원문 보기
my name's simon dennison smith from the uk my question is this if you are starting out today with a million dollars with a vision of building a business with 20 average growth in value over 40 years what type of investments and investment strategy would you look to make in the first five years well it's somewhat interesting that we formed the first partnership 50 years ago last two days ago thursday on may 4th 1956 which was 105 000.
that's my sister clapping she she was in the partnership the uh you know we would charlie and i were starting all over again and we were in this charlie would say we shouldn't be doing this but but uh if we if we were to succumb to satan and engage in same kind of activity we would i think be doing something very similarly if we are investing in securities we would look around the world and we would look at a korea and charlie says you can't find 20 of them but you don't have to find 20 of them you only have to find you only have to find one really you do not have to have tons of good ideas in this business you just have a good idea that's worth a ton occasionally and in securities we would we would be doing the same thing which would probably mean smaller stocks it would mean smaller stocks because we would find things that could have an impact on a small portfolio that will have no impact on a portfolio the size of berkshire if we were trying to buy businesses we'd have a tough time we would have no reputation so people would not be coming to us uh we'd be too small a player if you're talking about a million dollars so we would not have much success i don't think with small amounts buying businesses charlie started out you know in real estate development because it took very very little capital and you could magnify brain power and energy uh uh or i should say brain power and energy could magnify some small amounts of capital in a huge way that was not true in securities um you know my natural inclination was to look at securities and and just kind of do it one foot in front of the other over time but the basic principles wouldn't be different uh you know i think if i'd been running a partnership a couple of years ago with a small amount of money i think i'd have probably been 100 in korea and uh you know i would be looking around for something that was very mispriced and which and and that i understood and every now and then that's going to happen charlie well i agree with that the concept that you're likely to find just one thing where it'll make 20 per annum and you just sit back for the next 40 years that tends to be dreamland and in the real world you you have to find something that you can understand that's the best you have available and and once you've found the best thing then you measure everything against that because it's your opportunity cost that's the way small sums of money should be invested and the trick of course is is getting enough expertise that your opportunity cost meaning your default option which is still pretty good is very high and so the game hasn't changed at all in terms of its basic arithmetic that's why modern portfolio theory is so asinine it really is folks yeah when warren said he would have been all in one country that's pretty close to close to right he wouldn't have quite done that when he had the partnership but he would have been way more concentrated than is conventional if you listen to modern portfolio theory most people aren't going to find thousands of things that are equally good they're going to find a few things where one or two of them are way better than anything else they know and uh and the right way to think about it investing is to act thinking about your best opportunity cost number nine by the way that's in the freshman course in economics everywhere in the basic textbook it just has hasn't made its way into modern portfolio theory we don't get asked to do book reviews
댓글 0