You are here: Home » the Blog » How to Think About Investing » Before You Back Up The Truck On Adobe

Before You Back Up The Truck On Adobe

By Joe Ponzio on February 2, 2008  |  9 comments

Ever since I posted the analysis on Adobe yesterday, I've had this looming feeling that a little clarification was in order. Some of you are looking for reinforcement on your long-term, buy-and-ignore portfolio; some are really trying to find those heart-pounding, mouth-watering, back-up-the-truck deals in the markets.

At today's prices, I believe that Adobe is appropriate for the former — it is a great company that appears to be selling at a moderate discount. Allow me to explain:

A Tale of Two (Intelligent) Investors

When it comes to buying stocks, there are two types of intelligent investors — the safety-seekers and the non-conventionalists. While the approach is the same — buy wonderful companies when they are selling at a discount — the execution is quite different.

Safety-seekers are looking to buy the Johnson & Johnsons, Coca-Colas, Wal-Marts, and, in this case, the Adobes of the world without over-paying for their stock. They are looking for a bottom or near-bottom so they can minimize their exposure to the short-term drops which, to them, are often gut-wrenching and cause them to second-guess and reconsider their holdings, no matter how sound the companies are.

Safety-seekers are constitutionally averse to short-term price swings. They have a long-term outlook on their positions, but they tend to watch (and at times, overanalyze) the short-term swings. They are patient, but they have likely been burned in the past (or know many people who have) and tend to prefer bigger companies over bigger opportunities.

Non-conventionalists, on the other hand, try to put their money where they see the most value, regardless of the size of the company (or opportunity). To them, the size and stability of a company is merely a qualitative factor that helps them determine the margin of safety that is needed. When they see gigantic Company A at a 25% discount and small Company B at a 75% discount, they'll load up on Company B and pass on Company A (assuming, of course, that both opportunities are sound).

Non-conventionalists truly see price drops as opportunities, not just in theory, but in practice. Every dollar drop in the price of their holdings (from general market movement or noise) makes their hearts beat faster — not out of fear, desperation, or doubt, but from the excitement of being faced with greater opportunity, safety, and potential rewards. When their hearts pop out of their chests, they back up the truck and load up more, even if they have to sell some of their Company As (above) to do so.

The Psychological Perception

Being one or the other is a matter of your psychological perception of stock prices and risk. Your margin of safety is meant to put all companies on a level playing field. In theory, Johnson & Johnson at a 40% discount should be less attractive than American Eagle at, say, a 70% discount. In practice, if you look at the two and gravitate towards JNJ, you are a safety-seeker. If you subconsciously believe that the larger companies at a moderate discount are better investments than smaller (though also stable) companies at substantial discounts, you are a safety-seeker.

The Risks and Rewards of Each Strategy

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being one or the other. The safety-seekers will tend to make more consistent profits and suffer the occasional small loss; the non-conventionalists will generally make greater profits and experience the occasional larger loss. In the end and assuming both stick to their core strategies, the non-conventionalist will generally make more money but the safety-seeker should still beat the markets by a satisfactory margin.

Are You a Safety-Seeker or a Non-Conventionalist?

The only way to know if you are one or the other is to have purchased underpriced companies last year to find that they have (or had, for a time) dropped significantly in price. F Wall Street visitors can use American Eagle Outfitters as a prime example — the price was slashed by some 40% when the markets started tanking. (By the way, Buffett dismisses the idea of paper trading for this exact reason. There is no way to know for certain if you are comfortable owning businesses unless you get to experience the actual feelings associated with realized and unrealized gains and losses.)

If you bought AEO in the mid-20s, what went through your mind when it broke $17 a share and you were down a substantial amount? If you second-guessed your analysis, became desperate, or lamented your buy, you are likely a safety-seeker (or should consider buying bonds). If, on the other hand, you saw your position slashed and grew more excited each day, if you backed up the truck and loaded up (or wished you could have), you are likely a non-conventionalist.

It's Psychological — Tough To Change

I've said it before: investing is 99% art, 1% science. Watching your stock prices is 100% psychological. Though it is possible to become a non-conventionalist, it is not easy. (Heck, the markets have shown us that most people can barely stand to be safety-seekers!)

