Here is the Listing of Companies and Job Cuts.

DaimlerChrysler 26,000
-Motorola: 22,000
-Lucent Technologies: 16,000
-Delphi Automotive Systems: 11,500
-Verizon: 10,000
-Procter & Gamble: 9,600
-Nortel Networks: 9,000
-Solectron: 8,200
-Sara Lee: 7,000
-ADC Telecommunications: 6,000-7,000
-Whirlpool: 6,000
-J.C. Penney: 5,300
-Compaq: 5,000
-Xerox: 4,000
-The Walt Disney Co.: 4,000
-Textron: 3,600
-Schawb: 3,400
-Ericsson: 3,300
-Gateway: 3,000
-ShopKo Stores: 2,500
-AOL Time Warner: 2,400
-Standard Register: 2,400
-Sears: 2,400
-Electrolux: 2,000
-Service Merchandise: 1,750
-Hewlett-Packard: 1,700
-American Greetings: 1,500
-Amazon.com: 1,300
-3Com: 1,200
-Freightliner.: 1,085
-Norfolk Southern: 1,000-2,000

Hi Simon, Gordon, Rick, and everyone,

Times of change are times of opportunities....

Often when people are "downsized", a proportion of them will turn towards starting their own business(es) to support themselves.... So services for the new businesspeople probably represents an opportunity....

Also, the plunging stock markets does represent a buying opportunity.... Based on demographic data, I predict the stock market will rebound within at most a year or so (though probably not the tech stocks to their previous height, since that was an irrational "bubble")....

Harry S. Dent has shown that the US stock market generally follows the US birth data shifted by about 49 years. In his 1993 book, he correctly predicted the stock market boom we've enjoyed in the late 1990s as a result of this demographic data.... (As far as I know, he's the only one to have correctly predicted this boom BEFORE it happened.) We had the boom in births from 1945 onwards, and that meant a boom in the stock market in the late 1990s.

Why shifted by 49 years? The reason why is because that's the age which the average person spends the most money on products.... More money spent means higher profits for various companies. Higher company profits means higher "valuations" for these companies and therefore, in general, higher stock market prices....

I don't have the book with me right now (a friend borrowed it), but in "The Great Boom Ahead" by Harry S. Dent, there's a dip in the birth rate data in the early 1950s some time, and that's the "dip" we're seeing now in the stock market.... Based on birth rate data, the stock market should boom again within a year or so, and keep growing until somewhere around 2010 (give or take a couple years)....

After 2010, again based on birth rate data, we could start to see a big depression (to rival the Great Depression of the 1930s) as the baby boomers reduce their spending.... Although that big depression is still around 9 years away, the time to prepare for it is now....

By the way, just because the stock market in general will go down, it doesn't mean that all industries will go down.... Some industries will boom, particularly those in which the retired baby boomers will tend to spend their money, and also those in which the "baby boom echo" generation (the baby boomer kids), who will be in their 20s, will spend their money....

Yeah, I know this is a long range view, but it actually makes a lot of sense when you think about it. The correlation that Harry S. Dent has shown between birth rate data and stock market indices in the USA has been borne out by history, and it was on this basis that he predicted the stock market boom of the late 1990s BEFORE it happened. (He also correctly predicted the current Japanese recession, again BEFORE it happened.)

So, I'm riding out the current storm, and buying these undervalued stocks now before the rebound in the stock market comes again, which will probably be later this year or some time next year....

I know some will think I'm off my rocker, going loco, around the bend, gone CRAZY for talking about such long term trends.... But if you want to be safe (and I want you all to be), then the time to think about it is NOW. As you know, I study - HARD - to find out what REALLY WORKS, and Harry S. Dent's approach not only makes sense but is borne out by history....

- Dien

> Hi Simon, Gordon, Rick, and everyone,

> Times of change are times of
> opportunities....

> Often when people are "downsized",
> a proportion of them will turn towards
> starting their own business(es) to support
> themselves.... So services for the new
> businesspeople probably represents an
> opportunity....

> Also, the plunging stock markets does
> represent a buying opportunity.... Based on
> demographic data, I predict the stock market
> will rebound within at most a year or so
> (though probably not the tech stocks to
> their previous height, since that was an
> irrational "bubble")....

> Harry S. Dent has shown that the US stock
> market generally follows the US birth data
> shifted by about 49 years. In his 1993 book,
> he correctly predicted the stock market boom
> we've enjoyed in the late 1990s as a result
> of this demographic data.... (As far as I
> know, he's the only one to have correctly
> predicted this boom BEFORE it happened.) We
> had the boom in births from 1945 onwards,
> and that meant a boom in the stock market in
> the late 1990s.

> Why shifted by 49 years? The reason why is
> because that's the age which the average
> person spends the most money on products....
> More money spent means higher profits for
> various companies. Higher company profits
> means higher "valuations" for
> these companies and therefore, in general,
> higher stock market prices....

> I don't have the book with me right now (a
> friend borrowed it), but in "The Great
> Boom Ahead" by Harry S. Dent, there's a
> dip in the birth rate data in the early
> 1950s some time, and that's the
> "dip" we're seeing now in the
> stock market.... Based on birth rate data,
> the stock market should boom again within a
> year or so, and keep growing until somewhere
> around 2010 (give or take a couple
> years)....

> After 2010, again based on birth rate data,
> we could start to see a big depression (to
> rival the Great Depression of the 1930s) as
> the baby boomers reduce their spending....
> Although that big depression is still around
> 9 years away, the time to prepare for it is
> now....

> By the way, just because the stock market in
> general will go down, it doesn't mean that
> all industries will go down.... Some
> industries will boom, particularly those in
> which the retired baby boomers will tend to
> spend their money, and also those in which
> the "baby boom echo" generation
> (the baby boomer kids), who will be in their
> 20s, will spend their money....

> Yeah, I know this is a long range view, but
> it actually makes a lot of sense when you
> think about it. The correlation that Harry
> S. Dent has shown between birth rate data
> and stock market indices in the USA has been
> borne out by history, and it was on this
> basis that he predicted the stock market
> boom of the late 1990s BEFORE it happened.
> (He also correctly predicted the current
> Japanese recession, again BEFORE it
> happened.)

> So, I'm riding out the current storm, and
> buying these undervalued stocks now before
> the rebound in the stock market comes again,
> which will probably be later this year or
> some time next year....

> I know some will think I'm off my rocker,
> going loco, around the bend, gone CRAZY for
> talking about such long term trends.... But
> if you want to be safe (and I want you all
> to be), then the time to think about it is
> NOW. As you know, I study - HARD - to find
> out what REALLY WORKS, and Harry S. Dent's
> approach not only makes sense but is borne
> out by history....

> - Dien
Dien

Is there a simpler way to select stocks that will rebound. I've been struggling with William O'Neil system The founder of investors business daily.

Thanks in advance,
Joseph

There's a new book out by Hagstrom called "The Warren Buffett Portfolio".

And a new Kiyosaki book called "Rich Kid Smart Kid".

Michael Ross.

