巴菲特05年Q&A
2012-01-08 17:32阅读：
老巴说如果他只管理一百万（美元）资金，他能够年赚50%，老散们醒醒吧！
千万可别告诉我50%的复式回报率是靠拥抱股票而来的！呵呵
原文地址：巴菲特问答 2005.7.13作者：投资与财富
Buffett/Jayhawk Q&A
By mhirschey
July 13, 2005
Posts selected for this feature
rarely stand alone. They are
usually a part of an
ongoing thread, and are out
of context when presented here.
The material should be read
in that light. How are
these posts selected? Click here
to find out and nominate
a post yourself!
I took a bunch of students
to Omaha for a Q&A
with Warren recently, and I
thought you might be interested
in the back and forth.
Berkshire Hath
away
Warren Buffett Q&A
May 6, 2005
Question: According to a business
week report published in 1999,
you were quoted as saying
'it's a huge structural
advantage not to have a
lot of money. I think I
could make you 50% a year
on $1 million. No, I know
I could. I guarantee that.'
First, would you say the
same thing today? Second, since
that statement infers that you
would invest in smaller
companies, other than investing
in small-caps, what else would
you do differently?
Yes, I would still say the
same thing today. In fact,
we are still earning those
types of returns on some
of our smaller investments. The
best decade was the 1950s;
I was earning 50% plus
returns with small amounts of
capital. I could do the
same thing today with smaller
amounts. It would perhaps even
be easier to make that
much money in today's
environment because information is
easier to access.
You have to turn over a
lot of rocks to find
those little anomalies. You have
to find the companies that
are off the map - way
off the map. You may find
local companies that have
nothing wrong with them at
all. A company that I
found, Western Insurance Securities,
was trading for $3/share when
it was earning $20/share!! I
tried to buy up as much
of it as possible. No one
will tell you about these
businesses. You have to find
them.
Other examples: Genesee Valley Gas,
public utility trading at a
P/E of 2, GEICO, Union
Street Railway of New Bedford
selling at $30 when $100/share
is sitting in cash, high
yield position in 2002. No
one will tell you about
these ideas, you have to
find them.
The answer is still yes today
that you can still earn
extraordinary returns on smaller
amounts of capital. For example,
I wouldn't have had to
buy issue after issue of
different high yield bonds.
Having a lot of money to
invest forced Berkshire to buy
those that were less attractive.
With less capital, I could
have put all my money
into the most attractive issues
and really creamed it.
I know more about business and
investing today, but my returns
have continued to decline since
the 50's. Money gets to
be an anchor on performance.
At Berkshire's size, there would
be no more than 200
common stocks in the world
that we could invest in
if we were running a
mutual fund or some other
kind of investment business.
Q: Since Ben Graham isn't around
anymore, what money managers do
you respect today? Is there
a Ben Graham today?
You don't need another Ben
Graham. You don't need another
Moses. There were only Ten
Commandments; we're still waiting
for the eleventh (j/k). His
investing philosophy is still
alive and well. There are
disciples of him around, but
all we are doing is
parroting. I did read Phil
Fisher later on, which showed
the more qualitative aspects of
businesses. Common stocks are
part of a business. Markets
are there to serve you,
not to instruct you. You
can often find a couple
of companies that are out
of line. Find one; get
rich. Most people think that
what the stock does from
day to day contains information,
but it doesn't. It isn't
just something that wiggles
around. The stock market is
the best game in the
world. You can take advantage
of people who have no
morals. High prices inside of
a year will typically be
100% of the low price.
Businesses don't change in value
that much. That is simply
crazy. There are extreme degrees
of fluctuation, and Mr. Market
will call out the prices.
Wait until he is nutty in
one direction or the other.
Put in a margin of
safety. Don't find a bridge
that says no more than
10,000 pounds when you have
a 9800 pound vehicle. It
isn't a function of IQ,
but receptivity of the
mind.
