COLLAPSE: How Greed and Leverage Destroyed the Crypto-Tulip Market

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Crypto currency was touted as antidote to central banking.

But with its own flaws, is the system itself to blame for this crypto market crash?

***

Cryptocurrencies were supposed to offer a new, virtual alternative to the current, mundane, “corrupt” system, in which a few dozen bureaucrats in conference rooms around the world – central bankers – manipulate the most important commodity of all – interest rates – the price of money.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

The collapse of FTX (a cryptocurrency exchange that was valued at $30 billion just a few months ago) and the subsequent bankruptcies revealed what may have started as a kernel of sincere libertarian ideas to stand up to endless money printing and debt creation in our financial system, has been hijacked by what appears to be an immutable flaw of the human condition: our greed and desire to get rich fast.

READ: How Greed and Leverage Destroyed the Crypto Tulip Market

***

ORDER: https://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Health-Information-Technology-Security/dp/0826149952/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254413315&sr=1-5

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

A Few Simple Rules For Money Managers

vitaly

[By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA]

One of the biggest hazards of being a professional money manager is that you are expected to behave in a certain way: You have to come to the office every day, work long hours, slog through countless e-mails, be on top of your portfolio (that is, check performance of your securities minute by minute), watch business TV and consume news continuously, and dress well and conservatively, wearing a rope around the only part of your body that lets air get to your brain. Our colleagues judge us on how early we arrive at work and how late we stay. We do these things because society expects us to, not because they make us better investors or do any good for our clients.

Somehow we let the mindless, Henry Ford–assembly-line, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., widgets-per-hour mentality dictate how we conduct our business thinking. Though car production benefits from rigid rules, uniforms, automation and strict working hours, in investing — the business of thinking — the assembly-line culture is counterproductive. Our clients and employers would be better off if we designed our workdays to let us perform our best.

Investing

Investing is not an idea-­per-hour profession; it more likely results in a few ideas per year. A traditional, structured working environment creates pressure to produce an output — an idea, even a forced idea. Warren Buffett once said at a Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting: “We don’t get paid for activity; we get paid for being right. As to how long we’ll wait, we’ll wait indefinitely.”

***

stock-exchange

***

How you get ideas is up to you. I am not a professional writer, but as a professional money manager, I learn and think best through writing. I put on my headphones, turn on opera and stare at my computer screen for hours, pecking away at the keyboard — that is how I think. You may do better by walking in the park or sitting with your legs up on the desk, staring at the ceiling.

I do my best thinking in the morning. At 3:00 in the afternoon, my brain shuts off; that is when I read my e-mails. We are all different. My best friend is a brunch person; he needs to consume six cups of coffee in the morning just to get his brain going. To be most productive, he shouldn’t go to work before 11:00 a.m.

And then there’s the business news. Serious business news that lacked sensationalism, and thus ratings, has been replaced by a new genre: business entertainment (of course, investors did not get the memo). These shows do a terrific job of filling our need to have explanations for everything, even random events that require no explanation (like daily stock movements). Most information on the business entertainment channels — Bloomberg Television, CNBC, Fox Business — has as much value for investors as daily weather forecasts have for travelers who don’t intend to go anywhere for a year. Yet many managers have CNBC, Fox or Bloomberg on while they work.

Filters

You may think you’re able to filter the noise. You cannot; it overwhelms you. So don’t fight the noise — block it. Leave the television off while the markets are open, and at the end of the day, check the business channel websites to see if there were interviews or news events that are worth watching.

Don’t check your stock quotes continuously; doing so shrinks your time horizon. As a long-term investor, you analyze a company and value the business over the next decade, but daily stock volatility will negate all that and turn you into a trader. There is nothing wrong with trading, but investors are rarely good traders.

***

idea

***

Numerous studies have found that humans are terrible at multitasking. We have a hard time ignoring irrelevant information and are too sensitive to new information. Focus is the antithesis of multitasking. I find that I’m most productive on an airplane. I put on my headphones and focus on reading or writing. There are no distractions — no e-mails, no Twitter, no Facebook, no instant messages, no phone calls. I get more done in the course of a four-hour flight than in two days at the office. But you don’t need to rack up frequent-flier miles to focus; just go into “off mode” a few hours a day: Kill your Internet, turn off your phone, and do what you need to do.

I bet if most of us really focused, we could cut down our workweek from five days to two. Performance would improve, our personal lives would get better, and those eventual heart attacks would be pushed back a decade or two.

Assessment

Take the rope off your neck and wear comfortable clothes to work (I often opt for jeans and a “Life is good” T-shirt). Pause and ask yourself a question: If I was not bound by the obsolete routines of the dinosaur age of assembly-line manufacturing, how would I structure my work to be the best investor I could be? Print this article, take it to your boss and tell him or her, “This is what I need to do to be the most productive 

ABOUT

Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA, is Chief Investment Officer at Investment Management Associates in Denver, Colo. He is the author of Active Value Investing (Wiley 2007) and The Little Book of Sideways Markets (Wiley, 2010).  His books have been translated into eight languages.  Forbes called him – the new Benjamin Graham.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

[PHYSICIAN FOCUSED FINANCIAL PLANNING AND RISK MANAGEMENT COMPANION TEXTBOOK SET]

  Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™ Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

VALUE INVESTING: Great Again!

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

***

The stock market bubble that I’ve been writing about for the last few years is finally bursting. For the first time in almost a decade, it feels like common sense has stopped being a painful headwind and is turning into a tailwind. 

Paying any price for the stocks of companies that were growing revenues but had no hint of profitability and were diluting shareholders by giving away 10% of shares in stock-based compensation every year is an approach that has stopped working. 

Investors are discovering that the price you pay matters, eventually. Many of these companies are down 70-80% from their highs and are still expensive. 

Rising interest rates are making value investing great again! 


***
COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

ORDER: https://www.routledge.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-for-Doctors-and-Advisors-Best/Marcinko-Hetico/p/book/9781482240283

***

HOUSING MARKET: Worse Than You Think?

By Vitaliy N. Katsenelson CFA

REALLY!

***

READ: https://contrarianedge.com/the-housing-market-is-worse-than-you-think/

***
COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

ORDER: https://www.routledge.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-for-Doctors-and-Advisors-Best/Marcinko-Hetico/p/book/9781482240283

****

MORE: Tax Loss Harvesting

Tax Loss Harvesting

By Vitaliy Katsenelson, CFA

DEFINITION: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2022/11/06/tax-loss-harvesting-what-it-is/

***

Tax Lost Harvesting with Examples

I enjoy writing about taxes as much as I enjoy going to the dentist. But I feel what I am about to say is important. We – including yours truly – have been mindlessly conditioned to do tax selling at the end of every year to reduce our tax bills. On the surface it makes sense. There are realized gains – why don’t we create some tax losses to offset them?

Here is the problem. With a few exceptions, which I’ll address at the end, tax-loss selling makes no logical sense. Let me give you an example.

Let’s say there is a stock, XYZ. We bought it for $50; we think it is worth $100. Fourteen months later we got lucky and it declined to $25. Assuming our estimate of its fair value hasn’t changed, we get to buy $1 of XYZ now for 25 cents instead of 50 cents.

But as of this moment we also have a $25 paper loss. The tax-loss selling thinking goes like this: Sell it today, realize the $25 loss, and then buy it in 31 days. (This is tax law; if we buy it back sooner the tax loss will be disqualified.) This $25 loss offsets the gains we took for the year. Everybody but Uncle Sam is happy.

Since I am writing about this and I’ve mentioned above I’d rather be having a root canal, you already suspect that my retort to the above thinking is a great big NO!

In the first place, we are taking the risk that XYZ’s price may go up during our 31-day wait. We really have no idea and rarely have insights as to what stocks will do in the short term. Maybe we’ll get lucky again and the price will fall further. But we’re selling something that is down, so risk in the long run is tilted against us. Also, other investors are doing tax selling at the same time we are, which puts additional pressure on the stock.

Secondly – and this is the most important point – all we are doing is pushing our taxes from this year to future years. Let’s say that six months from now the stock goes up to $100. We sell it, and… now we originate a $75, not a $50, gain. Our cost basis was reduced by the sale and consequent purchase to $25 from $50. This is what tax loss selling is – shifting the tax burden from this year to next year. Unless you have an insight into what capital gains taxes are going to be in the future, all you are doing is shifting your current tax burden into the future.

Thirdly, in our first example we owned the stock for 14 months and thus took a long-term capital loss. We sold it, waited 31 days, and bought it back. Let’s say the market comes back to its senses and the price goes up to $100 three months after we buy it back. If we sell it now, that $75 gain is a short-term gain. Short-term gains are taxed at your ordinary income tax bracket, which for most clients is higher than their capital gain tax rate. You may argue that we should wait nine months till this gain goes from short-term to long-term. We can do that, but there are costs: First, we don’t know where the stock price will be in nine months. And second, there is an opportunity cost – we cannot sell a fully priced $1 to buy another $1 that is on fire sale.

Final point. Suppose we bought a stock, the price of which has declined in concert with a decrease of its fair value; in other words, the loss is not temporary but permanent.  In this case, yes, we should sell the stock and realize the loss. 