> Hi Simon, Gordon, Rick, and everyone,

> I know some will think I'm off my rocker,
> going loco, around the bend, gone CRAZY for
> talking about such long term trends.... But
> if you want to be safe (and I want you all
> to be), then the time to think about it is
> NOW. As you know, I study - HARD - to find
> out what REALLY WORKS, and Harry S. Dent's
> approach not only makes sense but is borne
> out by history....

Another interesting coincidence. One of the things Gordon and I do during our meetings is show each other what direct mail pieces we've received and sometimes products we've bought. We do this so we can learn what techniques other successful marketers are using and how we can employ those same techniques. Like them or hate them, (and I see even Dan Kennedy sells at least one product with them now), one of the best at this game is Nightingale-Conant. They have me right where they want me. With their hands in my wallet. Well, last night during one of our meetings, I showed Gordon a direct mail piece that I had recently received from NC. The piece had to do with an audio series by Harry S. Dent. It was called the "Roaring 2000s". Gordon asked me what I thought of the title and we agreed that the title and the concept were probably wrong.

You're saying "not so fast." Harry might have it right. Hmmm. I might give this product more serious consideration. Thanks Dien.

Rick Smith, "The Net Guerrilla"

CHAPTER ONE
The Roaring 2000s
Building the Wealth and Lifestyle You Desire in the Greatest Boom in History
By HARRY S. DENT
Simon & Schuster
Introduction: The Secret to Building Wealth...and
Lifestyle
It is common wisdom today that the key to building wealth is taking risks.
People who take higher risks get the higher returns and wealth. There are
risk/return graphs in investment and business that prove this. Most of us by now
have heard that stocks have higher risk and volatility but higher returns over
time than investments like bonds. New entrepreneurial ventures have higher risk
and failure rates than established businesses and tend to create greater
fortunes. And this is definitely true. But here is the paradox I have learned
through many years of hands-on business experience with successful people:
The best entrepreneurs, executives, and investors I have worked with who
actually achieve the highest returns and build the most wealth don't see it that
way! Despite often being involved in unproven ventures and changing management
or investments, they don't perceive that they are taking big risks at all. They
are simply doing the obvious. They are very definite that what they are doing or
investing in must and will succeed. They have a clear understanding of change
and fundamental trends that seem all but inevitable to them. They appear risky
and unclear only to people who don't understand such changes and naturally cling
to familiar patterns that are more comfortable.
Was Lee Iacocca unclear about the changes that were necessary to save a dying Chrysler Corporation in the mid-1980s? It was obvious to anyone who didn't have a stake in the old ways of doing business. How long did it take Gerstner to
figure out as an outside manager what it would take to turn around IBM in the
mid-1990s? Haven't much of the public and outside analysts been clear that Apple
needed radical changes before its near demise in the mid-1990s? Was Steve Jobs
unclear about the potential of personal computers in the late 1970s? Or Bill
Gates about the need for a software operating system standard in the mid-1980s?
Or Gordon Moore about the doubling of semiconductor power every 18 months since
the mid-1960s? Was Michael Milken unclear about the need to finance such new
emerging companies through nontraditional means in the 1980s?
The many failures among the high-risk ventures come from naive people who are hoping to make an easy killing, such as winning the lottery or getting instant salvation or overnight success in business. It is not that new directions or investments are proven or that it will be easy or that there won't be
challenges. That's the hard part. These successful people have the clarity and
conviction to push through such challenges. They foresee the need for a new
product or service or the viability of a new technology or investment. Why? They
have a unique history of experience that has already validated it for them. They
have done their homework and know it is possible. They understand the
fundamental trends driving the changes they are investing in. And their
experience and homework has also taught them that it won't necessarily happen
overnight or be easy. Therefore they usually don't expect it to be. But if it is
much harder than they thought, it's their belief in the feasibility and
inevitability of what they are doing that keeps them moving ahead until their
vision becomes a reality. It's the strength and attraction of their vision that
allows these people to overcome the obstacles that appear as risk, uncertainty,
and volatility to others.
Clarity about long-term fundamental trends is the key to dealing with the random and uncertain short-term events that inevitably come in the path of any goal. A
clear vision of future change and the discipline to stay the course are the keys
to building wealth and success, whether in business or investments. Setbacks are
only opportunities to learn, adapt, or invest more. It isn't a matter of chance
to these successful people. In this incredible era of change and progress, the
lion's share of wealth is going to the top half of 1 percent of the population
-- those with this understanding of change and a systematic approach to taking
so-called risks. Eighty percent of today's millionaires are self-made, not
through inheritances.
In The Millionaire Next Door, the authors' surveys of wealthy people have
found that the typical millionaire achieved such status by systematically
underspending and oversaving from modestly above-average incomes. The law of
compounding interest and investment returns built wealth over time, not
overnight successes or excessive risk-taking. And a high percentage was
self-employed, from successful small business owners in mostly nonglamour
industries to big-time entrepreneurs.
I watched one small business owner establish a simple business that sold a
narrow line of shorts to Wal-Mart. He managed a $5 million business with two
small factories in towns far away from his home office in Paradise Valley,
Arizona. No management complexity, no bureaucracy! Roy focused on one simple
concept that he could master and control without a bureaucracy while still
maintaining quality. Though he had many opportunities, he adamantly refused to
let his business grow beyond his ability to maintain his personal knowledge,
control, and, most important, his beloved casual and family-devoted lifestyle.
His profits were high, his business consistent, and his lifestyle almost
perfect...without the stress of international competition and a workaholic
lifestyle that would have eclipsed his family values. He achieved wealth and the
ultimate lifestyle!
I worked with another entrepreneur and investor, a penniless immigrant, who consistently bought raw land around two of the fastest growing cities outside of L.A. Where was he buying? In a seemingly unattractive area compared to other booming suburbs closer to downtown. The results: he turned a $7,000 original investment into $50 million in less than a decade. This was worthless land in
the desert that his analysis of the consistently expanding sprawl indicated
would almost certainly be in demand within 5 to 10 years. He had documented
exactly how this had happened in similarly unattractive areas within the same
radius in other growth cities. It was a certainty for him. He bought in a circle
around these two new growth cities and had the patience to wait for the
development to approach in whatever direction it chose. And he had the
conviction to convince other investors to leverage his investment and join in
the inevitable profits with him.
Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems started saying in 1986, "The network is the computer." This was something that almost no one in the highly innovative computer and software industries even remotely understood at the time. It wasn't until 1995 when the Internet suddenly emerged into the mainstream of this
country that this vision became one of the greatest trends of all time. Sun is
now positioned at the center of this revolution. The stock market and the press
have rewarded him enormously. He had the staying power to stick with his
conviction until it became the reality he foresaw. He didn't give up or change
strategies simply because the industry didn't acknowledge it yet.
Anita Roddick built the Body Shop, a worldwide franchise of personal-care
stores, out of a conviction that there were more natural and healthy ways of
caring for ourselves. She also assumed that people would be moved by the impact