When investing you don't have to
invest in all 10,000 companies
available, you just have to
find the one that is out
of line. Mr. Market is
your servant. Mr. Market is
your partner and wants to
sell the business to you
everyday. Some days he is
very optimistic and wants a
high price, others he is
pessimistic and will sell at
a low price. You have to
use this to your advantage.
The market is the greatest
game in the world. There
is nothing else that can,
at times, get this far
out of line with reality.
For example, land usually only
fluctuates within a 15% band.
Negotiated transactions are less
volatile. Some get this; others
don't. Just keep your wits
about you and you can
make a lot of money in
the market.
Q: Do you expect the stock
market premium to continue to
be 6.5% over bonds?
I don't think that the stock
market will return 6.5% over
bonds in the future. Stocks
usually yield a little more,
but that isn't ordained. Every
once in a while, stocks
will get very cheap, but
it isn't ordained in scripture
that this is so. Risk
premiums are mostly nonsense.
The world isn't calculating risk
premiums.
Best book prior to Graham was
written by Edgar Lawrence Smith
in 1924 called Common Stocks
as Long Term Investments. It
was a study that evaluated
how bonds compared to stocks
in various decades of the
past. There weren't a whole
lot of publicly traded companies
back then. He thought he
knew what he was going to
find. He thought that he'd
find that bonds outperformed
stocks during periods of
deflation, and stocks outperformed
during inflationary times. But
what he found was that
stocks outperformed the bonds in
nearly all cases. John M.
Keynes then enumerated the
reasons that this was so.
He said that over time
you have more capital working
for you, and thus dividends
would grow higher. This was
novel information back then and
investors then went crazy and
started buying stocks for these
higher returns. But then they
started to get crazy, and
no longer really applied the
sound tactics that made the
reasons given in the book
true. Be careful that when
you buy something for a
sound reason, make sure that
the reason stays sound.
If you buy GM, you need
to write the price and
the respective market valuation.
Then write down why you
are buying the business. If
you can't, then you have
no business doing it.
Quote from Ben Graham: 'You can
get in more trouble with
a sound premise than an
unsound premise because you'll
just throw out the unsound
premise'.
Q: What was your biggest
mistake?
First off, follow Graham and
you'll be fine.
My biggest mistakes were errors
of omission vs. commission.
Berkshire Hathaway was also a
big mistake. Sometimes the
opportunity costs of keeping
money in something (like a
lousy textile business) can be
a drag on Berkshire's
performance. We didn't learn
from the previous mistake and
bought another textile mill
(Womback Mills) 6-7 years after
buying Berkshire Hathaway. Meanwhile,
I couldn't run the one in
New Bedford.
Tom Murphy, my friend, bought
the newspaper in Fort Worth.
The previous ownership of these
entities owned NBC as well,
but he wanted to divest
the NBC affiliate - $30
million to buy, doing $75
million in earnings. It was
really a pretty good company,
but he wanted to sell it
anyway. There wouldn't be many
more of it. Network television
stations don't require excessive
brains to run. They add a
lot of money to our
bottom lines.
We have never lost lots of
money in things, except in
insurance after 9/11. We don't
do the kinds of things
that lose you a lot of
money. We just might not
be finding the 'best'
opportunities.
Don't worry about mistakes. You'll
make mistakes. Get over it.
At the same time, it's
important to learn from someone
else's mistakes. You don't want
to make too many mistakes.
Side note: Warren once asked
Bill Gates, 'If you could
only hire from one place,
where would it be?' Gate's
reply was Indian Institute of
Technology.
Q: Could you comment on your
currency position?
We have about $21 billion in
about 11 foreign currencies. We
have $60-70 billion in things
that are denominated in US
Dollars. We still have a
huge US bias. If Martians
came down with currency
certificates and could choose
any currency on earth, I
doubt it would be 80% in
US Dollars.
We are following policies that
make me doubt that our
currency will not follow a
downward spin. We lost $307
million this quarter. The net
gain since we started holding
foreign currencies in 2002 is
$2.1 billion. We have to
mark these future contracts to
market daily. If we owned
bonds instead of sterling
forward contracts, it wouldn't
fluctuate around so much.