Personally, I'm a non-conventionalist. (I used to be a safety-seeker, and an uninformed speculator before that.) And lest you equate non-conventional with aggressive, let me assure you that "conservative" and "conventional" are not the same thing.

Bringing It Full Circle To Adobe

This entire discussion is a long way of saying the following: My mouth isn't watering at the opportunity to buy Adobe. I think it is a great company and a good buy for safety-seekers, but I'm not backing up the truck just yet. I think it can be bought at these prices and buyers can expect a satisfactory return; still, I don't know that it is a true steal in the non-conventional way.

I'm not crazy about tech in the first place. Though I was able to confidently say that Apple was overpriced in October, I don't know that I can confidently say it is underpriced today. Even though I believe that Adobe was fairly priced last year and is at a slight discount today, I'm not backing up the truck just yet. I'll have to wait until my heart starts pounding and I don't think I got that point across yesterday.

And yes — when you are a non-conventional investor, you do get excited when things get really ugly and your target (or owned) companies drop in price. At least that's the feeling I get.

Hope that helps.

Written by Joe Ponzio on February 2, 2008

Joe Ponzio is the managing partner of the Ponzio Investors Funds and owner of Ponzio Capital Inc, a registered investment advisory and deep value portfolio management firm. The author of F Wall Street (the book and the website), his articles have appeared in hundreds of financial media, including Financial Planning Magazine, CNBC.com, Yahoo! Finance, and Reuters. He has appeared numerous times nationally on both radio and television, and has presented at universities and seminars across the United States.

Read more articles like this online at www.fwallstreet.com.
To learn more about Joe's portfolio management services, visit www.ponziocapital.com.
The Discussion
Night' gravatar

Night
Feb 2nd, 2008
72 comments

"And yes %u2014 when you are a non-conventional investor, you do get excited when things get really ugly and your target (or owned) companies drop in price. At least that's the feeling I get."

Me too.

I wasn't too excited about adobe, though I've used their products for years and I really understand how strong of a grip they have with their products. I'd probably be excited if their price dropped another 30% though, haha.
Tim2' gravatar

Tim2
Feb 2nd, 2008

Joe,

I'm really pleased that you decided to post this clarification about Adobe.

It answered a lot of questions I had. I read your analysis of Adobe last night and to be honest I can't say I was foaming at the mouth for it either. Basically for the same reasons you discussed in the clarification.

I can safely say that I am a non-convential investor, and I wouldn't be suprised if 90 percent of the posters on your blog are too! I think that you need to be non-conventional to start looking for answers (and not trust anyone but yourself).

I get a sense of satisfaction of buying stocks that have 'sell' ratings and everyone is staying clear from. Then to watch the stock receive 'buy' ratings. Has the company changed?.... Nup... these people that give these rating seem to pull them out of their ****... That how I ended up owning crappy Apple stock (prior to learning how to value companies). Love the products... hate the stock... but Apple is a great example of how neurotic the market can be... (which is good for us... so I'm not complaining)

Keep up the great work on the website!

Oh... before I go!

Here is one for the suggestion box...

One of the most time consuming things I have found sofar is actually going through the thousands of stocks and finding ones that I want to look into further. I'm sure that people have their own methods, and I have mine.

If you were to have a topic for people to post companies that they have valued (and keep it short) then that would be a great resource to start from. Although everyone should do their own valuation before purchasing any stock!

Just thought I'd put that idea before you because I'm spending countless hours just getting my shortlist.

Tim
david' gravatar

david
Feb 2nd, 2008

Joe -

I'm with you 100% on ADBE, except for the IV.

Perhaps you could share your thoughts about how you arrived at your 3 growth rates, and why you chose to use 3 -- I noticed that the spreadsheet you used for JNJ derives IV using only 2 rates.

I apologize in advance if this is covered elsewhere on your site.

And thanks for all your insight!

David
Tim2: Great suggestion. I have a few ideas like that. There are so many resources/forums out there, I didn't know if that would be helpful/welcome or just "another stock forum" that people would visit. Anyone?

David: The art of investing is in trying to predict the future. Adobe is now a mature company. Though it will likely continue to grow, I don't necessarily see rapid triple digit growth over the next ten or so years, regardless of the trend of the past.