of such natural consumption habits on the benefits to traditional industries of
third world countries and the resultant preservation of rain forests versus
clearing for cattle production and urban development. This message and cause
allowed her to attract motivated employees and eliminate traditional advertising
expenditures that many baby boomers considered offensive. She simply assumed
that many other people shared her values. And many did indeed! Her personal
experience and that of many people she associated with made this a near
certainty for her. She understood and invested in one of the most fundamental
trends of the new generation: environmental and health concerns.
Peter Lynch, one of the best investment managers of all time, had an intuitive
sense of the new retail and business formats that could bring a better level of
service at radically lower prices to the consumer. He was not only a great stock
and technical analyst by training and experience, he was also an adamant and
early consumer of such concepts. These were the very types of consumer trends he
was drawn to through his own personal experience. He saw the value of long-term
trends before most of us did. He could spot a Wal-Mart or Home Depot or PetSmart
right from the beginning. It was a near certainty to him that such concepts
would succeed. And he had the professional experience to evaluate whether such
companies were financially sound and undervalued.
He helped lead the explosive trend in mutual funds by proving that a focused, professional investment manager who technically and intuitively understood a sector of change in our economy could create incredible wealth for everyday investors who didn't have such skills -- all in an easy-to-track "packaged" investment program. Peter Lynch never pretended to be able to predict the
economy or fortunes of such companies in the short term. He bet on the long-term fundamentals. He experienced many short-term setbacks and failures. But the 10
to 30 times returns he experienced over time on the best calls made him a
legendary fund manager, more than making up for the bad calls.
Warren Buffet did the same thing for the incredible surge in successful brand
names in mature industrialized countries like ours around the world. You know...companies like Coca-Cola, GE, Gillette, and McDonald's. He has been accumulating large positions in such companies since the early 1980s. He bought when most investors considered these to be relatively mature companies with slower growth ahead and high valuations from historical performance. He wasn't focusing on the past trends in countries like the United States but in the
emerging third world countries where 5 billion new consumers were absolutely
destined to follow the same buying trends we had already established and
realized in the past century. Talk about long term fundamental trends! And these
emerging consumers didn't need to go through the brand wars that occurred in the
United States. They already knew through international television and
communications which brands were the top ones here. As long as such leading
companies had sound management, financial structures, and clear strategies of
investing heavily in these new markets with dominant market shares, he was
patient enough to wait for the inevitable growth and profits.
He buys value waiting to happen on the basis of projectable long-term
fundamental trends. He has patience. He buys when he sees such value and holds
for the long term. He doesn't try to anticipate short-term trends in the economy
or in such companies any more than Peter Lynch did. By 1997 he had stopped
buying heavily in Coca-Cola while accumulating shares of McDonald's. Why? The
stock markets had seen his vision of companies like Coca-Cola and driven
valuations too high, at 46 times earnings in mid-1997. He didn't sell Coca-Cola
as it was still likely to grow at its earnings rate of 18 percent a year with
less than 2 percent volatility well into the future, which is still a great
return with low risk. But he bought McDonald's because the short-term nature of
the markets was overstressing the obvious maturing of the burger market in the
United States versus the much greater long term potential overseas.
He is a long-term investor just like many of the very elite households in this
country that are building wealth in this unprecedented boom. Meanwhile, most of
us make more modest gains. And a significant minority is falling behind as the
rapid pace of change makes obsolete our past businesses, jobs, and investment
strategies.
Investment is actually very simple. It is just like diet and exercise. I don't
know about you, but I don't need to hear many more statistics about diet and
exercise. It is pretty straightforward. It comes down to broccoli and chocolate
cake. We all know that broccoli is better for us but we tend to choose the
chocolate cake when we actually sit down to eat. The chocolate cake is simply
irresistible, it tastes better, and it even feels better in the moment. But it
isn't the best for our long-term health, or even for our energy and mood later
in the day.
A clear vision of fundamental change and a persistent and disciplined strategy
of investment in time and money: those are the keys to building wealth,
especially in a time of sweeping change that threatens old ways of thinking and
doing business. But most investors think about timing the markets, picking the
hottest stocks and funds, trying to beat the odds instead of the simpler,
clearer long-term approach of a Warren Buffet. The purpose of this book is
equally simple:
To help you understand the fundamental trends that can be reliably projected into the future to allow you to build the wealth and lifestyle you desire in the greatest boom in history.
I have spent 25 years analyzing such trends, beginning with an undergraduate education in economics, accounting and finance, followed by an M.B.A. at Harvard Business School in business management, marketing, and strategy. I have worked
at the highest levels of business strategy with Fortune 100 companies at Bain & Company. I then worked in strategy and turnaround management with many entrepreneurial growth companies. I have been the CEO or CAO of several such companies, dealing with real human and business change at the extreme.
Unlike an academic or an armchair economist, I have been directly involved in
the dramatic changes occurring in our largest multinational companies and, more important, our vibrant emerging companies that are creating almost all of the growth and jobs in our economy. I was paid for forecasting fundamental changes
in old and new industries: changes that companies had to invest their entire
assets and strategies I had to be right or suffer the consequences. I have been
an entrepreneur, having conducted research that has spawned my own business,
which is not only succeeding beyond my original vision but may allow me to
prosper while living on a Caribbean island. I have achieved the lifestyle I
wanted, not from daydreams but from vision, patience, and understanding
long-term trends that I determined were inevitable.
Over my unique life and business experience, I learned how projectable such fundamental changes were. I simply adapted the proven tools in my profession of business and industry forecasting to the broader economy. I didn't consider this
a risky proposition, although it took many years and much more struggle than I anticipated for such forecasting tools to be recognized. I also learned through entrepreneurial ventures, crisis management, and short-term investment trading
how random and unpredictable short-term changes, events, and setbacks can be.
How many experts have consistently predicted short-term events and market
movements? Elaine Garzarelli was the last such expert timer to live and die by
"the sword." And she was really good. Nobody has ever proven the ability to
predict the short term over time.
Instead I developed an intuitive sense of the sweeping but simple trends that
were changing our lives, businesses, and investments. And very simple
quantitative measures to verify and project such trends. That is where the real
payoff is, just as the greatest entrepreneurs, business managers, and investors
have proven throughout history. I have conducted extensive research, in many
cases going back hundreds of years and even thousands of years of history, to
validate these changes and develop a clear and understandable vision of where we
are headed in this incredible boom...and even the inevitable downturn that will
follow.
This book is about bringing my proven tools of forecasting to people like you
who may not have the time or interest to go through my experience in business,
research, and forecasting. You can absolutely have a vision of the future
because it is the predictable human and economic behavior of people like you and
me that actually drives change in our society and economy. Therefore, you can