We are focused on the long-term compounding of your wealth. Thus our strategy has a relatively low portfolio turnover. However, we always keep tax considerations in mind when making investment decisions, and try to generate long-term gains (which are more tax efficient) than short term gains. 

We understand that each client has their unique tax circumstances. For instance, your income may decline in future years and thus your tax rate, too. Or higher capital gains may put you in a different income bracket and thus disqualify you from some government healthcare program.

We are here to serve you, and we’ll do as much or as little tax-loss selling as you instruct us to do. We just want you to be aware that with few exceptions tax-loss selling does more harm than good.

***

ORDER: https://www.routledge.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-for-Doctors-and-Advisors-Best/Marcinko-Hetico/p/book/9781482240283

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/082610254

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

STOIC: The Philosophy of “Knowing and Doing”

***

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

***

Introduction to Stoic Philosophy: Knowing and Doing

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

PODCAST: The Real Secret About Why Corporate Mergers Fail

AN AUDIO PRESENTATION

 

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

Corporate acquisitions often fail for one simple reason: the buyer pays too much. An old Wall Street adage comes to mind: Price is what you pay, value is what you get.

It all starts with a control premium

When we purchase shares of a stock, we pay a price that is within pennies of the last trade. When a company is acquired, the purchase price is negotiated during long dinners at fine restaurants and comes with a control premium that is higher than the latest stock quotation.

How much above?

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

 

For Entrepreneurs and Investors, Discovering Truth Takes Time

 

For Investors, Discovering Truth Takes Time

 CFA

 

The Roman philosopher, playwright, statesman and occasional satirist Lucius Annaeus Seneca wasn’t talking about the stock market when he wrote that “time discovers truth,” but he could have been. In the long run a stock price will reflect a company’s (true) intrinsic value. In the short run the pricing is basically random.

Here are two real-life examples:

Let’s say you had the smarts to buy Microsoft in November 1992. It would have been a brilliant decision in the long run — the software giant’s stock has gone up manyfold since. But nine months later, in August 1993, that call did not look so brilliant: Microsoft shares had declined 25 percent in less than a year. In fact, it would have taken you 18 months, until May 1994, for this purchase to break even. Eighteen months of dumbness?

In the early ’90s the PC industry was still in its infancy. Microsoft’s DOS and Windows operating systems were de facto standards. Outside of Macs and a tiny fraction of IBM computers, every computer came preinstalled with DOS and Windows. Microsoft had a pristine balance sheet and a brilliant co-founder and CEO who would turn mountains upside down to make sure the company succeeded. The above sentence is infested with hindsight — after all, that was almost 30 years ago. But Microsoft clearly had an incredible moat, which became wider with every new PC sold and every new software program written to run on Windows.

Here is another example. GoPro is a maker of video cameras used by surfers, skiers and other extreme sports enthusiasts. If you had bought the stock soon after it went public, in 2014, you would have paid $40 a share for a $5.5 billion–market-cap company earning about $100 million a year — a price-earnings ratio of about 55. Your impatience would, however, have been rewarded: The stock more than doubled in just a few short months, hitting $90.

Would it have been a good decision to buy GoPro? The company makes a great product — I own one. But GoPro has no moat. None. Most components that go into its cameras are commodities. There are no barriers to entry into the specialized video camera segment. Most important, there are no switching costs for consumers. Investors who bought GoPro after its IPO paid a huge premium for the promise of much higher earnings from a company that might or might not be around five years later.

***

What is even more interesting is that some of those buyers were then selling to even bigger fools who bought at double the price a few months later. GoPro was a momentum stock that was riding a wave about to break. Fast-forward a year and GoPro sales are collapsing, so now the stock is trading in the low teens ($11.65 as of this writing).

These two examples bring us to the nontrivial topics of complex systems and nonlinearity. My favorite thinker, Nassim Taleb, wrote the following in his book Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder: “Complex systems are full of interdependencies — hard to detect — and nonlinear responses. ‘Nonlinear’ means that when you double the dose of, say, a medication, or when you double the number of employees in a factory, you don’t get twice the initial effect, but rather a lot more or a lot less.”

The stock market is a complex system where in the short term there are few if any interdependencies between decisions and outcomes. In the short run stock prices are driven by thousands of random variables. Stock market participants have different risk tolerances and emotional aptitudes, and diverse time horizons ranging from milliseconds (for high-speed traders) to years (for long-term investors).

Assessment

In other words, predicting where a stock price will be in a day, a month or even a year is not much different from prognosticating whether the ball on a roulette wheel will land on red or black. In the longer run, however, good decisions should pay off because fundamentals will shine through — just as was the case with buying Microsoft in 1992 and not buying GoPro in 2014. But in the short run there is no correlation between good decisions and results. None!

Whenever you look at your portfolio, think of the Microsoft and GoPro examples above. The performance of your stocks in the short run tells you absolutely nothing about what you own or about the quality of your decisions. You may own a portfolio of Microsofts, and its value is still going down because at this juncture the market doesn’t care about Microsofts. Or maybe you stuffed your retirement fund with overpriced fads that may not be around a year from now. But in the longer run, which always lies out there past the short run, time discovers truth, as Seneca said.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

MORE FOR DOCTORS AND NURES:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

On Being a Father [A Labor Day Weekend Thought]

Being A Father

vitaly

By Vataliy Katsenelson, CFA

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

Mature Company Stocks Are Not Bonds

Dividends bring tangible and intangible benefits

vitaly

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

 

You can also listen to the article here, or by clicking on the buttons below:

Like many professional investors, I love companies that pay dividends. Dividends bring tangible and intangible benefits: Over the last hundred years, half of total stock returns came from dividends.

In a world where earnings often represent the creative output of CFOs’ imaginations, dividends are paid out of cash flows, and thus are proof that a company’s earnings are real.

Finally, a company that pays out a significant dividend has to have much greater discipline in managing the business, because a significant dividend creates another cash cost, so management has less cash to burn in empire-building acquisitions.

Mature Company Stocks Are Not Bonds

***

[PHYSICIAN FOCUSED FINANCIAL PLANNING AND RISK MANAGEMENT COMPANION TEXTBOOK SET]

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

PODCAST: Charter Communications Stock [Value Investing]

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

Charter Communications (CHTR) is a significantly undervalued stock today. But are competition, 5G, and satellite internet significant threats to its business? How does its management compare to AT&T and Verizon? Read and/or listen to the analysis below.

***

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

***

***

How [DOCTORS] Construct Investment Portfolios That Protect Them

***

ASK AN ADVISOR

***

Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA - YouTube

By Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA

***

Question: How do you construct investment portfolios and determine position sizes (weights) of individual stocks?

I wanted to discuss this topic for a long time, so here is a very in-depth answer.
CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/082610254

Answer
For a while in the value investing community the number of positions you held was akin to bragging on your manhood– the fewer positions you owned the more macho an investor you were. I remember meeting two investors at a value conference. At the time they had both had “walk on water” streaks of returns. One had a seven-stock portfolio, the other held three stocks. Sadly, the financial crisis humbled both – the three-stock guy suffered irreparable losses and went out of business (losing most of his clients’ money). The other, after living through a few incredibly difficult years and an investor exodus, is running a more diversified portfolio today.

Under-diversification: Is dangerous, because a few mistakes or a visit from Bad Luck may prove to be fatal to the portfolio.

On the other extreme, you have a mutual fund industry where it is common to see portfolios with hundreds of stocks (I am generalizing). There are many reasons for that. Mutual funds have an army of analysts who need to be kept busy; their voices need to be heard; and thus their stock picks need to find their way into the portfolio (there are a lot of internal politics in this portfolio). These portfolios are run against benchmarks; thus their construction starts to resemble Noah’s Ark, bringing on board a few animals (stocks) from each industry. Also, the size of the fund may limit its ability to buy large positions in small companies.

There are several problems with this approach. First, and this is the important one, it breeds indifference: If a 0.5% position doubles or gets halved, it will have little impact on the portfolio. The second problem is that it is difficult to maintain research on all these positions. Yes, a mutual fund will have an army of analysts following each industry, but the portfolio manager is the one making the final buy and sell decisions. Third, the 75th idea is probably not as good as the 30th, especially in an overvalued market where good ideas are scarce.

Then you have index funds. On the surface they are over-diversified, but they don’t suffer from the over-diversification headaches of managed funds. In fact, index funds are both over-diversified and under-diversified. Let’s take the S&P 500 – the most popular of the bunch. It owns the 500 largest companies in the US. You’d think it was a diversified portfolio, right? Well, kind of. The top eight companies account for more than 25% of the index. Also, the construction of the index favors stocks that are usually more expensive or that have recently appreciated (it is market-cap-weighted); thus you are “diversified” across a lot of overvalued stocks.

If you own hundreds of securities that are exposed to the same idiosyncratic risk, then are you really diversified?

Our portfolio construction process is built from a first-principles perspective. If a Martian visited Earth and decided to try his hand at value investing, knowing nothing about common (usually academic) conventions, how would he construct a portfolio?

