme with each other. I mean a city at the end of the day, it's an API for the industry." (Loved these three sentences)
Tattoo index is pretty cool.
3/ China's urbanization rate mimics what it was in the US at the end of WWII.
But it also means they have a cheat code as they know what happens at certain nodes just looking at the US.
Circa 1920, my grandpa was born in rural Bangladesh. Of course, there was no Bangladesh back then. It was still part of the British Empire.
~30 years later, the land he was born became part of Pakistan. Two and half decades later, it became Bangladesh.
2/ Even though the tumultuous history of the land evolved, my illiterate farmer grandpa never moved from his village. He toiled long and hard throughout his life.
He died peacefully in 2000 in the very village he was born.
3/ I too was born in rural Bangladesh, but moved with my parents in the nearby city when I was still a toddler.
During my late-teens, I came to Dhaka, the Capital of Bangladesh. As a first gen college grad, Dhaka seemed somewhat foreign in the first few months.
If you are not American, chances are extremely high you probably yawn when a political leader who lost the election allege and claim the election was rigged.
2/ If Trump claiming election as fraud and inspiring supporters to protest lead to permanent ban on Twitter, what will happen to all those opposition leaders in all those countries?
And yes, those claims do lead to protest, to violence, and to many unfortunate deaths.
3/ Many such protests were indeed organized with the help of social media.
In many cases, those opposition claims are real as the incumbent autocratic may end up getting 80%+ votes by organizing a staged election.