Thread by @TaylorPearsonMe

I’ve been (rental) house hunting for the last couple of months. I don’t really know anything about real estate investing, but I’ve been trying to read up (John T. Reed’s Best Practices for the Intelligent Real Estate Investor is my favorite so far).

It’s been interesting seeing the market and how homes are priced.

Factors which the market seems to price really efficiently include:
-Square footage
-Neighborhood
-Amenities/Finishes
-View

However, there are a lot of factors that (in my experience) have very high quality of life implications and basically don’t seem priced in at all.

The first one is natural light .

There is fairly clear research that natural light affects mood, but a dark house doesn’t get any discount

The second is Intra-neighborhood location - Broadly, neighborhoods seem to have a comp but location within that neighborhood doesn’t seem to matter much

However, there is an exponential decay function of how often you will use it based on walk time - something that is 3 minutes away will get used 10x something 15 minutes away - and this doesn’t seem priced in at all.

Design - a house beautifully designed by an architect will be priced the same as a cookie-cutter house thrown up by a developer that is stamping out properties without much thought or consideration.

The process has made me think more about the idea of efficient markets.

The strict version of the efficient market hypothesis is obviously wrong and no one outside the halls of academia considers it.

However, it’s usually a good starting point.

If you stumble on what looks like a great opportunity that the market is ignoring, 99 times out of 100, the market as a whole knows something you don’t. So it’s good to start with the assumption that markets are efficient and then work to disprove that on a case-by-case basis.

The 1 out of 100 times that you really did identify an inefficiency are worth a lot.

They are what Peter Thiel refers to as secrets - things you believe to be true that few others do - and are often the basis for the most profitable “trades” whether that’s an actual trade, starting a business, or positioning yourself in your career.

One interesting place where I think markets are often inefficient is what I call The Illegible Margin.

taylorpearson.me/illegible/

Things that are easy to measure and put into an Excel spreadsheet tend to get priced pretty efficiently.Thing that are hard to measure often get ignored.

In the case of residential housing: natural light and design are both very hard to quantify and I think that leads to them largely being ignored.

(The lack of pricing intra-neighborhood seems driven by most people in the U.S. driving instead of walking places so people don’t really care about walking distance).

In the context of careers, new industries tend to be mispriced because the path isn’t very legible.

I started learning about Search Engine Optimization (SEO) in 2011 and that was how I got my first job.

At the time, I couldn’t even explain to my parents what SEO was. There certainly weren’t any degrees or formal credentials, everyone in the field was self-taught.

It wasn’t a particularly bold or savvy bet on my part.

By 2011, it was pretty clear that search engines weren’t going anywhere and that more and more businesses would rely on them to acquire customers.

It was just illegible and so the competition relative to the demand made it easier to break in and grow quickly.

What opportunities do you see that might be mispriced because of the The Illegible Margin? That’s usually where the best investments are.

If you enjoyed this thread, you can sign up for my newsletter at taylorpearson.me/newsletter/