We want to have a portfolio where we own not too many stocks, so that every decision we make matters – we have both skin and soul in the game in each decision. But we don’t want to own so few that a small number of stocks slipping on a banana will send us into financial ruin.

In our portfolio construction, we are trying to maximize both our IQ and our EQ (emotional quotient). Too few stocks will decapitate our EQ – we won’t be able to sleep well at night, as the relatively large impact of a low-probability risk could have a devastating impact on the portfolio. I wrote about the importance of good sleep before (link here). It’s something we take seriously at IMA.

Holding too many stocks will result in both a low EQ and low IQ. It is very difficult to follow and understand the drivers of the business of hundreds of stocks, therefore a low IQ about individual positions will eventually lead to lower portfolio EQ. When things turn bad, a constant in investing, you won’t intimately know your portfolio – you’ll be surrounded by a lot of (tiny-position) strangers.

Portfolio construction is a very intimate process. It is unique to one’s EQ and IQ. Our typical portfolios have 20–30 stocks. Our “focused” portfolios have 12–15 stocks (they are designed for clients where we represent only a small part of their total wealth). There is nothing magical about these numbers – they are just the Goldilocks levels for us, for our team and our clients. They allow room for bad luck, but at the same time every decision we make matters.

Now let’s discuss position sizing. We determine position sizing through a well-defined quantitative process. The goals of this process are to achieve the following: Shift the portfolio towards higher-quality companies with higher returns. Take emotion out of the portfolio construction process. And finally, insure healthy diversification.

Our research process is very qualitative: We read annual reports, talk to competitors and ex-employees, build financial models, and debate stocks among ourselves and our research network. In our valuation analysis we try to kill the business – come up with worst-case fair value (where a company slips on multiple bananas) and reasonable fair value. We also assign a quality rating to each company in the portfolio. Quality is absolute for us – we don’t allow low-quality companies in, no matter how attractive the valuation is (though that doesn’t mean we don’t occasionally misjudge a company’s quality).

The same company, at different stock prices, will merit a higher or lower position size. In other words, if company A is worth (fair value) $100, at $60 it will be a 3% position and at $40 it will be a 5% position. Company B, of a lower quality than A but also worth $100, will be a 2% position at $60 and a 4% position at $40 (I just made up these numbers for illustration purposes). In other words, if there are two companies that have similar expected returns, but one is of higher quality than the other, our system will automatically allocate a larger percentage of the portfolio to the higher-quality company. If you repeat this exercise on a large number of stocks, you cannot but help to shift your portfolio to higher-quality, higher-return stocks. It’s a system of meritocracy where we marry quality and return.

Let’s talk about diversification. We don’t go out of our way to diversify the portfolio. At least, not in a traditional sense. We are not going to allocate 7% to mining stocks because that is the allocation in the index or they are negatively correlated to soft drink companies. (We don’t own either and are not sure if the above statement is even true, but you get the point.) We try to assemble a portfolio of high-quality companies that are attractively priced, whose businesses march to different drummers and are not impacted by the same risks.  Just as bank robbers rob banks because that is where the money is, value investors gravitate towards sectors where the value is. To keep our excitement (our emotions) in check, and to make sure we are not overexposed to a single industry, we set hard limits of industry exposure. These limits range from 10%–20%. We also set limits of country exposure, ranging from 7%–30% (ex-US).

CONCLUSION

In portfolio construction, our goal is not to limit the volatility of the portfolio but to reduce true risk – the permanent loss of capital. We are constantly thinking about the types of risks we are taking. Do we have too much exposure to a weaker or stronger dollar? To higher or lower interest rates? Do we have too much exposure to federal government spending? I know, risk is a four-letter word that has lost its meaning. But not to us. Low interest rates may have time-shifted risk into the future, but they haven’t cured it.

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

Subscribe to the Medical Executive-Post

***

***

Financial Planning Advice that Changed My Life

A PODCAST

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

One of the best wedding gifts I received was lunch with my friend, Mark. Here, I reflect on the financial advice Mark gave me then, and how it could help young people like my son Jonah settle into adulthood with a lot more forward-thinking.

***

You can read this article online at:

 https://contrarianedge.com/personal-finance-advice-that-changed-my-life/

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

COVID, Inflation and Value Investing [Millennial Interview]

***

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

COVID, Inflation, and Value Investing: Millennial Investing Interview
I was recently interviewed by Millennial Investors podcast. They sent me questions ahead of time that they wanted to ask me “on the air”. I found some of the questions very interesting and wanted to explore deeper. Thus, I ended up writing answers to them (I think through writing). You can listen to the podcast here

By the way, I often get asked how I find time to write. Do I even do investment research? Considering how much content I’ve been spewing out lately, I can understand these questions. In short – I write two hours a day, early in the morning (usually from 5–7am), every single day. I don’t have time-draining hobbies like golf. I rarely watch sports. I have a great team at IMA, and I delegate a lot. I spend the bulk of my day on research because I love doing it. 

This is not the first time I was asked these questions. If you’d like to adapt some of my daily hacks in your life, read this essay.

***

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/082610254

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

Subscribe to the Medical Executive-Post

***

***

My Investing “Sell” Principle

The Renaissance of Pipelines

Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA - YouTube

By Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA

A client recently asked me whether there is a difference in our sell discipline between high and low growth companies.

Selling is one of the hardest parts of investing. I wrote a lot on the subject in the past, but let’s zoom in on how our selling practice differs between high-growth companies with long runways for compounding and slow-growth companies.

LINK: https://contrarianedge.com/our-sell-discipline/

AUDIO: https://investor.fm/the-renaissance-of-pipelines-and-our-sell-discipline-ep-113

Your thoughts are appreciated.

EDITOR’S NOTE: It has been a few years since I spoke with my colleague Vitaliy. But, I read his newsletters and blog regularly and suggest all ME-P readers do the same.

Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA

[Editor-in-Chief]

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners(TM)

BOOK: https://www.amazon.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-Advisors/dp/1482240289/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418580820&sr=8-1&keywords=david+marcinko

THANK YOU

***

#6: The Six Commandments of Value Investing

***

6. In the long run, stocks revert to their fair value

***

***

EDITOR’S NOTE: Although it has been some time since speaking live with busy colleague Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA, I review his internet material frequently and appreciate this ME-P series contribution. I encourage all ME-P readers to do the same and consider his value investing insights carefully.

By Vitaliy Katsenelson, CFA

***

6. In the long run, stocks revert to their fair value

Reversion to fair value is not a pie-in-the-sky concept. If a stock is significantly undervalued for a long time, then this undervaluation gets cured, eventually. That can happen through share buybacks – the company can basically buy all of its shares and take itself private.

Or it can happen by the company’s paying out its earnings in dividends, thus creating yields that the market will not be able to ignore. Or the company’s competitors will realize that it is cheaper for them to buy the company than to replicate its assets on their own. Either way, undervaluation gets cured.

This faith that undervaluation will not last forever is paramount to value investing. But this is not your regular faith, which requires belief without proof. This is evidence-supported faith with hundreds of years of data to back it. Just look at the US stock market: it has gone through cycles when it was incredibly cheap and others when it was incredibly expensive. At some points in its journey from one extreme to the other, it touched its fair value, even if it was transitory.

Historically, value investing (owning undervalued companies) has done significantly better than other strategies. Paradoxically, the reason it has done well in the long run is because it did not work consistently in the short run. If something works consistently (keyword), everybody piles into it and it stops working.

These aforementioned cycles of temporary brilliance and dumbness are not just common to us mere mortals. Even Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway goes through them. As just one example, in 1999, when the stock market went up 21%, Berkshire Hathaway stock declined 19%. In 1999, the financial press was writing obituaries for Buffett’s investment prowess.

Suddenly, in 1999, Buffett’s IQ was lagging the market by 40%. At the time, investors were infatuated with internet stocks that were not making money but that were supposed to have a bright future. Investors were selling unsexy “old economy” stocks that Buffett owned in order to buy the “new economy” ones.

If at the end of 1999, you were to sell Berkshire Hathaway and buy the S&P 500 instead, you would have done the easy thing, but it would have been a large (though very common) mistake. Over the next three years Berkshire Hathaway gained over 30% while the S&P declined over 40%. During the year 1999, Buffett’s IQ did not change much; in fact, the (book) value of businesses Berkshire Hathaway owned went up by 0.5% that year. But in 1999, the market’s attention was somewhere else and it chose to price Berkshire Hathaway 19% lower. 

As a value investor, if you do a reasonable job estimating what the business is worth, then at some point the stock market will price it accordingly. You need to have faith. I am acutely aware how wishful this statement sounds. But this faith, the belief in mean reversion, has to be deeply ingrained in our psyche. It will allow us to remain rational when people around us are not. 

***

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Editor’s Final Note; Many thanks to VK for this timely series on value investing. Our ME-P readers appreciate you.

Thank You

Subscribe to the Medical Executive-Post

***

***

#4: The Six Commandments of Value Investing

***

***

EDITOR’S NOTE: Although it has been some time since speaking live with busy colleague Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA, I review his internet material frequently and appreciate this ME-P series contribution. I encourage all ME-P readers to do the same and consider his value investing insights carefully.