Identifying bubbles is fairly easy.
You don't know how big
they will get and you
don't know when they will
pop. You don't know when
midnight will hit, but when
it does, it turns carriages
to pumpkins and mice. What
markets will do is pretty
easy. When they will do
it is more difficult. Some
people want to stick around
for the last dance, and
they thought that a bigger
fool would be just around
the corner tomorrow.
When we bought those junk bonds,
I didn't know we would
make $4 billion in such a
short time. It would have
been better if it wouldn't
have happened so quickly, as
we would have gotten a
bigger position.
Q: When did you know you
were rich?
I really knew I was rich
when I had $10,000. I
knew along time ago that
I was going to be doing
something I loved doing with
people that I loved doing
it with. In 1958, I had
my dad take me out of
the will, as I knew I
would be rich anyway. I
let my two sisters have
all the estate.
I bet we all in this room
live about the same. We
eat about the same and
sleep about the same. We
pretty much drive a car
for 10 years. All this
stuff doesn't make it any
different. I will watch the
Super Bowl on a big
screen television just like you.
We are living the same
life. I have two luxuries:
I get to do what I
want to do every day and
I get to travel a lot
faster than you.
You should do the job you
love whether or not you
are getting paid for it.
Do the job you love. Know
that the money you will
follow. I travel distances
better than you do. The
plane is nicer. But that
is about the only thing
that I do a whole lot
different.
I didn't know my salary when
I went to work for Graham
until I got his first
paycheck. Do what you love
and don't even think about
the money. I will take a
trip on Paul Allen's Octopus
($400M yacht), but wouldn't want
one for myself. A 60 man
crew is needed. They could
be stealing, sleeping with each
other, etc. Professional sports
teams are a hassle, especially
when you have as much
money as him. Fans would
complain that you aren't
spending enough when the team
loses.
If there is a place that
is warm in the winter and
cool in the summer, and
you do what you love
doing, you will do fine.
You're rich if you are
working around people you like.
You will make money if
you are energetic and
intelligent. This society lets
smart people with drive earn
a very good living. You
will be no exception.
Q: What is your opinion of
the prospects for the
Kmart/Sears merger? How will
Eddie Lambert do at bringing
Kmart and Sears together?
Nobody knows. Eddie is a very
smart guy but putting Kmart
and Sears together is a
tough hand. Turning around a
retailer that has been slipping
for a long time would be
very difficult. Can you think
of an example of a
retailer that was successfully
turned around? Broadcasting is
easy; retailing is the other
extreme. If you had a
network television station 50
years ago, you didn't really
have to invent or being a
good salesman. The network paid
you; car dealers paid you,
and you made money.
But in retail you have to
be smarter than Wal-Mart. Every
day retailers are constantly
thinking about ways to get
ahead of what they were
doing the previous day.
Retailing is like shooting at a
moving target. In the past,
people didn't like to go
excessive distances from the
street cars to buy things.
People would flock to those
retailers that were near by.
In 1996 we bought the
Hochschild Kohn department store
in Baltimore. We learned quickly
that it wasn't going to
be a winner, long-term, in
a very short period of
time. We had an antiquated
distribution system. We did
everything else right. We put
in escalators. We gave people
more credit. We had a
great guy running it, and
we still couldn't win. So
we sold it around 1970.
That store isn't there anymore.
It isn't good enough that
there were smart people running
it.
It will be interesting to see
how Kmart and Sears play
out. They already have a
lot of real estate, and
have let go of a bunch
of Sears' management (500
people). They've captured some
savings already.
We would rather look for easier
things to do. The Buffett
grocery stores started in Omaha
in 1869 and lasted for
100 years. There were two
competitors. In 1950, one
competitor went out of business.
In 1960 the other closed.
We had the whole town to
ourselves and still didn't make
any money.
How many retailers have really
sunk, and then come back?
