A few visitors have asked me to review Mary Buffett & David Clark's Buffettology: The Previously Unexplained Techniques That Have Made Warren Buffett The World's Most Famous Investor. It had been years since I read it—eight, in fact. So, I had to take a day to revisit it (hence no post yesterday).
Buffettology was one of the first "Buffett" books I had read, and I loved it from the very first page. And who could argue the logic provided by someone who sat at the dinner table with Mr. Buffett for the better part of twelve years? I mean, of course, other than me...
When I first read Buffettology, I was a diligent student—highlighter in hand, hanging on every word. Up until that point, I was playing in options, following charts and trends, and trying to figure out the logic and math to the hourly and daily swings of the stock market. I was convinced that there was a system to beating the markets—I just didn't know that Warren Buffett had figured it out forty years earlier.
One concept that continued to ring in my head—and was constantly highlighted in my book—was:
"The price you pay determines your rate of return."
It was obvious. It was simple. It made sense. Why was I just learning it?
The Buffettology strategy is simple: Use past earnings per share to predict future earnings per share, slap on a P/E ratio, and you'll know the future price. Then, discount that price to today and you'll know what to pay for your stock. In fact, it is very similar to Phil Town's method in Rule #1.
Buffettology also spends some time discussing important concepts like: how to identify great companies, diversification, and taxes, among others.
Where is the best place to learn about Warren Buffett's strategies and beliefs? How about we go straight to the horse's mouth? I started reading everything he wrote, studying everything on the Berkshire Hathaway site, watching every video and presentation, and analyzing every book I could find or that he would discuss.
I also went into business—both my own and with other people. At times, I ran the daily operations. At times, I sat back and judged the business from afar.
And then it all made sense.
I revisited Buffettology yesterday, and I noticed some very important things were missing from the book. Simple concepts that matter in business and that Buffett has repeatedly told us to look at. For example, owner earnings are never mentioned in Buffettology.
Intrinsic value? Warren tells us:
The critical investment factor is determining the intrinsic value of a business and paying a fair or bargain price.
Intrinsic value is an all-important concept that offers the only logical approach to evaluating the relative attractiveness of investments and businesses. Intrinsic value can be defined simply: It is the discounted value of the cash that can be taken out of a business during its remaining life.
Buffettlogy tells us:
To Warren the intrinsic value of an investment is the projected annual compounding rate of return the investment will produce.
Here's the difference in the two: Warren Buffett defines intrinsic value as the amount of cash that can be taken out of a business whereas Mary Buffett defines it as the amount of cash that can be made on a business' stock.
If Buffett's method came down to earnings per share and P/E ratios, he would never be able to buy so many private businesses because he wouldn't be able to determine the intrinsic value of the business. He'd be stuck playing in stocks.
Buffettology is a nice primer to the mind of Warren Buffett—if you can ignore the "valuation" methods. In the end, however, it is a book about picking stocks—a book with a great title and great marketing. Any strategy based on earnings—a strategy that might have led you into Enron, Worldcom, Lucent, or a dozen other bad businesses hidden by great stock ratios and wonderful IRS earnings—is a dangerous, gambling, trading strategy.
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!
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.
| Excel 2007 | | | Excel 2003 |
| (ZIP, 168kb) | (ZIP, 138kb) |
Sun @ 9:46AM | View comment
trading for a living said,
I really like this blog post, it has some great info. Thank you and keep up good work.
A Glance At Sharper Image
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
Giggsy
Sep 26th, 2007
6 comments
I also loved the book except for the emphasis on earnings. The authors contradicted themselves by flogging the wall street methods and then emphasizing the earnings.
An interesting (brought to my attention on another forum) article appeared on New York Times about earnings growth:
Excerpt:
A NEW study has found compelling evidence that companies often tinker with their earnings to make themselves look more attractive.
The study found nearly 600 companies over the last four decades that at some point reported earnings increases for at least 20 consecutive quarters - far more than would be expected if no earnings manipulation had taken place.
Link for the article.
Giggsy
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Joe Ponzio
Sep 27th, 2007
Joe on twitter
Ponzio Capital
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
David Clark
Sep 28th, 2007
1 comment
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Your Name
Mar 14th, 2010