By Vitaliy Katsenelson, CFA

***

4. Margin of safety – leave room in your buy price for being wrong

Margin of safety is a function of two dimensions: a company’s quality and its growth.

I am generalizing here, but exogenous events have a greater impact on a lower-quality business than a higher-quality one. Thus a high-quality company needs a lower margin of safety than a lower-quality one.

A company that is growing earnings and paying dividends has time on its side and thus may not need as much margin of safety as a lower-growing one.

We quantify both a company’s quality and growth, and thus margin of safety is deeply embedded in our investment operating system.

The larger discount to the stock’s fair value (the $1) the less clairvoyance you need to have about the future of the business. For instance, in 2013, when Apple stock was trading at $400 (pre-split) we didn’t have to have a very clear crystal ball about Apple’s future; Apple just had to be able to barely fog the mirror.

In later years, at $900, we need to have a lot more precision in our analysis of Apple’s future. 

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/082610254

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank You

Subscribe to the Medical Executive-Post

***

***

#3: The Six Commandments of Value Investing (Part 2)

***

EDITOR’S NOTE: Although it has been some time since speaking live with busy colleague Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA, I review his internet material frequently and appreciate this ME-P series contribution. I encourage all ME-P readers to do the same and consider his value investing insights carefully.

By Vitaliy Katsenelson, CFA

***

***

3. The market is there to serve you, not the other way around (Part 2)

First, we increase it by subtraction, by shrinking our universe to stocks that lie within both our IQ and EQ comfort zones.

We are very careful about stocks or industries where either our IQ or EQ is questionable. For instance, we have recognized that our IQ is low when it comes to non-revenue-generating, single-future-product biotech companies. We have zero analytical insights into this business. None.

We find that our EQ is fairly low when it comes to complex financial businesses. We don’t invest in any.

The beauty of investing is that we only need 20-30 stocks, and we get to choose which problems we want to tackle. We usually like easy problems.

In other professions, that is a luxury you don’t have. If you are an orthopedic surgeon, you are not going to tell your patient that you only operate on right knees because the last time out you had a bad experience with a left knee.

Second, we look for areas where our EQ is highest.

Over the years, we’ve discovered that our EQ is much higher with higher-quality companies. Therefore, for every company in our portfolio or on our watch list, we quantify quality. And with very rare exceptions, we own only very-high-quality companies.

We quantify quality for another reason, too. As value investors, we are innately focused on a margin of safety. We found that if you don’t quantify quality, it is very easy to lower your standards when you reach for value, especially in a very expensive market.

We went a step further: Quality, for us, is a filter. If a company doesn’t pass its quality test, it is dead to us. It may have high growth prospects, pay high dividends, and it may sell at a mouthwatering valuation. But if it failed our quality test, it is still dead to us.

By quantifying quality, we can keep the overall quality of our portfolio very high. Just as importantly, we can keep our EQ high, too.

By maximizing both our IQ and EQ for individual stocks, we maximize the Total IQ of the portfolio. Thus, when we get punched in the mouth, we are able to rationally reanalyze a stock and may decide to buy more, do nothing, or sell.

We cautiously guard our EQ and long-term horizon. We don’t let the outside world come unchecked into our daily life. For instance, we spend little time watching business TV during the day, as we find it to be toxic to our time horizon and to our investor (as opposed to trader) mentality. For the same reason, we also don’t look at our portfolio more than twice a day.

Finally, and this applies to professional investors only, you need to have clients who will allow you to maintain your EQ. Following the Six Commandments is practically impossible if your clients don’t believe in them.

Here’s a real example:

On my recent purchase of Apple stock coming off a one year top and heading down.

On January 25th, 2013 at 3:55 pm I got this email from a client, David:

David and I talked on the phone, and I tried to explain our logic. I’m not going to bore you with that, but it was along the lines of “incredible brand, high recurrence of revenues, great management, a quarter of market capitalization in cash; we tried to kill it (we lowered its margins, cut sales) and we simply couldn’t.”

I told David that the price of the stock is an opinion of value, not a final verdict – he didn’t care. He’d talked to his neighbor who was a famous technician, who said, “Apple is going down.” To which my response was, “If it declines that will be a blessing – the company is buying back stock, and we are going to buy more.”

The “technician” was right: Apple declined from $455 ($65 split-adjusted), our initial purchase price, to $395 ($56 split-adjusted). We bought more Apple as it fell. This encounter also made me realize how this negative psychology around Apple was creating an opportunity in Apple, and I wrote a two-part article describing the aforementioned incident as evidence of that.

What I did not say in that article is that we had to amicably part ways with David. I tried very hard to communicate the Six Commandments to him, but he was not willing to (re)learn. Keeping him as a client would erode my overall EQ and would have impacted other clients.

Your mental state is as important as your ability to analyze a company’s balance sheet or your ability to value the business. You may spend days sharpening your investment process, your analytical skills; but in the end, if your EQ is low nothing else will matter.

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/082610254

***

COMMENTS APPRECIATED

Thank Yo

Subscribe to the Medical Executive-Post

****

PODCAST: Inflation Update

NOT TRANSITORY … YET!

imausa-vitaliy-katsenelson

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Here is my advice to you

Instead of straining your eyes, you can strain your ears and listen to the following articles. I’m providing links to my pieces on the inflation landscape (read, listen) and how we invest in inflation (read, listen).

***

Five Facts On Inflation | RealClearPolicy

***
YOUR COMMENTS ARE APPRECIATED.

Thank You

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

***

***

UPDATE: Value Investing as Oil Gets Cheaper

As Oil Gets Cheaper – What Would Ben Graham Do?

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

In terms of excitement, investing usually rivals watching paint dry. This has not been the case lately.

LINKOil Gets Cheaper – What Would Ben Graham Do?

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

 COMMENTS APPRECIATED.

Thank You

UPDATE: https://oilprice.com/

***

 

INFLATION Is Here – UPDATE?

But for How Long?

See the source image

Vitaliy N. Katsenelson, CFA

[CEO & Chief Investment Officer]

READERS

DEFINITION: In economics, inflation (or less frequently, price inflation) is a general rise in the price level of an economy over a period of time. When the general price level rises, each unit of currency buys fewer goods and services; consequently, inflation reflects a reduction in the purchasing power per unit of money – a loss of real value in the medium of exchange and unit of account within the economy. The opposite of inflation is deflation, a sustained decrease in the general price level of goods and services. The common measure of inflation is the inflation rate, the annualized percentage change in a general price index, usually the consumer price index, over time.

CITATION: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

***

See the source image

***

DEAR READERS

This essay is going to be long.
I blame inflation, be it transitory or not, for inflating its length. 

The number one question I am asked by clients, friends, readers, and random strangers is, are we going to have inflation? 

I think about inflation on three timelines: short, medium, and long-term

The pandemic disrupted a well-tuned but perhaps overly optimized global economy and time-shifted the production and consumption of various goods. For instance, in the early days of the pandemic automakers cut their orders for semiconductors. As orders for new cars have come rolling back, it is taking time for semiconductor manufacturers, who, like the rest of the economy, run with little slack and inventory, to produce enough chips to keep up with demand. A $20 device the size of a quarter that goes into a $40,000 car may have caused a significant decline in the production of cars and thus higher prices for new and used cars. (Or, as I explained to my mother-in-law, all the microchips that used to go into cars went into a new COVID vaccine, so now Bill Gates can track our whereabouts.)

Here is another example. The increase in new home construction and spike in remodeling drove demand for lumber while social distancing at sawmills reduced lumber production – lumber prices spiked 300%. Costlier lumber added $36,000 to the construction cost of a house, and the median price of a new house in the US is now about $350,000.

The semiconductor shortage will get resolved by 2022, car production will come back to normal, and supply and demand in the car market will return to the pre-pandemic equilibrium. High prices in commodities are cured by high prices. High lumber prices will incentivize lumber mills to run triple shifts. Increased supply will meet demand, and lumber prices will settle at the pre-pandemic level in a relatively short period of time. That is the beauty of capitalism! 

Most high prices caused by the time-shift in demand and supply fall into the short-term basket, but not all. It takes a considerable amount of time to increase production of industrial commodities that are deep in the ground – oil, for instance. Low oil prices preceding the pandemic were already coiling the spring under oil prices, and COVID coiled it further. It will take a few years and increased production for high oil prices to cure high oil prices. Oil prices may also stay high because of the weaker dollar, but we’ll come back to that.

Federal Reserve officials have told us repeatedly they are not worried about inflation; they believe it is transitory, for the reasons I described above. We are a bit less dismissive of inflation, and the two factors that worry us the most in the longer term are labor costs and interest rates. 

Let’s start with labor costs 

During a garden-variety recession, companies discover that their productive capacity exceeds demand. To reduce current and future output they lay off workers and cut capital spending on equipment and inventory. The social safety net (unemployment benefits) kicks in, but not enough to fully offset the loss of consumer income; thus demand for goods is further reduced, worsening the economic slowdown. Through millions of selfish transactions (microeconomics), the supply of goods and services readjusts to a new (lower) demand level. At some point this readjustment goes too far, demand outstrips supply, and the economy starts growing again.