understand these changes in very commonsense terms. Economists who have failed
to forecast the most important changes of this era have missed the most
fundamental insights, despite their obvious intelligence and meticulous
analysis. They have missed the forest for the trees.
The predictable impacts of the birth and aging of new generations drive
economic, technological, and social changes that influence our lives, jobs,
businesses, and investments over time. The impacts range from innovation to
spending to borrowing to saving and even to the purchase of everyday items like
potato chips or motorcycles. Consumer marketers have used age, income, and
lifestyle demographics very successfully as a "snapshot" to determine how to
best exploit trends in consumer behavior today. This book is about seeing such
demographic and generation shifts as a "moving picture" to see the changes that
will inevitably occur in the future to change our lives, career, business, and
investment opportunities. You can understand and invest in the future lust as
the most successful people have in the past. History is all about raising our
standard of living through innovation and learning. It has also been about
bringing a high standard of living to more and more people. The rich don't just
get richer over time. Every day people move to higher standards of living and
actually reduce the gap between the rich and the poor over time.
Yes, history proves that the gap between rich and poor has narrowed dramatically over the long term, despite volatile periods of change that temporarily tend to benefit the rich. The average person was a serf or slave for most of history
versus very few nobles, knights, or information-elite. This also happened in the
last economic revolution from the late 1800s into the Roaring Twenties. But that innovation cycle and the new emerging economy created an unprecedented new prospering middle class in the 1950s and 1960s. The innovation of such entrepreneurial people is necessary to create new revolutions that "trickle
down" over many decades to more and more people. It doesn't just happen
overnight, like the secrets to building wealth I have already described. The
S-curve principle described in this book is one of the many simple tools that
will make change more obvious to you. It will show how most new products,
technologies, and social trends move into our economy and create change and
opportunities predictably...but not in the straight line that most experts
forecast.
I have been projecting the most fundamental changes in our economy, business,
and investments since the mid-to-late 1980s with the simple tools I will present
in this book. I am not someone who has become suddenly bullish with the
incredible stock rises between 1995 and 1997. In 1988 I began speaking to
business CEOs on my research predicting the greatest boom in history and
unprecedented changes in business and management -- despite the infamous 1987
crash. I published my first book Our Power to Predict in 1989, in which I
forecast an incredible boom to around 2010, with a Dow of 10,000, falling
inflation and interest rates, and the resurgence of America in world markets. In
this book I have updated my forecasts to a Dow of at least 21,500 and likely
higher by including the massive wave of immigrants into our country since then.
In late 1992 I published my best-known book, The Great Boom Ahead, which
reiterated and expanded on these forecasts lust as depression and debt crisis
books were all hitting the bestseller lists and negative views of the future
were widespread. That book has become the bible of many financial advisors and
investors over the past years because the forecasts have proven to be largely on
the mark. It's not that I predicted everything right in the short term. I
overforecast the severity of the recession of the early nineties after predicting it in 1989. I underforecast the stock boom to follow despite being
wildly bullish at the time. I assumed that my prediction of the collapse of
Japan's economic miracle and the fall in suburban real estate prices would have
a greater impact on the fundamentals of growth of U.S. consumer trends in the
short term. But consumers spent as the reliable statistics I will reveal in this
book would have suggested despite these setbacks. That was part of my lesson in
focusing too much on near-term trends. I wish I had had Warren Buffet or Peter
Lynch as a mentor at that time.
The Roaring 2000s is about projecting the inevitable trends that have
already been established by the massive baby boom generation that will impact
our economy and our lives as it predictably ages. I will bring a much updated
view of the Internet and information revolution and the massive changes that
will result in the coming decade in our work and business structures as they are
finally moving into the mainstream of our economy. This will create a surge in
productivity, wealth, lifestyle opportunities, and conveniences in our lives --
just as automobiles, electricity and motors, phones, and new consumer products
such as Coca-Cola did dramatically beginning in the Roaring Twenties and
expanding into the early 1970s. I will look at the predictable trends in the
stock markets, business and entrepreneurial opportunities, jobs and careers,
lifestyles, and real estate investing that can allow you to achieve your dreams
in the greatest boom in history. And lifestyle is what it's all about, not
merely achieving wealth. Although anyone who is wealthy would quickly agree that
it is better than being poor. Surveys of happiness in this country have shown
that wealth affects the sense of well-being by a factor of only 2 percent.
Happiness is more about relationships, friends, family, and community...and a
balanced life. It's more fundamentally about living, learning, experiencing, and
growing as a human being. It's ultimately about evolution. It's what you do with
your life that counts, and wealth can be a critical tool for achieving the
freedom to maximize your experience and your impact on others.
Money or economic wealth is ultimately about giving yourself the freedom to choose the lifestyle that you want and to champion the causes you believe in.
That is the new ethic in this era of prosperity when many of us have already
achieved the fundamentals of survival, security, and living.
This book is more about how you can achieve the lifestyle you really want. Not
just wealth...but the satisfying career, the opportunity to start your own
business, the ability to innovate and establish your own business unit within
your present corporation, the ability to live where you want to and still
maintain or advance your standard of living, the ability to better manage change
as an executive or professional within your company, the ability to manage your
life to spend more time with the people you love rather than commuting and
becoming a workaholic in today's stressful society of two-worker couples and
downsizing of jobs.
The ability to greatly evolve and advance one's standard of living has not
always been possible for many people throughout history. We are living in the
greatest period of change and progress since the printing press revolution and
the discovery of America and the rest of the world after the late 1400s. Such
times create the greatest opportunities for advancement of people from all
socioeconomic sectors. The greatest advances in such times have often come from
the drive and motivation of lower-class people and penniless immigrants. As I
stated earlier, 80 percent of the millionaires today were self-made through
either systematic investment from above average, not extreme, incomes or from
entrepreneurial businesses.
I will show how these revolutions are predictable and how they create changes in our economy and society. This will allow you, if you are open to change, to take advantage of these anticipated trends using your own unique experiences and insights. But it is up to you to apply these insights creatively to your own
business and living circumstances to redesign how you work and where and how you
live. We are in the midst of the greatest economic boom and technological
revolution in history. And it hasn't occurred yet. It is about to emerge: just
as cars, electricity, and phones did in the Roaring Twenties. The Roaring 2000s
will come with the aging of the massive baby boom generation into its peak
productivity, earning, and spending years and the emergence of their radical
information revolution into the mainstream of our economy.
Tighten your seatbelts and prepare for the greatest boom in history: from 1998
to 2008!
I said this in late 1992 in The Great Boom Ahead and I will say it again:
Stay invested and take any short-term setbacks in the stock market or in your
career as an opportunity to invest more in change and growth. And when the next
long-term downturn in the economy eventually occurs, I have advice for
prospering in that stage as well.
Best of success to you in the Roaring 2000s!

