"In 2020, companies with real options had a valuation boost for their current operations because of a fall in the cost of capital and a gain in their real options because of an increase in volatility." Michael Mauboussin FT today.
2/ "A real option has the right—but not the obligation—to make a potentially value-accretive investment. Investment examples include new plants, line extensions, joint ventures, and licensing agreements." capatcolumbia.com/Articles/FoFin…
3/ Risk isn't uncertainty.
"Uncertainty can be your friend because you can learn from experience and use the option not to make an investment. There’s no necessary association with loss
with uncertainty, whereas with risk there’s the concept of a potential downside.” Mauboussin
4/ To understand real options, invert in the manner of Charlie Munger. What company is viewed as having no real options (ie, just risk)?
Clue: They pay for a lot of promoted tweets in an attempt to support their stock price and have a three letter ticker starting with I.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I'm increasingly concerned that people are sharing entertaining stories and delivering free advice on Clubhouse. How are talking heads on cable TV news expected to complete with this phenomenon? And don't get me started about the adverse impact of Clubhouse on bots and trolls.
Why would an interesting and knowledgeable person want to have a fun non-adversarial conversation with similar people in a public setting that thousands of people may find informative and entertaining?
Aren't divisive and adversarial interviews good enough for these people?
The positive public conversations happening on Clubhouse can easily spread to other platforms. Demagogues and other peddlers of divisive twaddle will unfairly be forced to compete for attention. I'm concerned that cable news ratings in may fall significantly in key demographics.
1/ I flashed back to 1994 when I heard Elon Musk say recently: "If you need encouraging words, don't do a startup."
I was in that situation in 1994 and for me doing a "zero to one" startup was a mission: bring the benefits of broadband networks to every place on Earth.
2/ When someone like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos sets out on a mission not primarily driven by economic returns the world will benefit from positive externalities of the inevitable innovations that result from the work. Bezos is a example of a missionary. washingtonpost.com/technology/202…
3/ Both Elon and Bezos know that BIG changes happen faster if the activity has positive economics. It isn't that return on investment isn't important, but that profit and free cash flow enable the mission to achieve scale. Bill Gates believes this about achieving scale too.
"Can you recall when a promoter bought a stock that was more than 100% shorted and was able to convince many people who didn’t know exactly what to do that if the promoter was buying that stock then it was a good idea for them to buy the stock?"
2/ Not exactly is the answer. Munger was actually using the example of oil company CEOs buying fertilizer manufacturers to illustrate "bias from over-influence by social proof, that is, the conclusions of others, particularly under conditions of natural uncertainty and stress."
3/ Cialdini: "We will use the actions of others to decide on proper behavior for ourselves, especially when we view those others as similar to ourselves. When we are uncertain, we are willing to place an enormous amount of trust in the collective knowledge of the crowd."
1/ Learning painful lessons vicariously is preferable to touching a hot stove or peeing on the electric fence yourself. Vicarious lessons aren't as vivid as mistakes you make yourself, but they're still valuable. One great learning opportunity was the late 1990s Internet bubble.
2/ When NASDAQ peaked in March 2000 if you didn't see people learning vivid lessons, you weren't paying attention.
1. The only thing you can spend is cash- This seems obvious, but if you need cash fast and take a giant haircut when quickly selling an asset you own, it is vivid.
3/
2. When a correction happens, everything financial is correlated. People run from risk. This causes them to sell what’s most liquid and that, you know, quickly impacts price. What people thought was diversification, isn't, especially in the short run. Cash gets scarce fast.
"The film is described as exploring how a populist uprising of social media day traders beat Wall Street at their own game, turning the stock market upside down and shaking the financial world to its core." msn.com/en-us/movies/n…
If all else fails, pretend!
The bar for "shaking the financial world to its core" has apparently been lowered! I didn't get that memo.
A bunch of traders staging a modern day Piggly Wiggly "corner" of an over shorted stock didn't shake anything but the heads of actual investors.
"Populist uprising" was a narrative spread by promoters to generate the desired feedback. Journalists assisted.
As with Long-Term Capital Management, cannibalistic hedge funds smelled blood and jumped in to profit from other hedge funds who were left exposed by their shorts.
2/ At the heart of the Writer's Guild's dispute: 1) agents collecting packaging fees; and 2) the ownership by agents of affiliated production companies. The new agreement removes incentives to increase share of the profit pool at the expense of writers. latimes.com/entertainment-…
3/ Here'a an analysis of the profit pool in the auto industry circa 1998.
How has Tesla changed the profit pool? Is any former participant no longer in the value chain in the case of Tesla? hbr.org/1998/05/profit…