This pandemic was not a garden-variety recession 

The government manually turned the switch of the economy to the “off” position. Economic output collapsed. The government sent checks to anyone with a checking account, even to those who still had jobs, putting trillions of dollars into consumer pockets. Though output of the economy was reduced, demand was not. It mostly shifted between different sectors within the economy (home improvement was substituted for travel spending). Unlike in a garden-variety recession, despite the decline in economic activity (we produced fewer widgets), our consumption has remained virtually unchanged. Today we have too much money chasing too few goods– that is what inflation is. This will get resolved, too, as our economic activity comes back to normal.

But …

Today, though the CDC says it is safe to be inside or outside without masks, the government is still paying people not to work. Companies have plenty of jobs open, but they cannot fill them. Many people have to make a tough choice between watching TV while receiving a paycheck from big-hearted Uncle Sam and working. Zero judgement here on my part – if I was not in love with what I do and had to choose between stacking boxes in Amazon’s warehouse or watching Amazon Prime while collecting a paycheck from a kind uncle, I’d be watching Sopranos for the third time. 

To entice people to put down the TV remote and get off the couch, employers are raising wages. For instance, Amazon has already increased minimum pay from $15 to $17 per hour. Bank of America announced that they’ll be raising the minimum wage in their branches from $20 to $25 over the next few years. The Biden administration may not need to waste political capital passing a Federal minimum wage increase; the distorted labor market did it for them. 

These higher wages don’t just impact new employees, they help existing employees get a pay boost, too. Labor is by far the biggest expense item in the economy. This expense matters exponentially more from the perspective of the total economy than lumber prices do. We are going to start seeing higher labor costs gradually make their way into higher prices for the goods and services around us, from the cost of tomatoes in the grocery store to the cost of haircuts.

Only investors and economists look at higher wages as a bad thing. These increases will boost the (nominal) earnings of workers; however, higher prices of everything around us will negate (at least) some of the purchasing power. 

Wages, unlike timber prices, rarely decline. It is hard to tell someone “I now value you less.” Employers usually just tell you they need less of your valuable time (they cut your hours) or they don’t need you at all (they lay you off and replace you with a machine or cheap overseas labor). It seems that we are likely going to see a one-time reset to higher wages across lower-paying jobs. However, once the government stops paying people not to work, the labor market should normalize; and inflation caused by labor disbalance should come back to normal, though increased higher wages will stick around.

There is another trend that may prove to be inflationary in the long-term: de-globalization.  Even before the pandemic the US set plans to bring manufacturing of semiconductors, an industry deemed strategic to its national interests, to its shores. Taiwan Semiconductor and Samsung are going to be spending tens of billions of dollars on factories in Arizona.  

The pandemic exposed the weaknesses inherent in just-in-time manufacturing but also in over reliance on the kindness of other countries to manufacture basic necessities such as masks or chemicals that are used to make pharmaceuticals.  Companies will likely carry more inventory going forward, at least for a while.  But more importantly more manufacturing will likely come back to the US. This will bring jobs and a lot of automation, but also higher wages and thus higher costs.  

If globalization was deflationary, de-globalization is inflationary  

We are not drawing straight-line conclusions, just yet. A lot of manufacturing may just move away from China to other low-cost countries that we consider friendlier to the US; India and Mexico come to mind.  

And then we have the elephant in the economy – interest rates, the price of money. It’s the most important variable in determining asset prices in the short term and especially in the long term. The government intervention in the economy came at a significant cost, which we have not felt yet: a much bigger government debt pile. This pile will be there long after we have forgotten how to spell social distancing
 
The US government’s debt increased by $5 trillion to $28 trillion in 2020 – more than a 20% increase in one year! At the same time the laws of economics went into hibernation: The more we borrow the less we pay for our debt, because ultra-low interest rates dropped our interest payments from $570 billion in 2019 to $520 billion in 2020. 

That is what we’ve learned over the last decade and especially in 2020: The more we borrow the lower interest we pay. I should ask for my money back for all the economics classes I took in undergraduate and graduate school.

This broken link between higher borrowing and near-zero interest rates is very dangerous. It tells our government that how much you borrow doesn’t matter; you can spend (after you borrow) as much as your Republican or Democratic heart desires. 

However, by looking superficially at the numbers I cited above we may learn the wrong lesson. If we dig a bit deeper, we learn a very different lesson: Foreigners don’t want our (not so) fine debt. It seems that foreign investors have wised up: They were not the incremental buyer of our new debt – most of the debt the US issued in 2020 was bought by Uncle Fed. Try explaining to your kids that our government issued debt and then bought it itself. Good luck.

Let me make this point clear: Neither the Federal Reserve, nor I, nor a well-spoken guest on your business TV knows where interest rates are going to be (the total global bond market is bigger even than the mighty Fed, and it may not be able to control over interest rates in the long run). But the impact of what higher interest rates will do the economy increases with every trillion we borrow. There is no end in sight for this borrowing and spending spree (by the time you read this, the administration will have announced another trillion in spending). 

Let me provide you some context about our financial situation 


The US gross domestic product (GDP) – the revenue of the economy – is about $22 trillion, and in 2019 our tax receipts were about $3.5 trillion. Historically, the-10 year Treasury has yielded about 2% more than inflation. Consumer prices (inflation) went up 4.2% in April. Today the 10-year Treasury pays 1.6%; thus the World Reserve Currency debt has a negative 2.6% real interest rate (1.6% – 4.2%). 

These negative real (after inflation) interest rates are unlikely to persist while we are issuing trillions of dollars of debt. But let’s assume that half of the increase is temporary and that 2% inflation is here to stay. Let’s imagine the unimaginable. Our interest rate goes up to the historical norm to cover the loss of purchasing power caused by inflation. Thus it goes to 4% (2 percentage points above 2% “normal” inflation). In this scenario our federal interest payments will be over $1.2 trillion (I am using vaguely right math here). A third of our tax revenue will have to go to pay for interest expense. Something has to give. It is not going to be education or defense, which are about $230 billion and $730 billion, respectively. You don’t want to be known as a politician who cut education; this doesn’t play well in the opponent’s TV ads. The world is less safe today than at any time since the end of the Cold War, so our defense spending is not going down (this is why we own a lot of defense stocks). 

The government that borrows in its own currency and owns a printing press will not default on its debt, at least not in the traditional sense. It defaults a little bit every year through inflation by printing more and more money. Unfortunately, the average maturity of our debt is about five years, so it would not take long for higher interest expense to show up in budget deficits. 

Money printing will bring higher inflation and thus even higher interest rates

If things were not confusing enough, higher interest rates are also deflationary 

We’ve observed significant inflation in asset prices over the last decade; however, until this pandemic we had seen nothing yet. Median home prices are up 17% in one year. The wild, speculative animal spirits reached a new high during the pandemic. Flush with cash (thanks to kind Uncle Sam), bored due to social distancing, and borrowing on the margin (margin debt is hitting a 20-year high), consumers rushed into the stock market, turning this respectable institution (okay, wishful thinking on my part) into a giant casino. 

It is becoming more difficult to find undervalued assets. I am a value investor, and believe me, I’ve looked (we are finding some, but the pickings are spare). The stock market is very expensive. Its expensiveness is setting 100-year records. Except, bonds are even more expensive than stocks – they have negative real (after inflation) yields.

But stocks, bonds, and homes were not enough – too slow, too little octane for restless investors and speculators. Enter cryptocurrencies (note: plural). Cryptocurrencies make Pets.com of the 1999 era look like a conservative investment (at least it had a cute sock commercial). There are hundreds if not thousands of crypto “currencies,” with dozens created every week. (I use the word currency loosely here. Just because someone gives bits and bytes a name, and you can buy these bits and bytes, doesn’t automatically make what you’re buying a currency.)

“The definition of a bubble is when people are making money all out of proportion to their intelligence or work ethic.”

By Mike Burry MD
[The Big Short]

I keep reading articles about millennials borrowing money from their relatives and pouring their life savings into cryptocurrencies with weird names, and then suddenly turning into millionaires after a celebrity CEO tweets about the thing he bought. Much ink is spilled to celebrate these gamblers, praising them for their ingenious insight, thus creating ever more FOMO (fear of missing out) and spreading the bad behavior.

Unfortunately, at some point they will be writing about destitute millennials who lost all of their and their friends’ life savings, but this is down the road. Part of me wants to call this a crypto craziness a bubble, but then I think, Why that’s disrespectful to the word bubble, because something has to be worth something to be overpriced. At least tulips were worth something and had a social utility. (I’ll come back to this topic later in the letter).

But ….

When interest rates are zero or negative, stocks of sci-fi-novel companies that are going to colonize and build five-star hotels on Mars are priced as if El Al (the Israeli airline) has regular flights to the Red Planet every day of the week except on Friday (it doesn’t fly on Shabbos). Rising interest rates are good defusers of mass delusions and rich imaginations. 