(C) 1998 Harry Dent All rights reserved. ISBN: 0-684-83818-4

Hi Rick,

> Another interesting coincidence. One of the
> things Gordon and I do during our meetings
> is show each other what direct mail pieces
> we've received and sometimes products we've
> bought. We do this so we can learn what
> techniques other successful marketers are
> using and how we can employ those same
> techniques. Like them or hate them, (and I
> see even Dan Kennedy sells at least one
> product with them now), one of the best at
> this game is Nightingale-Conant. They have
> me right where they want me. With their
> hands in my wallet.

Heheh. :)

I've recently started to get myself on some catalog lists (as Gordon has recommended), so I'm hoping to get some more direct mail pieces too.... :)

> Well, last night during
> one of our meetings, I showed Gordon a
> direct mail piece that I had recently
> received from NC. The piece had to do with
> an audio series by Harry S. Dent. It was
> called the "Roaring 2000s". Gordon
> asked me what I thought of the title and we
> agreed that the title and the concept were
> probably wrong.

> You're saying "not so fast." Harry
> might have it right. Hmmm. I might give this
> product more serious consideration. Thanks
> Dien.

Actually, I agree with you. Harry S. Dent isn't a marketer.... Instead, he's a specialist in forecasting the effects that age-related trends has on the economy (and in various industries)....

So his marketing techniques could be terrible, but I think his techniques for predicting the future are on the money. :)

I don't have "The Roaring 2000s" by the way, that's a follow up book to "The Great Boom Ahead" (TGBA) which he published in 1993.

I first learned about TGBA in 1994, when I saw it at a friend's house. My friend told me all about it, and I was kind of skeptical of the whole thing. Dent predicted a booming stock market, and a big Japanese recession -- and I thought he had it all wrong.

What struck me was when these things happened!

His timing for the Japanese recession was out by a couple years, but the guts of what he said was right!

- Dien

> There's a new book out by Hagstrom called
> "The Warren Buffett Portfolio".

THE WARREN BUFFETT PORTFOLIO: MASTERING THE POWER OF THE FOCUS INVESTMENT STRATEGY
by*Robert G., Jr. Hagstrom*Hagstrom
Format:Hardcover,*246pp.
ISBN: 0471247669
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Pub. date: April 1999
Other Formats:Analog Audio Cassette
Prologue
The Warren Buffett Portfolio
Mastering the Power of the Focus Investment Strategy
By Robert G. Hagstrom
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Copyright © 1999 Robert G. Hagstrom.
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 0-471-24766-9
Chapter One
Focus Investing
Robert, we just focus on a few outstanding companies.

We're focus investors.
—Warren Buffett
I remember that conversation with Warren Buffett as if it
happened yesterday. It was for me a defining moment, for
two reasons. First, it moved my thinking in a totally new direction;
and second, it gave a name to an approach to portfolio
management that I instinctively felt made wonderful sense but
that our industry had long overlooked. That approach is what we
now call focus investing, and it is the exact opposite of what most
people imagine that experienced investors do.

***

Hollywood has given us a visual cliché of a money manager at
work: talking into two phones at once, frantically taking notes
while trying to keep an eye on jittery computer screens that blink
and blip from all directions, slamming the keyboard whenever one
of those computer blinks shows a minuscule drop in stock price.

***

Warren Buffett, the quintessential focus investor, is as far
from that stereotype of frenzy as anything imaginable. The man
whom many consider the world's greatest investor is usually described
with words like "soft-spoken," "down-to-earth," and
"grandfatherly." He moves with the calm that is born of great confidence, yet his accomplishments and his performance
record are legendary. It is no accident that the entire investment
industry pays close attention to what he does. If Buffett characterizes
his approach as "focus investing," we would be wise to
learn what that means and how it is done.

***

Focus investing is a remarkably simple idea, and yet, like
most simple ideas, it rests on a complex foundation of interlocking
concepts. If we hold the idea up to the light and look closely
at all its facets, we find depth, substance, and solid thinking
below the bright clarity of the surface.

***

In this book, we will look closely at these interlocking concepts,
one at a time. For now, I hope merely to introduce you to
the core notion of focus investing. The goal of this overview
chapter mirrors the goal of the book: to give you a new way of thinking about investment decisions and managing investment
portfolios. Fair warning: this new way is, in all likelihood, the opposite
of what you have always been told about investing in the
stock market. It is as far from the usual way of thinking about
stocks as Warren Buffett is from that Hollywood cliché.

The essence of focus investing can be stated quite simply:

Choose a few stocks that are likely to produce above-average

returns over the long haul, concentrate the bulk of your

investments in those stocks, and have the fortitude to hold

steady during any short-term market gyrations.
***

No doubt that summary statement immediately raises all
sorts of questions in your mind:

***

How do I identify those above-average stocks?

***

How many is "a few"?

***

What do you mean by "concentrate"?

***

How long must I hold?

And, saved for last:

***

Why should I do this?
The full answers to those questions are found in the subsequent
chapters. Our work here is to construct an overview of the focus
process, beginning with the very sensible question of why you
should bother.

PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT TODAY:
A CHOICE OF TWO
In its current state, portfolio management appears to be locked
into a tug-of-war between two competing strategies: active portfolio
management and index investing.

***

Active portfolio managers constantly buy and sell a great
number of common stocks. Their job is to try to keep their
clients satisfied, and that means consistently outperforming the
market so that on any given day, if a client applies the obvious
measuring stick—"How is my portfolio doing compared to the
market overall?"—the answer is positive and the client leaves her
money in the fund. To keep on top, active managers try to predict
what will happen with stocks in the coming six months and
continually churn the portfolio, hoping to take advantage of
their predictions. On average, today's common stock mutual
funds own more than one hundred stocks and generate turnover ratios of 80 percent.

***

Index investing, on the other hand, is a buy-and-hold passive
approach. It involves assembling, and then holding, a broadly diversified
portfolio of common stocks deliberately designed to
mimic the behavior of a specific benchmark index, such as the
Standard & Poor's 500 Price Index (S&P 500).

***

Compared to active management, index investing is somewhat
new and far less common. Since the 1980s, when index
funds fully came into their own as a legitimate alternative strategy,
proponents of both approaches have waged combat to determine
which one will ultimately yield the higher investment
return. Active portfolio managers argue that, by virtue of their superior stock-picking skills, they can do better than any index.
Index strategists, for their part, have recent history on their side.
In a study that tracked results in a twenty-year period, from 1977
through 1997, the percentage of equity mutual funds that have
been able to beat the S&P 500 dropped dramatically, from 50 percent in the early years to barely 25 percent in the last four
years. Since 1997, the news is even worse. As of November 1998,
90 percent of actively managed funds were underperforming the
market (averaging 14 percent lower than the S&P 500), which
means that only 10 percent were doing better.

***

Active portfolio management, as commonly practiced today,
stands a very small chance of outperforming the S&P 500. Because
they frenetically buy and sell hundreds of stocks each year, institutional money managers have, in a sense, become the market. Their
basic theory is: Buy today whatever we predict can be sold soon at a
profit, regardless of what it is. The fatal flaw in that logic is that,
given the complex nature of the financial universe, predictions are impossible. (See Chapter 8 for a description of complex adaptive
systems.) Further complicating this shaky theoretical foundation is
the effect of the inherent costs that go with this high level of activity—costs that diminish the net returns to investors. When we factor
in these costs, it becomes apparent that the active money
management business has created its own downfall.

