Idea Hive Profile picture
Feb 28, 2021 14 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Thread on ‘capital allocation’.

1/ The Buffett shareholder letter has got me thinking about what a great capital allocator he has been at #BRK. One of the best ever. Henry Singleton, Tom Murphy & a few others are right along side him.
2/ A great capital allocator in my opinion can be correlated with long-term market outperformance. @chriswmayer makes this case in his book #100baggers. William Thorndike hammers the point in #theoutsiders
3/ So what are the capital allocation decisions that made #Buffett and others so great? And how can we identify a CEO that can allocate effectively?
4/ Firstly, we have acquisitions. The ability to acquire a business at the right price is critical for any allocator. In the shareholder letter, Buffett shares many of the successful acquisitions #BRK has made, but also some of the mistakes.
5/ @brettkellySYD is CEO of a micro-cap in Australia $KPG. He has continually acquired accounting firms at around 4x EBITDA and less than 1x sales. A fragmented industry of ‘mom and pop’ business can be beneficial.

You can read more about Brett here: contactinvestingwi.wixsite.com/investingwithf…
6/ Henry Singleton is another great serial acquirer and arguably the best capital allocator ever. Buffett & Munger have both suggested Singleton is second to none.
7/ Singleton took advantage of Teledyne’s public valuation. When trading above high multiples, he would raise capital to acquire private businesses at low multiples. Taking advantage of the arbitrage situation between public and private markets.
8/ Second capital allocation decision to discuss is share buybacks. Again, Singleton is the best example. During his time as CEO he bought back 90% of all outstanding shares.
9/ He would raise capital during the early days when trading at high multiples. But when they became cheap, he bought back more shares than any other CEO in history. During his time at Teledyne he turned $1 of shareholder value into $180.
10/ Thirdly, is not paying a dividend. Buffett has been very public about never paying a dividend due to tax inefficiencies. He and many others suggest reinvesting that capital for growth or even buying back shares will increase shareholder value more than paying out dividends.
11/ Of course there are times dividends are a good option of capital allocation. For example, if a company is trading above intrinsic value and have no opportunities to reinvest the capital for growth, then a dividend would usually be a better decision than a buyback.
12/ there are other ways management can intelligently allocate capital, although I just wanted to highlight a few that have made Buffett so great. His 2020 shareholder letter highlighted some of these brilliant decisions.
13/ Here are a few of Buffett’s best capital allocations;

Sees Candy & GEICO acquisitions, consistent buybacks below intrinsic value and reinvesting rather than paying a dividend.

The shareholder letter this year has highlighted the importance of capital allocation.
14/ Overall, I think it’s important for investors to put an emphasis on finding a skilful capital allocator. If you are looking for above market returns, you need to find above average capital allocators. Ideally, we are searching for the next Buffett, Singleton or Murphy.

• • •

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

Keep Current with Idea Hive

Idea Hive 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 @ideahive

Mar 20
Thread/ 'Reflections on the Ten Attributes of Great Investors'

In 2016, Michael Mauboussin wrote an article reflecting on 30 years of researching the greatest investors and identifying the traits made them successful.

Below is a summary of the ten attributes he identified Image
1/ Be numerate (and understand accounting).

To be a successful investor, you have to be comfortable with numbers. There are rarely complicated calculations but a feel for figures, percentages, and probabilities is essential.
2/ Understand value (the present value of free cash flow)

The present value of future free cash flow determines the value of a financial asset. This is true for stocks, bonds, and real estate. Valuation is challenging for equity investors because of cash flows, timing, and risk
Read 12 tweets
Jan 25
2005 short pitch on Monster Beverage.

$MNST was trading at 25-30x fwd earnings, 16x BV, and 23x EBITDA while facing a fears competition on a seemingly faddish product.

Compelling, isn't it? Yet decades later, $MNST is in 100-bagger+ territory.

Worst short ever?👇
Image
Image
1/ $MNST's case is one of my favorites to look into among all the multi-bagger cases presented here before.

True testament to how hard it is to catch onto ideas like this and hold onto them for dear life to turn the stock into the biggest career winner.
2/ I believe it was practically impossible to bet on $MNST in 2005 due to several factors:

- High valuation
- Seemingly a faddish product
- Competition from Red Bull (market leader) and two of the most successful beverage companies ever, $KO and $PEP.

How do you bet on a small cap with those characteristics?
Read 13 tweets
Jan 15
Thread/

‘Nick Sleep on Diversification’

Below is a collection of Nick Sleeps’ comments on concentration vs diversification, from the Nomad Investment Partnership letters.👇 Image
1/

“The church of diversification, in whose pews the professional fund management industry sits, proposes many holdings. They do this not because managers have so many insights, but so few! Diversity, in this context, is seen as insurance against any one idea being wrong”…
2/

“Like Darwin, we find ourselves disagreeing with the theocracy. We would propose that if knowledge is a source of value added, and few things can be known for sure, then it logically follows that owning more stocks, does not lower risk but raises it”…
Read 7 tweets
Jan 8
Thread/
Peter Lynch popularised the concept of EPS growth driving stock returns, which is backed up with academic literature.

Over the very long-term, 20+ years, EPS growth is by far the main contributor to returns.

But what about for a more typical investment of ~5 years? Image
2/

As much as we all want to hold a stock for 20 years, the average holding period is just ~6 months. So a more realistic ‘long-term investment’ is 5 years.

Over 5 years, EPS growth contributes to ~40% of returns. Multiple change contributes to over half of returns. Image
3/

I’ll demonstrate with a simple example.

Stock (a) is a tech company trading at a 40x P/E multiple and will grow earnings at a 30% 5y CAGR. After stock-based comp, shareholders will be diluted at 2% annually.

In the past decade, this sounds somewhat common to come across.
Read 9 tweets
Dec 28, 2023
Another GOAT VIC pitch from 2002, this time on a little company called $NVDA.

In Sep '02, $NVDA was a $2 billion market cap company trading at 14x LTM EPS while being the #1 player in a GPU duopoly with an 83% sales CAGR in 5 years.

Since then, NVIDIA generated a 571x return👇
Image
Image
1/ At the time of the pitch, $NVDA was cheap due to several one-off issues, including an SEC probe (resulting in relatively immaterial revisions), a pricing dispute and ongoing arbitration with $MSFT, an inventory write-down, and a delay in its next-generation chip.
2/ Moreover, this was a cycle trough for the business, so there was a significant inflection potential in current earnings.

Meanwhile, its core GPU business was positioned strongly — being the #1 player in a duopoly with a long runway for growth.

If you managed to look past temporary headwinds, this was an incredible bet.Image
Read 11 tweets
Dec 14, 2023
One of the best VIC pitches ever.

2001 pitch on Apple Computer.

The core $AAPL operating business was valued at $597 million, or about 0.1x expected next year sales.

Most importantly, 87% of Mcap was in cash and marketable securities. 👇
Image
Image
Part of the undervaluation was likely due to significant cash hoard and many investments in other tech companies.

Especially, considering that most of the authorized 1999 buyback plan worth $500m was not still put to use. Image
Of course, it was difficult to imagine what would happen in the upcoming years. Yet signs of these were present then too.

The company had an established market-leading PC and was innovating non-stop.

See the screenshot below. Image
Read 7 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!

:(