In the real economy, higher interest rates will reduce the affordability of financed assets. They will increase the cost of capital for businesses, which will be making fewer capital investments. No more 2% car loans or 3% business loans. Most importantly, higher rates will impact the housing market. 

Up to this point, declining interest rates increased the affordability of housing, though in a perverse way: The same house with white picket fences (and a dog) is selling for 17% more in 2021 than a year before, but due to lower interest rates the mortgage payments have remained the same. Consumers are paying more for the same asset, but interest rates have made it affordable.

At higher interest rates housing prices will not be making new highs but revisiting past lows. Declining housing prices reduce consumers’ willingness to improve their depreciating dwellings (fewer trips to Home Depot). Many homeowners will be upside down in their homes, mortgage defaults will go up… well, we’ve seen this movie before in the not-so-distant past. Higher interest rates will expose a lot of weaknesses that have been built up in the economy. We’ll be finding fault lines in unexpected places – low interest has covered up a lot of financial sins.

And then there is the US dollar, the world’s reserve currency. Power corrupts, but the unchallenged and unconstrained the power of being the world’s reserve currency corrupts absolutely. It seems that our multitrillion-dollar budget deficits will not suddenly stop in 2021. With every trillion dollars we borrow, we chip away at our reserve currency status (I’ve written about this topic in great detail, and things have only gotten worse since). And as I mentioned above, we’ve already seen signs that foreigners are not willing to support our debt addiction. 

A question comes to mind.
Am I yelling fire where there is not even any smoke? 

Higher interest rates is anything but a consensus view today. Anyone who called for higher rates during the last 20 years is either in hiding or has lost his voice, or both. However, before you dismiss the possibility of higher rates as an unlikely plot for a sci-fi novel, think about this. 

In the fifty years preceding 2008, housing prices never declined nationwide. This became an unquestioned assumption by the Federal Reserve and all financial players. Trillions of dollars of mortgage securities were priced as if “Housing shall never decline nationwide” was the Eleventh Commandment, delivered at Temple Sinai to Goldman Sachs. Or, if you were not a religious type, it was a mathematical axiom or an immutable law of physics. The Great Financial Crisis showed us that confusing the lack of recent observations of a phenomenon for an axiom may have grave consequences. 

Today everyone (consumers, corporations, and especially governments) behaves as if interest rates can only decline, but what if… I know it’s unimaginable, but what if ballooning government debt leads to higher interest rates? And higher interest rates lead to even more runaway money printing and inflation? 

This will bring a weaker dollar 

A weaker US dollar will only increase inflation, as import prices for goods will go up in dollar terms. This will create an additional tailwind for commodity prices. 

If your head isn’t spinning from reading this, I promise mine is from having written it. 

To sum up: A lot of the inflation caused by supply chain disruption that we see today is temporary. But some of it, particularly in industrial commodities, will linger longer, for at least a few years. Wages will be inflationary in the short-term and will reset prices higher, but once the government stops paying people not to work, wage growth should slow down. Finally, in the long term a true inflationary risk comes from growing government borrowing and budget deficits, which will bring higher interest rates and a weaker dollar with them, which will only make inflation worse and will also deflate away a lot of assets.

THE END
UPDATE: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/how-us-inflation-rate-is-impacting-americans-wallets-before-the-holiday-season/vi-AAROG5J

CURRENT: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/us-treasury-yields-tick-lower-on-fears-omicron-will-dent-recovery/ar-AARYSKy?li=BBnbfcL

Your thoughts are appreciated.

THANK YOU

***
See the source image

PODCAST: Is Value Investing Dead?

Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

Recent : DOW , NASDAQ , NVIDIA CORPORATION , GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY , PAYPAL HOLDINGS, INC. Market DOW 35,365.44 ▼ -532.20 NASDAQ 15,169.68 ▼ -10.75 S&P 500 4,620.64 ▼ -48.03 WTI Futures 70.86 ▼ -1.52

***

DEFINITION: Value investing is an investmentparadigm that involves buying securities that appear underpriced by some form of fundamental analysis. The various forms of value investing derive from the investment philosophy first taught by Benjamin Graham and David Dodd at Columbia Business School in 1928, and subsequently developed in their 1934 text Security Analysis.

Citation: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

***

See the source image

***

PODCAST: Is Value Investing Dead?

ASSESSMENT: Your comments are appreciated.

THANK YOU

***

UBER Investing Analysis Update

By Vitaliy Katsenelson Contrarian Edge

***

***

YOUR COMMENTS ARE APPRECIATED.

Thank You

***

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

FINANCIAL PLANNING: https://www.routledge.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-for-Doctors-and-Advisors-Best/Marcinko-Hetico/p/book/9781482240283

***

Should You Invest in Marijuana Stocks?

POT -or- NOT?

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Should You Invest in Marijuana Stocks?

***

***

Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Value Investing

“Six Commandments of Value Investing”

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

If you haven’t gotten the chance to read the “Six Commandments of Value Investing”, you can also listen to it.  It was the first episode that we recorded for the Intellectual Investor podcast!
Listen here-> https://lnkd.in/eZC2Zkc

THANK YOU

 

 

A Shift in Perception Transforms Reality

Reality Check Ahead

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA,

“When you arise in the morning think of what a privilege it is to be alive, to think, to enjoy, to love …”

-Marcus Aurelius

***

As I look at 2020, I have very conflicting feelings. On one hand, the year was horribly tragic for many people who lost loved ones and businesses. My heart goes out to the nearly two million people worldwide who have lost their lives to COVID and their grieving families, and to the tens of millions in this country now suffering from economic hardship.

On the other hand, the worst that many people, including me, have suffered from this virus, has been annoying inconvenience. Thankfully, almost all my relatives and friends are in this category. Yes, we cannot see our extended family and friends; yes, we have not been able to travel or go to concerts or sporting events. The events of last year led me to an important personal, philosophical breakthrough. This was the year that I embraced Stoic philosophy.

https://contrarianedge.com/a-shift-in-perception-transforms-reality/?utm_source=IMA++-+Main+Articles&utm_campaign=9ba2086858-UBER_MONEY_MANAGER_KIDNAPPED_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f1c90406d1-9ba2086858-55139025

Assessment

Your thoughts are appreciated.

***

The Berkshire Hathaway Annual Meeting 2020?

The Impact of Coronavirus [Covid-19]

People, Economy and Your Portfolio

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

The Coronavirus

I cannot tell you how much displeasure I have experienced from what I am about to say. I’ll be throwing around statistics of people dying as if I am talking not about people but widgets. My six-year-old daughter Mia Sarah had a garden-variety virus a few weeks ago. When my wife told me – a few minutes after I had been reading about coronavirus –for a second my heart sank, as virus to me meant coronavirus.

Even if Mia Sarah had coronavirus, the chances of survival were greatly in her favor. (Coronavirus, like the flu, is exponentially deadlier to older folks than younger ones). However, when it comes to your loved ones, statistics lose their meaning, and you start magnifying tiny probabilities into high-probability outcomes. The coronavirus statistics represent people’s loved ones, but I don’t know how else to write what I am about to write.

I am going to divide this letter into three sections: health and human impact (sometimes a tragic one), economic impact, and investment strategy.

***

LINK:

https://contrarianedge.com/the-impact-of-coronavirus-people-economy-your-portfolio/?utm_source=IMA++-+Main+Articles&utm_campaign=9bd771e575-CORONAVIRUS&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f1c90406d1-9bd771e575-55139025

Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Market Risk & The All-Terrain Portfolio

Interview by RealVision (In case you missed it)
By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA
***
DEAR ANN AND ME-P READERS: I wanted to share with you a recent interview I did with RealVision TV.
***
If you haven’t heard of them, RealVision is an internet-based video platform that features serious, long-form interviews with leading financial thinkers – think of it as “CNBC for grown-ups.” I’ve personally watched a bunch of their interviews, and always find them challenging and enjoyable.
***
When I was recently in New York, I sat down with Tony Greer of TG Macro to discuss IMA’s All-Terrain Portfolio, Tesla, Bitcoin, oil, the dollar, value investing, and more – all the usual suspects.
******
LINK:
If you’re interested, you can check out the interview above or read a transcript of it here.
***
Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.
***
BUSINESS, FINANCE, INVESTING AND INSURANCE TEXTS FOR DOCTORS:
THANK YOU
***
Product DetailsProduct Details

 

2020: Stock Markets Party Like It’s 1999?

2020: Party Like It’s 1999?

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

The stock market marched higher for the year even though US companies as a whole did not become more valuable, just more expensive, as earnings failed to grow from 2018 to 2019. Earnings are estimated to be up about 5% for 2020 (though these estimates are usually revised down as the year progresses).

If you look at the quality of this non-growth, then the rose-tinted glasses of the average stock market investor quickly prove inadequate. Corporate debt is up 5% in 2019, and a good chunk of the increase went into stock buybacks. As stocks become  expensive their benefit from earnings per share growth diminishes.

LINK: https://contrarianedge.com/2020-party-like-its-1999/?utm_source=IMA++-+Main+Articles&utm_campaign=ef3ee0520d-2020_PARTY_1999&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f1c90406d1-ef3ee0520d-55139025

Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.