***

Indexing, because it does not trigger equivalent expenses, is
better than actively managed portfolios in many respects. But
even the best index fund, operating at its peak, will only net exactly
the returns of the overall market. Index investors can do no
worse than the market—and no better.

***

From the investor's point of view, the underlying attraction
of both strategies is the same: minimize risk through diversification.
By holding a large number of stocks representing many industries
and many sectors of the market, investors hope to create
a warm blanket of protection against the horrific loss that could
occur if they had all their money in one arena that suffered some
disaster. In a normal period (so the thinking goes), some stocks
in a diversified fund will go down and others will go up, and let's
keep our fingers crossed that the latter will compensate for the
former. The chances get better, active managers believe, as the number of stocks in the portfolio grows; ten is better than one,
and a hundred is better than ten.

***

An index fund, by definition, affords this kind of diversification
if the index it mirrors is also diversified, as they usually are.
The traditional stock mutual fund, with upward of a hundred
stocks constantly in motion, also offers diversification.

***

We have all heard this mantra of diversification for so long,
we have become intellectually numb to its inevitable consequence:
mediocre results. Although it is true that active and
index funds offer diversification, in general neither strategy
will yield exceptional returns. These are the questions intelligent investors must ask themselves: Am I satisfied with average
returns? Can I do better?

A NEW CHOICE
What does Warren Buffett say about this ongoing debate regarding
index versus active strategy? Given these two particular
choices, he would unhesitatingly pick indexing. Especially if he
were thinking of investors with a very low tolerance for risk, and
people who know very little about the economics of a business
but still want to participate in the long-term benefits of investing
in common stocks. "By periodically investing in an index fund,"
Buffett says in his inimitable style, "the know-nothing investor
can actually outperform most investment professionals."

***

Buffett, however, would be quick to point out that there is a
third alternative, a very different kind of active portfolio strategy
that significantly increases the odds of beating the index.
That alternative is focus investing.

FOCUS INVESTING: THE BIG PICTURE

"Find Outstanding Companies"
Over the years, Warren Buffett has developed a way of choosing the
companies he considers worthy places to put his money. His choice
rests on a notion of great common sense: if the company itself is
doing well and is managed by smart people, eventually its inherent value will be reflected in its stock price. Buffett thus devotes most
of his attention not to tracking share price but to analyzing the economics
of the underlying business and assessing its management.

***

This is not to suggest that analyzing the company—uncovering
all the information that tells us its economic value—is particularly
easy. It does indeed take some work. But Buffett has often
remarked that doing this "homework" requires no more energy
than is expended in trying to stay on top of the market, and the results are infinitely more useful.

***

The analytical process that Buffett uses involves checking
each opportunity against a set of investment tenets, or fundamental
principles. These tenets, presented in depth in The Warren
Buffett Way and summarized on page 8, can be thought of as
a kind of tool belt. Each individual tenet is one analytical tool, and, in the aggregate, they provide a method for isolating the
companies with the best chance for high economic returns.

***

The Warren Buffett tenets, if followed closely, lead you inevitably
to good companies that make sense for a focus portfolio.
That is because you will have chosen companies with a long history
of superior performance and a stable management, and that
stability predicts a high probability of performing in the future
as they have in the past. And that is the heart of focus investing:
concentrating your investments in companies that have the highest
probability of above-average performance.

***

Probability theory, which comes to us from the science of
mathematics, is one of the underlying concepts that make up the
rationale for focus investing. In Chapter 6, you will learn more
about probability theory and how it applies to investing. For the
moment, try the mental exercise of thinking of "good companies"
as "high-probability events." Through your analysis, you have already
identified companies with a good history and, therefore,
good prospects for the future; now, take what you already know
and think about it in a different way—in terms of probabilities.

"Less Is More"
Remember Buffett's advice to a "know-nothing" investor, to stay
with index funds? What is more interesting for our purposes is
what he said next:

***

"If you are a know-something investor, able to understand
business economics and to find five to ten sensibly priced companies
that possess important long-term competitive advantages,
conventional diversification [broadly based active portfolios]
makes no sense for you."

***

What's wrong with conventional diversification? For one
thing, it greatly increases the chances that you will buy something
you don't know enough about. "Know-something" investors,
applying the Buffett tenets, would do better to focus
their attention on just a few companies—"five to ten," Buffett
suggests. Others who adhere to the focus philosophy have suggested
smaller numbers, even as low as three; for the average investor,
a legitimate case can be made for ten to fifteen. Thus, to
the earlier question, How many is "a few"? the short answer is: No
more than fifteen. More critical than determining the exact
number is understanding the general concept behind it. Focus investing falls apart if it is applied to a large portfolio with
dozens of stocks.

***

Warren Buffett often points to John Maynard Keynes, the
British economist, as a source of his ideas. In 1934, Keynes wrote
to a business associate: "It is a mistake to think one limits one's
risks by spreading too much between enterprises about which one
knows little and has no reason for special confidence....
One's knowledge and experience are definitely limited and there
are seldom more than two or three enterprises at any given time in
which I personally feel myself entitled to put full confidence."
Keynes's letter may be the first piece written about focus investing.

***

An even more profound influence was Philip Fisher, whose
impact on Buffett's thinking has been duly noted. Fisher, a
prominent investment counselor for nearly half a century, is the
author of two important books: Common Stocks and Uncommon
Profits and Paths to Wealth Through Common Stocks, both of which
Buffett admires greatly.

***

Phil Fisher was known for his focus portfolios; he always said
he preferred owning a small number of outstanding companies
that he understood well to owning a large number of average
ones, many of which he understood poorly. Fisher began his investment counseling business shortly after the 1929 stock market
crash, and he remembers how important it was to produce good
results. "Back then, there was no room for mistakes," he remembers.
"I knew the more I understood about the company the better
off I would be." As a general rule, Fisher limited his
portfolios to fewer than ten companies, of which three or four
often represented 75 percent of the total investment.

***

"It never seems to occur to [investors], much less their advisors,"
he wrote in Common Stocks in 1958, "that buying a company
without having sufficient knowledge of it may be even more dangerous
than having inadequate diversification." More than forty years later, Fisher, who today is ninety-one, has not changed his
mind. "Great stocks are extremely hard to find," he told me. "If
they weren't, then everyone would own them. I knew I wanted to
own the best or none at all."

***

Ken Fisher, the son of Phil Fisher, is also a successful money
manager. He summarizes his father's philosophy this way: "My
dad's investment approach is based on an unusual but insightful
notion that less is more."

"Put Big Bets on
High-Probability Events"
Fisher's influence on Buffett can also be seen in his belief that
when you encounter a strong opportunity, the only reasonable
course is to make a large investment. Like all great investors,
Fisher was very disciplined. In his drive to understand as much
as possible about a company, he made countless field trips to
visit companies he was interested in. If he liked what he saw, he
did not hesitate to invest a significant amount of money in the
company. Ken Fisher points out, "My dad saw what it meant to
have a large position in something that paid off."

***

Today, Warren Buffett echoes that thinking: "With each investment
you make, you should have the courage and the conviction
to place at least 10 percent of your net worth in that stock."

