ELIMINATING THE IMPOSSIBLE

ELIMINATING THE IMPOSSIBLE

4 Nov 2024

Here is a top tip for finding something that you have mislaid. Don’t look for it. Instead, adopt a Rodin posture and think. I call this the Sherlock Holmes method based on his mystery-solving technique that once you have eliminated all the most likely explanations, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. The strong chances are that you will find what you are looking for during the process of eliminating the most likely explanations. I can report that the Holmes method often irritates other people because their instinct is to race around in pursuit of the most unlikely answers. But they like it when you have correctly worked out where their sunglasses/passport/pet hamster are most likely to be. Holmes’ technique is often misleadingly referred to as “eliminating the impossible”, which is nearly the exact opposite of his advice. As an investor I am committed to judging probability. Possibility is by definition always assumed. It is very rare that an outcome can be judged to be impossible. And when something that is highly unlikely is treated as impossible, disaster can follow. See the global financial crisis of 2008, sometimes characterised as a “black swan” event. The circumstance in which impossibility might be profitable for an investor is when the world, or a large part of it, appears to be in denial. I am thinking of two examples now. They are the idea that government debt can rise inexorably and still be treated as if it will be serviced and repaid and secondly that “Net Zero” will be achievable or acceptable. It is an unspoken assumption that major first world governments are good for their debt. This might be credible in the case of the US which borrows in the world’s default currency – even Bitcoin and gold depend on the continuing credibility of the dollar. The fact that Japan is the global emperor of state borrowing (268% of GDP) is remarkable but it is usually explained that domestic institutions and individuals are loyal buyers of government debt, long conditioned to low nominal returns. For Eurozone countries the topic is much hotter, as we saw when “Grexit” seemed to be a thing. (Grexit was a...

IN PRAISE OF STUPIDITY

IN PRAISE OF STUPIDITY

5 Mar 2023

When I talk of stupidity I do not refer to my own which, save in painful retrospect, is an unknown unknown. For better or worse I am limited to my own perception of the stupidity of others.  My proposition is that when some people are wrong, others can profit. Like all judgements, observations of stupidity need to be subjected to a probability test.  Warren Buffett says that sometimes prices are “foolish”, absolving people of some responsibility for the valuations of “Mister Market” but he is a kindly man and evidently much nicer than me.  One advantage of our publicly-traded segment is that – episodically – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. It’s crucial to understand that stocks often trade at truly foolish prices, both high and low. “Efficient” markets exist only in textbooks. In truth, marketable stocks and bonds are baffling, their behavior usually understandable only in retrospect Warren Buffett, Berkshire Hathaway shareholder letter, February 2022 THE LONELINESS OF THE LONG DISTANCE INVESTOR It makes sense that the greater the number of people that are wrong, the greater the potential rewards for those who know better. If you haven’t read The Big Short by Michael Lewis, or watched the film made of it, you should. It was a lonely life, defying consensus ahead of the great financial crisis of 2008 and it is never easy. As Keynes said, most investors would rather fail in the comfort of a crowd than risk standing out.  Holding a minority opinion can be worse than lonely. For some reason, rejecting consensus appears to provoke hostility, particularly at times of perceived emergency (see my last post). After Neville Chamberlain agreed to Hitler’s annexation of the Sudetenland in Munich in September 1938, Winston Churchill denounced the deal (“England…has chosen shame and will get war”). This may look like a historical footnote but Churchill’s own constituency party attempted to have him deselected and very nearly succeeded. The appeasers of 1938 were in a large majority and the idea that Hitler could be bought off was treated as believable because people wanted “peace in our time” so much. Stupidity is surely the eager and dangerously loyal...