BUSINESS, FINANCE, INVESTING AND INSURANCE TEXTS FOR DOCTORS:

1 – https://lnkd.in/ebWtzGg

2 – https://lnkd.in/ezkQMfR

3 – https://lnkd.in/ewJPTJs

THANK YOU

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

My Interview with Danielle Town

My Interview with Danielle Town

By Vitaliy Katsenelson, CFA

Today I’d like to share with you an interview I did with my friend Danielle Town. Danielle is coauthor of Invested and runs the Rule #1 Finance blog with her father, Phil Town.

Danielle put me on the proverbial podcast couch; and though originally we were going to talk about investing, well, we talked about everything but investing. We ended up delving into many personal topics I rarely discuss. I went down memory lane about growing up in Soviet Russia, my family’s immigration to the US in 1991 and our first years in the US, my parents’ attitude towards money, budgeting, creativity, sleep, writing, a book I am working on, and more.

This interview ran so long it was broken up into two parts (Listen to Part 1 here and Part 2 here). I don’t think I could have done this interview talking to a stranger. It turned into a conversation between friends.

We decided that we are going to go back and talk about investing next time. Maybe we’ll do another interview when I see her in Switzerland in January, where we’ll both attend VALUEx Klosters.

Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.

BUSINESS, FINANCE, INVESTING AND INSURANCE TEXTS FOR DOCTORS:

1 – https://lnkd.in/ebWtzGg

2 – https://lnkd.in/ezkQMfR

3 – https://lnkd.in/ewJPTJs

THANK YOU

Is Value Investing Dead?

 

Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Is Value Investing Dead?

***

MORE: http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstocks/value-stocks-are-trading-at-the-steepest-discount-in-history/ar-AACuYES?li=BBnbfcN

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Fifty Shades of Warren Buffet -OR- New Year in Omaha

A POD-Cast

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

50 Shades of Warren Buffet or Next Year In Omaha

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

 

On Stock Investing Fear!

vitaly

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Stock Investors: You Have Nothing to Fear but Fear Itself

    

This article is Part 1 of a 3-part series discussing how investors can avoid acting irrationally. Read Part 2 and Part 3.

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Resetting our Defaults for 2019

Random Drivel?

[By Vitaly Katsenelson CFA]

What I am about to share with you is somewhat random drivel about a topic that has been very important to me in 2018 – time.

I am anything but an expert on it; and in fact, as you’ll see, this is something I fail in and am trying to fail less.

 ***

Resetting Defaults 

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

About the Opioid Crisis

And, Drug Distributors

[By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA]

I don’t know anyone personally who has been affected by the opioid epidemic in the US. And I truly hope I never will. I don’t know if I would be able to maintain objectivity in my analysis of drug distributors and their involvement in this epidemic if I had experienced getting a call at night informing me that my loved one had died from a drug overdose. Drug overdoses killed 70,237 Americans in 2017. Of these deaths, 47,600 (67.8%) involved opioids and 17,000 involved prescription opioids (24% of total overdose deaths). Legally prescribed opioids are killing 47 of us every day.

How did we get here?

According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse: “In the late 1990s, pharmaceutical companies reassured the medical community that patients would not become addicted to prescription opioid pain relievers, and healthcare providers began to prescribe them at greater rates. This subsequently led to widespread diversion and misuse of these medications before it became clear that these medications could indeed be highly addictive.”

Today pharma distributors are used as scapegoats for the opioid epidemic – not because they are guilty but because they have money and they are “drug distributors.” They are dragged through the same mud as the tobacco companies and British Petroleum (after it spilled millions of gallons of oil in the Gulf of Mexico). Despite negative headlines, we own drug distributors.

Here is why:

They distribute legally prescribed medicine to pharmacies that are approved by several government agencies, including the DEA. Doctors write scripts; pharma distributors order medicine from pharma manufacturers and deliver them to pharmacies. The sad truth about the opioid epidemic is that 21-29% of patients who were prescribed them for chronic pain misused them, and 8-12% of those who received an opioid prescription developed an opioid use disorder.
However, just as truck drivers cannot be held liable for delivering cigarettes to convenience stores, pharma distributors are not manufacturers of drugs and cannot be held liable for the addictive properties of the drugs they distribute or the fact that doctors overprescribe them and patients misuse them.
Also, the DEA should be responsible for limiting the illegal use of opioids. That is its job – DEA stands for Drug Enforcement Agency. It has legal and enforcement resources that distributors lack. And it has a lot more data and tools. Drug distributors do their part and provide data to the ARCOS database that DEA manages.
***
drugs
***
However, each individual distributor has data only for the drugs it distributes, while DEA has data (which it doesn’t share with distributors) for all opioid sales to pharmacies. The DEA is in a much better position to spot suspicious activity in orders than distributors. The DEA controls how much legal opioid is manufactured in the US every year and has been increasing quotas of opioids produced.
Opioids constitute only a very small percentage of the $450 billion in drugs distributed in the US, and thus incentives for distributors to overdistribute opioids are very limited. Though lawyers and the media keep saying that distributors are some of the largest companies in the S&P 500 by sales, they forget to mention that distributors operate on razor thin margins of less than 2%. Comparing the distributors (not even the makers) of legal medicine, that helps millions of people cope with excruciating pain, to cigarette companies that have a 40% pretax profit margin on a product that doesn’t have a societal benefit, and is almost guaranteed to cause cancer if you use it long enough, creates awesome headlines but has little substance.
  • What if DEA was the one distributing all the opioid drugs to pharmacies instead of McKesson, Cardinal Health, and Amerisource Bergen?
  • Would fewer people get addicted to opioids?
  • Would opioids be less accessible? Remember, DEA sets the production targets every year.
Maybe DEA would catch a few bad actors sooner – it has more data than distributors and a specific skillset and mindset aimed at catching criminals.
But in the big scheme of things, even if DEA distributed opioids nothing would really change. Doctors would still prescribe them; some patients would still get addicted to them … and so on. Distributors will likely settle lawsuits for two reasons:
First, McKesson already settled with the FDA for $150 million for “failure to report suspicious orders of pharmaceutical drugs.”
***
Second, McKesson and other drug distributors don’t want to be involved in costly and protracted litigation. We don’t know how much the settlement will be, but it is very unlikely to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars and likely (see reasons above) to be hundreds of millions or a few billion dollars.
***
Assessment
Today McKessonʻs market capitalization is $25 billion. We think the company is worth at least $50 billion (at 15 times earnings), thus there is a $25 billion of margin of safety. If the lawsuit costs the company less than $25 billion, McKesson will be a profitable investment; if not, then the market is right and we are wrong.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Some Value-Focused Investing Interviews and Podcasts

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Dear ME-P Readers,

You might want to listen to some great interviews by Roben on investment topics (his shows cover a wide variety of themes).

  1. An interview with an acquaintance of mine, Saurabh Madaan, who went from working for Google to Markel (which is often called the “Baby Berkshire Hathaway”).
  2. Speaking of Markel, here Roben interviews Tom Gayner, Markel’s CIO. I have had the privilege of sharing a stage with Tom once a year for the last seven years in Omaha at the YPO event.
  3. Here Roben interviews my friend Jim Chanos –brilliant short seller and incredible human being. 

I am just scratching the surface here. You can listen to hundreds of other shows with Roben here, or look for Full Disclosure with Roben Farzad on your podcast app – just be careful, they are very addicting. 

stocks

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

Stansberry Investor Hour Interview

Stansberry Investor Hour Interview

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

I was interviewed by my friend Dan Ferris on the Stansberry Investor Hour show. My segment of the interview starts at the 22:22 mark (click here to listen).

If you’d like to dig deeper into some of the concepts I discussed, you can read the following articles:

1 – What quality means to us.
2 – Why we sold of ETFs and bought Treasuries
3 – How and why we are hedging our portfolios with options
4 – Why Amazon will not run McKesson out of business and why we like the stock and here is one more.

***

***

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

The Average Stock Is Overvalued

 

The Average Stock Is Overvalued Somewhere Between Tremendously And Enormously

Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

imba

BUSINESS EDUCATION, RISK MANAGEMENT & INVESTING FOR DOCTORS:
“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93
“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox
“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

How A Stock Market Turns Investors Into Gamblers

How A Stock Market Turns Investors Into Gamblers

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

Today I am going to share with you an article I wrote after the January 2018 stock market volatility index run-up. It’s as relevant today as it was then.

***

https://contrarianedge.com/how-a-volatile-stock-market-turns-investors-into-gamblers/

***

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

How To Invest In A Stock Market That’s Due For A Hard Landing

On Fundamentals of the Global Economy

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

How To Invest In A Stock Market That’s Due For A Hard Landing

I simply don’t trust the fundamentals of the global economy right now. The system is built on quicksand.

Debt is growing globally and governments are running huge deficits while interest rates are still incredibly low. Looking at almost any metric, stock markets have been more expensive once in the last 100 years — just before the dot-com bubble burst.

There is also another risk in a category of its own: China.