***

You can see why Buffett says the ideal portfolio should contain
no more than ten stocks, if each is to receive 10 percent. Yet
focus investing is not a simple matter of finding ten good stocks
and dividing your investment pool equally among them. Even
though all the stocks in a focus portfolio are high-probability events, some will inevitably be higher than others and should be
allocated a greater proportion of the investment.

***

Blackjack players understand this tactic intuitively: When
the odds are strongly in your favor, put down a big bet. In the
eyes of many pundits, investors and gamblers have much in
common, perhaps because both draw from the same science:
mathematics. Along with probability theory, mathematics provides
another piece of the focus investing rationale: the Kelly Optimization Model. The Kelly model is represented in a formula
that uses probability to calculate optimization—in this
case, optimal investment proportion. (The model, along with
the fascinating story of how it was originally derived, is presented
in Chapter 6.)

***

I cannot say with certainty whether Warren Buffett had optimization
theory in mind when he bought American Express stock
in late 1963, but the purchase is a clear example of the concept—and
of Buffett's boldness. During the 1950s and 1960s, Buffett
served as general partner in a limited investment partnership in
Omaha, Nebraska, where he still lives. The partnership was allowed
to take large positions in the portfolio when profitable opportunities
arose, and, in 1963, one such opportunity came along.
During the infamous Tino de Angelis salad oil scandal, the American
Express share price dropped from $65 to $35 when it was
thought the company would be held liable for millions of dollars
of fraudulent warehouse receipts. Warren invested $13 million—a
whopping 40 percent of his partnership's assets—in ownership of close to 5 percent of the shares outstanding of American Express.
Over the next two years, the share price tripled, and the Buffett
partnership walked away with a $20 million profit.

"Be Patient"
Focus investing is the antithesis of a broadly diversified, high-turnover
approach. Among all active strategies, focus investing
stands the best chance of outperforming an index return over
time, but it requires investors to patiently hold their portfolio
even when it appears that other strategies are marching ahead.
In shorter periods, we realize that changes in interest rates,
inflation, or the near-term expectation for a company's earnings
can affect share prices. But as the time horizon lengthens, the
trend-line economics of the underlying business will increasingly
dominate its share price.

***

How long is that ideal time line? As you might imagine, there
is no hard and fast rule (although Buffett would probably say
that any span shorter than five years is a fool's theory). The goal
is not zero turnover; that would be foolish in the opposite direction
because it would prevent you from taking advantage of
something better when it comes along. I suggest that, as a general
rule of thumb, we should be thinking of a turnover rate between
10 and 20 percent. A 10 percent turnover rate suggests
that you would hold the stock for ten years, and a 20 percent rate implies a five-year period.

"Don't Panic over Price Changes"
Price volatility is a necessary by-product of focus investing. In a
traditional active portfolio, broad diversification has the effect
of averaging out the inevitable shifts in the prices of individual
stocks. Active portfolio managers know all too well what happens
when investors open their monthly statement and see, in cold
black and white, a drop in the dollar value of their holdings.
Even those who understand intellectually that such dips are part
of the normal course of events may react emotionally and fall
into panic.

***

The more diversified the portfolio, the less the chances that
any one share-price change will tilt the monthly statement. It is
indeed true that broad diversification is a source of great comfort
to many investors because it smooths out the bumps along
the way. It is also true that a smooth ride is flat. When, in the interests
of avoiding unpleasantness, you average out all the ups
and downs, what you get is average results.

***

Focus investing pursues above-average results. As we will see
in Chapter 3, there is strong evidence, both in academic research
and actual case histories, that the pursuit is successful.
There can be no doubt, however, that the ride is bumpy. Focus
investors tolerate the bumpiness because they know that, in the
long run, the underlying economics of the companies will more
than compensate for any short-term price fluctuations.

***

Buffett is a master bump ignorer. So is his longtime friend
and colleague Charlie Munger, the vice chairman of Berkshire
Hathaway. The many fans who devour Berkshire's remarkable
annual reports know that the two men support and reinforce
each other with complementary and sometimes indistinguishable
ideas. Munger's attitudes and philosophy have influenced Buffett every bit as much as Buffett has influenced Munger.

***

In the 1960s and 1970s, Munger ran an investment partnership
in which, like Buffett at about the same time, he had the
freedom to make big bets in the portfolio. His intellectual reasoning
for his decisions during those years echoes the principles
of focus investing.

***

"Back in the 1960s, I actually took a compound interest rate
table," explained Charlie, "and I made various assumptions
about what kind of edge I might have in reference to the behavior
of common stocks generally." (OID) Charlie worked
through several scenarios, including the number of stocks he
would need in the portfolio and what kind of volatility he could
expect. It was a straightforward calculation.

***

"I knew from being a poker player that you have to bet heavily
when you've got huge odds in your favor," Charlie said. He
concluded that as long as he could handle the price volatility,
owning as few as three stocks would be plenty. "I knew I could
handle the bumps psychologically," he said, "because I was
raised by people who believe in handling bumps. So I was an ideal person to adopt my own methodology." (OID)

***

Maybe you also come from a long line of people who can
handle bumps. But even if you were not born so lucky, you can
acquire some of their traits. The first step is to consciously decide
to change how you think and behave. Acquiring new habits
and thought patterns does not happen overnight, but gradually
teaching yourself not to panic and not to act rashly in response to the vagaries of the market is certainly doable.

***

You may find some comfort in learning more about the psychology
of investing (see Chapter 7); social scientists, working in
a field called behavioral finance, have begun to seriously investigate
the psychological aspects of the investment phenomenon.
You may also find it helpful to use a different measuring stick for evaluating success. If watching stock prices fall gives you heart
failure, perhaps it is time to embrace another way of measuring
performance, a way that is less immediately piercing but equally
valid (even more valid, Buffett would say). That new measurement involves the concept of economic benchmarking, presented in
Chapter 4.

Focus investing, as we said earlier, is a simple idea that draws its
vigor from several interconnecting principles of logic, mathematics,
and psychology. With the broad overview of those principles
that has been introduced in this chapter, we can now
rephrase the basic idea, using wording that incorporates concrete
guidelines.

***

In summary, the process of focus investing involves these
actions:

* Using the tenets of the Warren Buffett Way, choose a few

(ten to fifteen) outstanding companies that have achieved

above-average returns in the past and that you believe have

a high probability of continuing their past strong performance

into the future.
* Allocate your investment funds proportionately, placing

the biggest bets on the highest-probability events.
* As long as things don't deteriorate, leave the portfolio

largely intact for at least five years (longer is better), and

teach yourself to ride through the bumps of price volatility

with equanimity.
A LATTICEWORK OF MODELS
Warren Buffett did not invent focus investing. The fundamental
rationale was originally articulated more than fifty years ago by
John Maynard Keynes. What Buffett did, with stunning success,
was apply the rationale, even before he gave it its name. The
question that fascinates me is why Wall Street, noted for its unabashed
willingness to copy success, has so far disregarded focus
investing as a legitimate approach.

