1/8 Thread: Changing your mind

It's easy to read Keynes' quote, "When the facts change, I change my mind - what do you do, sir?" and nod your head; but it doesn't make it any less difficult for anyone to change their opinions.

Why is that?
2/8 Murakami had a great quote that I try to remind myself every time I disagree with someone:

“Always remember that to argue, and win, is to break down the reality of the person you are arguing against. It is painful to lose your reality, so be kind, even if you are right.”
3/8 Unfortunately, one of the downsides of arguments/debates on twitter or any social media is it's mostly performative in nature.

You not only lose arguments that shatter your "reality", you go through the experience publicly which makes it even harder to accept and change.
4/8 When we discuss investments, we have enormous incentives to get things right. We lose money when we are wrong.

Any investor should be viscerally interested in the arguments of the other side. Why don't others see it the way you do?
5/8 There is an innate tendency and desire for people to speak to the choir. We don't try to imagine how we would want to be convinced if we were on the other side.
6/8 Supermajority of critics of Facebook, for example, make such an exaggerated, pompous, harsh, and stretched claims that it becomes very, very difficult to even finish a critical piece.

It feels like the critics don't even want to reach an audience who are on the other side.
7/8 Ironically, when people on "my side" do the same to the "other side", it's a fun read. Sometimes, I probably read it more than once.

Just think about the lopsided feedback loop our brains usually go through. There is perhaps no more potent drugs than confirmation bias.
8/8 Equanimity is super hard. And yet, it is perhaps a requirement to be a successful investor in the long-term.

Hopefully, even writing it down helps me a little bit to get there.

All my twitter threads here: mbi-deepdives.com/twitter-thread…

• • •

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

Keep Current with Mostly Borrowed Ideas

Mostly Borrowed Ideas 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 @borrowed_ideas

26 May
1/9 Thread: Retention rate illusions

With the rise of SaaS businesses, retention rate is often discussed and followed by investors.

Here are some of the notes I took from an academic paper discussing illusions/misconceptions when it comes to retention rates.
2/9 Issue #1: Reported retention rate may not be indicative of realized renewal rate. Let me give an example.

Let’s say a business reports retention rate is 95% which is, of course, awesome. What is less discussed, however, is the duration of the customer contracts.
3/9 To illustrate why it is important, imagine Company A, B, and C all report 95% retention rates, but customers only renew the contracts in every 1, 3, and 5 year respectively.

Here’s how the reported and underlying retention rate differs for these companies. Image
Read 9 tweets
22 May
1/ Thread: Customer-based Corporate Valuation

@mjmauboussin and Callahan recently published a piece highlighting Customer-based Corporate Valuation (CBCV) which works particularly well for subscription businesses.

Here are my notes.
2/ Subscription based businesses’ topline grew 17.8% in 2012-2020 period whereas S&P 500 grew sales ~2% during the same time.

Digital subscription has also expanded TAM significantly for some businesses.

$NYT print subscription in 1996: 1.1 mn vs digital subs in 2021: 5.3 mn
3/ The CBCV framework appears simple: customer value comes from existing and future customers. Of course, the devil is the details.

Let’s get to it.
Read 22 tweets
16 May
1/ Thread: Why I am an active investor

One of the questions most investors ask themselves at least at some point is whether they are indeed good investors, or all their past success are just random luck which by definition may not persist.
2/ My basic assumption is I am probably not a great investor. Even to be average, it will require a lot of work for me.

A common retort is why bother investing then? If I am so unsure of myself as an investor, shouldn’t I just index?
3/ This feels like equivalent of telling kids there’s no point in playing basketball because they’re never gonna make it to NBA.

I doubt most NBA players knew before touching the basketball that they are probably very good at it and it might be possible to make it a profession.
Read 15 tweets
9 May
1/ I have thought about it a little more and now I'm a bit confused whether FactSet's methodology is actually better than Grant's. Let me explain what's giving me second thoughts.
2/ if we imagine overall earnings of today's market is a stable pool of total earnings that grows at a historically similar rate, it perhaps makes sense to just the total earnings of the market rather than adjusting it by their mcap weights.
3/ Companies within today's index will die or be left out and new companies will join, and overall profit pool in the economy will just shift around to companies that are creating the most value.
Read 7 tweets
9 May
1/6 Thread: What is the market's valuation multiple?

One of the reasons I was becoming bullish on some of the big tech stocks ~2-3 years ago is some of the them, especially $AAPL was trading at market multiple.
2/6 That didn't make quite sense to me since I thought Apple was clearly a better business than the broader "market".

I now think there was a flaw in that argument.

If I remember correctly, I first came to know about this flaw from one of the pieces by Jim Grant.
3/6 Grant's argument was really simple.

The way market valuation multiple is calculated by FactSet/CapIQ can understate the "true" multiple of the market. Let me explain.
Read 7 tweets
8 May
1/ $IAC/ $ANGI 1Q’21 Update

“The IAC Way pairs scrappiness and big ambition with the rational patience of permanent capital.”

Joey Levin is an excellent communicator. Another young CEO in early 40s who can work for shareholders hopefully for decades.

Here are my notes.
2/ “Whatever the relative point of reference: we’re back where we need to be: building”

16% CAGR since 1995 is an awesome track record in the public markets. That’s ~4x of S&P 500 over the same period.
3/ Vimeo

“Vimeo became part of IAC in 2006 through the $26 million acquisition of Connected Ventures, a collection of businesses whose main attraction for IAC was a business called College Humor.”

Incredible story on the early years of Vimeo.
Read 17 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

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(