Not many. I can't think
of any. Don't bet against
the best. Costco is working
on a 10-11% gross margin
that is better than the
Wal-Mart's and Sams'. In
comparison, department stores have
35% gross margins. It's tough
to compete against the best
deal for customers. Department
stores will keep their old
customers that have a habit
of shopping there, but they
won't pick up new ones.
Wal-Mart is also a tough
competitor because others can't
compete at their margins. It's
very efficient.
If Eddie sees it as impossible,
he won't watch it evaporate.
Maybe he can combine certain
things and increase efficiencies,
but he won't be able to
compete against Costco's margins.
Q: What led you to develop
your values and goals at
an early age?
I was lucky because I knew
what I loved at an early
age. I was wired in a
certain way when I was
born, and I was lucky
enough to stumble upon some
books at a library at a
very early age. In 1930,
I won the ovarian lottery.
If I had been born 2000
years ago, I'd have been
somebody's lunch. I couldn't run
fast, etc.
I was lucky. I had a
terrific set of parents. My
father was an enormous
inspiration for me. The job
when you are a parent is
to teach them. Be a
natural hero. They are learning
from you every moment you
are around. There is no
rewind button. If your parents
do what they say and
their values match what they
teach you, you are lucky.
What I observed in the
world was consistent with what
my parents taught me. That
was important. If you are
sarcastic, and use it as
a teaching tool to kids,
they'll never learn to get
over it. Those first few
years they are very
impressionable.
Q: Could you discuss your views
on estate planning and how
you will allocate your wealth
to your children?
It really reflects my views on
how a rich society should
behave. If it weren't for
this society, I wouldn't be
rich. It wasn't all me.
Imagine if you were one
of a pair of identical
twins and a genie came
along and allowed you to
bid on where you could be
born. The money that you
bid is how much you had
to agree to give back to
society, and the one who
bids the most gets to be
born in the US and the
other in Bangladesh. You would
bid a lot. It is a
huge advantage to be born
here.
There should be no divine right
of the womb. My kids
wouldn't go off and do
nothing if I give them a
lot of money, but if they
did, that would be a
tragedy. $30 billion will be
generated from estate taxes,
which will go to help pay
for the war in Iraq and
other things. If you take
away the estate tax, that
money will have to come
from somewhere else. If not
from estate taxes then you
inherently get it from poorer
citizens. Less than 2% of
estates will pay the estate
tax. They would still have
$50 million left over on
average. I think those that
get the lucky tickets should
pay the most to the
common causes of society. I
believe in a big redistribution.
Wealth is a bunch of
claim checks that I can
turn in for houses, etc.
To pass those claim checks
down to the next generation
is the wrong approach. But
for those that think I am
perpetuating the welfare state,
consider if you are born
to a rich parent. You get
a whole bunch of stocks
right at the beginning of
your life, and thus you
are sort of on a welfare
state of support from your
rich parents from the beginning.
What's the difference?
At $100,000 a year, I can
find 10 people to paint
my portraits to find the
perfect one. I have that
kind of money. But that
is a waste, as those
people could be doing something
useful. I feel the same
way about my kids and
other heirs. They should be
doing things that help to
contribute to society.
Q: What kind of impact will
the demographic shift (i.e. baby
boomers) have on the United
States?
We aren't big on demographic
trends. It's difficult to
translate that information into
profitable decisions. It is hard
to figure out what businesses
will prosper in the future,
based on macro trends. See's
candy is for anyone and
Fruit of the Loom is for
people who need underwear today.
We want to be right on
something that will work right
now, not something that might
work in the future. I
doubt that Wal-Mart spends a
lot of time on demographics.
They instead focus on where
to put the store and what
to put on the shelves.
I've never found those kinds
of stats useful. People were
all excited to go into
stocks 6 years ago, but
it wasn't because of demographic
trends.
Warren then referred to a recent
WSJ article written by Jeremy
Siegel that discussed funds
flowing out of investments
because baby boomers will need
to cash in their investments
during retirement. He said he
respected Siegel, but he doesn't
find fund flows data
useful.