***

In 1995, we launched Legg Mason Focus Trust, only the second
mutual fund to purposely own fifteen (or fewer) stocks.
(The first was Sequoia Fund; its story is told in Chapter 3.) Focus
Trust has given me the invaluable experience of managing a
focus portfolio. Over the past four years, I have had the opportunity
to interact with shareholders, consultants, analysts, other portfolio managers, and the financial media, and what I have
learned has led me to believe that focus investors operate in a
world far different from the one that dominates the investment
industry. The simple truth is, they think differently.

***

Charlie Munger helped me to understand this pattern of
thinking by using the very powerful metaphor of a latticework
of models. In 1995, Munger delivered a lecture entitled "Investment
Expertise as a Subdivision of Elementary, Worldly Wisdom"
to Professor Guilford Babcock's class at the University of
Southern California School of Business. The lecture, which was covered in OID, was particularly fun for Charlie because it centered
around a topic that he considers especially important:
how people achieve true understanding, or what he calls
"worldly wisdom."

***

A simple exercise of compiling and quoting facts and figures
is not enough. Rather, Munger explains, wisdom is very much
about how facts align and combine. He believes that the only
way to achieve wisdom is to be able to hang life's experience
across a broad cross-section of mental models. "You've got to have models in your head," he explained, "and you've got to
array your experience—both vicarious and direct—on this latticework
of models." (OID)

***

The first rule to learn, says Charlie, is that you must carry
multiple models in your mind. Not only do you need more than a
few, but you need to embrace models from several different
disciplines. Becoming a successful investor, he explains, requires a multidiscipline approach to your thinking.

***

That approach will put you in a different place from almost
everyone else, Charlie points out, because the world is not multidiscipline.
Business professors typically don't include physics in
their lectures, and physics teachers don't include biology, and biology teachers don't include mathematics, and mathematicians
rarely include psychology in their coursework. According to
Charlie, we must ignore these "intellectual jurisdictional boundaries"
and include all models in our latticework design.

***

"I think it is undeniably true that the human brain must work
in models," says Charlie. "The trick is to have your brain work
better than the other person's brain because it understands the
most fundamental models—the ones that will do the most work
per unit."
***

It is clear to me that focus investing does not fit neatly within
the narrowly constructed models popularized and used in our
investment culture. To receive the full benefit of the focus approach,
we will have to add a few more concepts, a few more
models, to our thinking. You will never be content with investing
until you understand the behavior models that come from psychology.
You will not know how to optimize a portfolio without
learning the model of statistical probabilities. And it is likely you
will never appreciate the folly of predicting markets until you understand the model of complex adaptive systems.

***

This investigation need not be overwhelming. "You don't
have to become a huge expert in any one of these fields," explains
Charlie. "All you have to do is take the really big ideas
and learn them early and learn them well." (OID) The exciting
part to this exercise, Charlie points out, is the insight that is
possible when several models combine and begin operating in
the same direction.

***

The most detailed model that focus investors have to learn is
the model for picking stocks, and many of you are already familiar
with that from The Warren Buffett Way. From here, we need to
add just a few more simple models to complete our education: to understand how to assemble those stocks into a portfolio, and
how to manage that portfolio so that it yields maximum results
well into the future. But we are not alone. We have Warren's and
Charlie's wisdom to guide us, and we have their accumulated experience at Berkshire Hathaway. Typically, these two visionaries
credit not themselves personally but their organization, which
they describe as a "didactic enterprise teaching the right systems
of thought, of which the chief lessons are that a few big ideas really work." (OID)

***

"Berkshire is basically a very old-fashioned kind of place,"
Charlie Munger said, "and we try to exert discipline to stay that
way. I don't mean old-fashioned stupid. I mean the eternal verities:
basic mathematics, basic horse sense, basic fear, basic diagnosis
of human nature making possible predictions regarding
human behavior. If you just do that with a certain amount of discipline,
I think it's likely to work out quite well." (OID)

Hi Joseph,


> Is there a simpler way to select stocks that
> will rebound. I've been struggling with
> William O'Neil system The founder of
> investors business daily.


I haven't read his book, but I found some info on his CANSLIM system.... Here's a page which summarizes it http://www.equis.com/free/taaz/canslim.html


The main thing I can relate to is the "A" part - Annual earnings growth. I also look for companies which grow their profits by a substantial amount every year....


As you may know though, I'm a "buy and hold" type of person, whereas the CANSLIM system seems to be designed for those who want to buy and sell all the time....


I think the danger with always buying and selling (which he might not tell you) is that you're going to pay a lot more in commissions if you're always buying and selling compared to a buy and hold approach.


Buying and selling all the time also means you pay tax on your profits every year, rather than at the end (as you would with a buy and hold strategy). That also means more money if you buy and hold.... Let me show this by example.


Let's say you have $10,000 to invest, and every year you make a 30% return. Let's say that your profits are taxed at 30% too. Let's look at the constant buy and sell approach.... That means you pay your tax every year (since tax is due when you sell)....


Year Your Wealth
0 $10,000
1 $12,100
2 $14,641
3 $17,716
4 $21,436
5 $25,937
6 $31,384
7 $37,975
8 $45,950
9 $55,599
10 $67,275


You've done well, in 10 years you've increased your money more than six-fold with these figures, constantly buying and selling, and paying your tax every year on the profits.


Now, let's take the same figures, of making a 30% annual return, and with a 30% tax rate. However, now let's say you're using a buy and hold approach, where you happen to hold the stock for ten years, paying the tax on your profits only after 10 years when you sell it....


Year Your Wealth (pre-tax)
0 $10,000
1 $13,000
2 $16,900
3 $21,970
4 $28,561
5 $37,129
6 $48,268
7 $62,749
8 $81,573
9 $106,045
10 $137,859


In year 10, you sell, which means the tax on your profit is due.... Say that tax comes to 30% too, then your total wealth is


Year Your Wealth (after tax)
10 $99,501


As you can see, you've made almost 48% more money (or more than $30,000 better in the above example) by using a buy-and-hold strategy, just because you can pay your tax at the end, rather than all the time you're buying and selling....


Also, by constantly buying and selling, you're always working, whereas with a "buy and hold" approach, you only have to work when you pick the stock.... Then you can forget about it for a while and get on to other things, you don't have to check how it's doing every day....


I try to follow Warren Buffett's approach.... I always like to see people's record to see how they've really done. I don't know precisely how rich O'Neil is, however, I think nowadays (since the tech crash) Buffett is the second richest person in the USA, with a net worth of more than $30 billion.


- Dien Rice


P.S. If after the above, you still want to be a "daytrader" type, O'Neil could be good.... I also noticed he recommends an 8% stop-loss -- that is, sell the stock if it drops by 8% or more. I have a good friend who's a daytrader, and he's one of the few daytraders I know personally who's ended up with a profit even after the recent market downturn.... This friend of mine uses a strict 10% stop-loss, so making sure you "cut your losses" this way I think is very important if you are going to take the day trading approach....