My projections were merely based on my thoughts. We look at the past as a guide to the stability and predictability of the company; the projections of the future are entirely up to us.

Make sense?
Night' gravatar

Night
Feb 4th, 2008
72 comments

I like forums.
thomas yates' gravatar

thomas yates
Feb 5th, 2008
3 comments

i have been reading your blog for a couple months now, and i just have to tell you how great i think it is. the content is really really good - well thought out, well written, and very insightful. a wonderful breath of fresh air.

..and you have really helped me to transition from being an emotional roller coaster "quote-my-stocks-every-10-minutes" kind of investor to one that actually gets EXCITED when i see me favorite (SNDK, btw) fall even further. "what, its even ~cheaper~ today...you fools, of course i will take some more". once i learned how to determine the intrinsic value of what i owned, to have something to hang my hat on, it allowed me to sleep at night.

many many thanks - i (and my sanity) owe you the world.



Thanks, Mr. Yates. I hope I can keep it up!

Night and Tim2: I talked to my web designer and he is going to get back to me with a quote. I'll let you guys know.
Stephen Eddleman' gravatar

Stephen Eddleman
Feb 8th, 2008
4 comments

Joe,

I'm not a big fan of Forums suggesting stocks to buy. I don't like the idea that someone could be trying to pump up the stocks they own, doing a disservice to the rest of us and worse to anyone who might buy. Then if you point out the flaw in their buy suggestion, you get 10 more entries of attempted justifications and explaining away items of importance. To me, Forums suggesting stocks is just asking for pollution to a very clean web site. Seldom do I ever read the comments that people add to an article, this web site is the exception. I read every comment made by everyone, and learn a lot from those comments. I see this readership today on fwallstreet.com as an educated group, very low noise level. These are not the type of people who would forward on a chain letter (or chain email). I hope it stays that way.

Stephen
Stephen,

I'm with you on that. The problem with forums is that they are mostly noise and spam. My web designer is coming up with some ideas as to how we can organize the comments and posts and clean up a site that is otherwise a long chain of fairly unorganized discussion.
Join The Discussion

Your Name
Mar 12th, 2010

Remember me on this computer
To help keep the F Wall Street website free from comment spam, we require that you have javascript enabled to post a comment. Please turn on javascript and refresh this page to load the comment form.

Joe Ponzio's F Wall Street

Submitting Your Comment

Please wait while your comment is submitted. (It may take a moment.) Comments on F Wall Street are moderated which means that your comment will appear only after it has been reviewed by Joe. Comments are typically reviewed and approved (or denied) quickly, except between 11:30PM and 5:00AM (CST) – Joe has to sleep some time!

Joe Ponzio's F Wall Street

Thank You For Participating!

Thank you for participating on F Wall Street. Once your comment has been approved, it will appear here. While waiting, check out some other articles on the blog or click here to return to the article.

» Buy F Wall Street at Amazon.com

Excel 2007|Excel 2003
(ZIP, 168kb) (ZIP, 138kb)

Search F Wall Street

Powered by Google

Subscribe to F Wall Street

E-mail or RSS updates. And it's free!

Enter your e-mail address below

Thu @ 3:33PM | View comment
MinorityStakes said,

A couple comments regarding BBEP's latest communication with shareholders:* 2009 production just about equaled 2008 production even though capex was...
BreitBurn Energy: Playing the Commodities Crash

Sun @ 11:09AM | View comment
Eric T said,

Instead of inventory turnover, I use the cash conversion cycle, or CCC.It is more accurate for companies that manufacture and...
Understanding the True Profit Margin

Sun @ 5:48AM | View comment
Diversification said,

well it all depends on the correlation between the stocks you have choosen many big mutual funds are having the...
The Dangers Of Overdiversification

Sun @ 4:46AM | View comment
sandesh trivedi said,

Very well explained joe. i believe one must also take into account the nature of the product being manufactured while...
Understanding the True Profit Margin

Sat @ 10:19AM | View comment
Ron said,

Hi Joe,Is there a rule of thumb of percentage of net shares sold by insiders where we should start to...
When To Watch Out For Insider Selling

Sat @ 10:18AM | View comment
jan said,

joe, any thoughts on jackson hewitt? what were the risks that played out in your mind when you decided...
BreitBurn Energy: Playing the Commodities Crash