Q: What would Berkshire be like
if you hadn't met Charlie
Munger?
It would be very different, but
I could say the same
thing about a lot of
other people, too. I've had
a lot (at least a dozen)
of heroes, including my parents.
Charlie and I didn't meet
until 1959, although he grew
up a half a block from
where I lived. Charlie was
35 and I was 29. We've
been partners ever since. He
is very strong-minded, but we've
never had an argument that
whole time. I've never been
let down once. It must be
a terrible feeling to be
let down by a hero.
Hang around people who are
better than you all the
time. You do pick up the
behavior of people who are
around you. It will make
you a better person. Marry
upward. That is the person
who is going to have the
biggest effect on you. A
relationship like that over the
decades will do nothing but
good.
Q: Are investors more or less
knowledgeable today compared to
ten years ago?
There is no doubt that there
are far more 'investment
professionals' and way more IQ
in the field, as it
didn't use to look that
promising. Investment data are
available more conveniently and
faster today. But the behavior
of investors will not be
more intelligent than in the
past, despite all this. How
people react will not change
?their psychological makeup stays
constant. You need to divorce
your mind from the crowd.
The herd mentality causes all
these IQ's to become paralyzed.
I don't think investors are
now acting more intelligently,
despite the intelligence. Smart
doesn't always equal rational.
To be a successful investor
you must divorce yourself from
the fears and greed of
the people around you, although
it is almost impossible.
Do you think Ponzi was crazy?
The tech and telecom madness
that existed just 6 years
ago is right up there
with the craziest mania's that
have ever happened. Huge
training in capital management
didn't help.
Take Long Term Capital Management.
They had 100's of millions
of their own money, and
had all of that experience.
The list included Nobel Prize
winners. They probably had the
highest IQ of any 100
people working together in the
country, yet the place still
blew up. It went to zero
in a matter of days. How
can people who are rich
and no longer need more
money do such foolish
things?
Q: What effect does large
institutional ownership have on
stock price volatility?
Never has so much been managed
by so few that care so
much about what happens
tomorrow. So much of the
world of investing is people
who are trying to beat
indexes, and they have a
willingness and eagerness to
make decisions in the next
24 hours. This condition didn't
exist years ago. It has
created a 'hair trigger' effect.
An example of this hair
trigger effect was Black Monday
in '87. The cause was
program trading and stop loss
orders.
Q: What sectors are hurting? Is
there a bear market
coming?
Humans are still made up of
the same psychological makeup,
and opportunities will always
present themselves. All these
people have not gotten more
rational. They are moved by
fear and greed. But I'm
never afraid of what I am
doing. What are directors
thinking [by not repurchasing
shares] if the business is
selling on a per share
basis for one-fourth of what
the whole business would sell
for? They don't always think
rational. I simply don't have
that problem.
Berkshire owned the Washington Post,
the ABC network and Newsweek.
It was selling for $100
million based on the stock
price. No debt. You could
have held an auction, and
sold off the companies
individually for $500M total,
but $100M was the price.
In other words they were
willing to sell us money
that was worth $1 for
$0.25. According to efficient
markets, the beta was higher
when the stock was at $20
than at $37. This is
insanity. We bought what was
then worth $9 million that
is now worth $1.7 billion.
Q: How do you feel about
divisions of conglomerates trying
to horde capital?
Berkshire wants the capital in
the most logical place.
Berkshire is a tax efficient
way to move money from
business to business, and we
can redeploy capital in places
that need them. Most of
the managers of companies we
own are already independently
rich. They want to work,
but don't have to. They
don't horde capital they don't
need.
Q: How do you feel about
the current real estate
environment?
If you are buying to own
a home, that is fine.
Otherwise, it seems to be
getting into bubble territory.
We're not excited about real
estate because generally there
is not enough return at
current prices.
http://www.fool.com/community/pod/2005/050713.htm