***

world map

***

Assessment

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

MORE FOR DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

THANK YOU

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

Investors Have Misdiagnosed Amazon’s Push Into The Pharmacy Business

Investors Have Misdiagnosed Amazon’s Push Into The Pharmacy Business

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

***

Companies everywhere, in every business, are paranoid about Amazon.com. This sort of paranoia is healthy for the long-term well-being of our investment portfolio, as it is creating interesting buying opportunities.

A case in point: My firm spent a lot of time thinking about pharmacies when we were analyzing investments in McKesson and other drug distributors. We struggled with a question: How will the retail pharmaceutical industry look in the future? Or more precisely, how will Amazon’s entrance into the retail pharmacy business change this industry?

Our inability to answer this question kept us away from retail pharmacies. Then we had a small but important insight that shifted our thinking on Walgreens Boots Alliance. The preponderance of drugs in the U.S. is consumed by an older population, whose habits change slowly or not at all. Accordingly, it’s likely that Amazon’s online pharmacy will not significantly impact the existing drug industry.

Here’s why: Americans currently spend $450 billion a year on drugs. Walmart is the fourth-largest pharmacy in the U.S., with sales of $21 billion, or 4.6% of the company’s total sales. Let’s say that over the next five years Amazon gets to Walmart’s sales level of $21 billion. If the U.S. pharmaceutical industry grows 2% a year over that time, total drug sales will have increased by $45 billion, or the equivalent of two Walmarts (we are ignoring compounding here), to $495 billion. Walgreens, with its pharmacy selling about $70 billion a year, would barely notice Amazon’s presence.

I’ve made this point before, but it is important to repeat: 10 years ago Amazon was not taken too seriously. Giants like Google, now Alphabet, and Microsoft ignored Amazon’s entry into cloud hosting, thinking “What does a bookseller know about the cloud?” They have regretted it ever since.

Nowadays everyone is taking Amazon too seriously, bestowing CEO Jeff Bezos with walk-on-water-like superpowers. Boardrooms today are filled to overflowing with chatter about Amazon. There‘s admittedly a lot Corporate America can learn from Bezos (for instance, about ignoring short-term results), but Bezos is not superhuman and Amazon cannot bend the laws of economic gravity.

Walgreens’ U.S. business, which is about 75% of its total sales, is impressive. A single stand-alone store produces revenues of about $10 million a year — $7 million in the pharmacy and $3 million in front-end sales (milk, candy bars, T-shirts, etc.) A single store fills about 121,000 scripts a year (up from 97,000 four years ago). Walgreens has one of the highest sales-per-square-foot numbers in the retail industry, at around $1,000 per-square-foot (compared to Walmart’s $450, Kroger’s $550, and Target’s $300). (Note that Tesco’s U.K. stores have sales per square foot of $1,100 — this is why we like the U.K. grocery business more than ones in the US).

Walgreens also has an underutilized asset: the front end of the store. Think about it: The pharmacy takes up 20% of the floor space but generates 70% of revenue. In other words 80% of the store (the front end) brings in only 30% of revenue. Walgreens is experimenting with different ways to optimize this underutilized asset — it’s opening medical clinics and bringing LabCorp into its stores, for instance.

In 2018 Walgreens bought 1,900 stores from Rite Aid, bringing its total U.S. store count up to around 10,000. Store-count growth days are behind Walgreens, but the scripts-per-store-growth will continue, since baby boomers are not getting any younger. Accordingly, total sales growth will continue at a level of at least 2%-3% a year. When retailers mature and cannot open new stores, their free cash flows explode. Which begs the question, what will Walgreens do with its cash?

Already Walgreens is taking a quite different approach than its largest counterpart, CVS Health Corp. CVS owns one of the largest pharmacy benefit management (PBM) companies (a business that has a lot of political risk, as it’s ridden with conflicts of interest), and CVS is doubling down on complexity and buying Aetna , a health insurance company. CVS is trying to become an integrated healthcare provider. We don’t know if CVS will be successful in this endeavor, but the historical odds of success with acquisitions of this complexity clearly do not favor CVS.

Walgreens is run by Stefano Pessina, who owns 13% of the company; and thus 13 cents of every dollar spent is his. Walgreens has therefore been deleveraging its business, buying back stock, and paying a dividend. Walgreens is expected to earn $6 a share in 2018. My estimate is that earnings, helped by the Rite Aid acquisition, same-store sales growth, and share buybacks (WBA repurchased 8% of its shares in 2018 and has an authorization to buy another 13%), will exceed $8 per share in 2021.

***

drugs

***

Assessment

If Walgreens shares trade at 13 times its $8 earnings per share in three years, then the upside from here is about 70%; if it trades at 15 times then it’s a double (Walmart trades currently at 18 times estimated 2018 earnings, while Target is at 15 times). We bought Walgreens at a little over 10 times estimated 2018 earnings in July 2018. Walgreens is a better business than Target and at least as good a business as Walmart. At this valuation, heads we win, tails we win — the only question is by how much.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

MORE FOR DOCTORS AND NURES:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

Questions I’d be Asking If I Owned Tesla Stock

Questions I’d be Asking If I Owned Tesla Stock

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

 What happened to 345,000 reservations?

When Tesla’s Model 3 was released, it was supposed to be a $35,000 car. Four hundred thousand people, including yours truly, put down a $1,000 deposit to reserve their spots in line so they could get their hands on that marvel as soon as it became available. It was a brilliant move by Tesla, as it provided the company $400 million of interest-free financing — the biggest crowdfunding project ever.

Today, after some delays, the Model 3 is being produced. However, $35,000 seems to have been a fiction of CEO Elon Musk’s imagination. Though the car is getting great reviews from auto critics, the price for a bare-bones Model 3 starts at $49,000, and the tax incentives are fading away.

But something interesting happened recently. I received an email from Tesla that said: Model 3 is available to order, and no reservation is required in the U.S. We’re now offering all our best options — including our Long Range and Performance configurations with dual motor all-wheel drive. You can design and order yours today for delivery in approximately 2–4 months.

On the surface this sounds like great news, except that it begs a question: What happened to 345,000 orders? Let me explain. According to Bloomberg, which has been tracking Tesla’s production, to date (as of July 28, 2018) Tesla has produced 55,000 Model 3 cars. Since a $1,000 deposit was supposed to secure buyers a place in line, any car ordered today will only be delivered after orders that were placed years ago are fulfilled — after all, 400,000 people paid Tesla $1,000 to hold their places.

Thus there are only three possible explanations for the email I received. One is that Model 3 production is expected to accelerate at an exponential rate to 40,000 cars a week, starting now. However, Bloomberg estimates that Tesla’s normal production cadence of the Model 3 is closer to 2,825 cars a week, so this is a highly unlikely scenario.

Or two, maybe Tesla has been extremely liberal with its statement of a two-to-four month delivery schedule because it still has 345,000 cars to produce before it can start fulfilling new orders, and the company is using that email to raise additional funds from new customers making deposits. (The required deposit is now $2,500.)

There is a third explanation: The bulk of the original 400,000 orders were for a $35,000 car. When it came time to actually buy the car, consumers may have realized that the out-of-pocket expense was much more than expected and simply canceled their orders, draining Tesla’s balance sheet of $345 million.

How sound is Tesla’s balance sheet?

What Musk has achieved with Tesla and SpaceX is truly astounding. I have incredible respect for him, but he is also a magician playing a confidence game. If Musk can continue to convince the market that Tesla has a bright future, then the market will continue to finance Tesla’s losses, and maybe Musk will figure out how to produce the Model 3 more cheaply and then Tesla will sell hundreds of thousands of Model 3s and the future will be as bright as Musk paints it.

For that to happen, Tesla needs to maintain its high stock price, and investors have to believe that Musk is the Iron Man. Investors have to suspend belief, ignore current problems, and focus on the future. However, if the market loses confidence in Tesla and Musk, Tesla is done. This company is losing billions of dollars a year; it has an over-levered balance sheet. This is where Musk’s confidence game comes in.

If you believe in magic stop reading right now. Okay, you’ve been warned.

There is no magic. Magic is just the art of misdirection. The magician gets you to focus on the shiny object he holds in his left hand and you don’t see what he is doing with his right hand.

Musk has been showing us a lot of shiny objects. Some are real, like the success of SpaceX; some are superfluous, like sending a Tesla Roadster into space, and some are future promises on which Musk may or may not be able to deliver, like his futuristic underground railroad for cars (the hyperloop) and the Tesla truck, which is unlikely to be produced on time and at the promised price. The list is long in this category and never-ending; Musk’s futuristic thinking knows no bounds.

But importantly, these promises are the shiny objects that keep Tesla’s stock price high.

If I was a Tesla investor I’d be seriously worried about the company’s balance sheet. There are some ominous signs that Tesla’s financial situation is deteriorating rapidly. Tesla reportedly recently sent an email to its suppliers asking them to give some money back to help the company with its profitability.

Such requests are made by companies looking for Hail Mary solutions to significant financial problems. If suppliers start questioning Tesla’s financial viability, they’ll start shortening their accounts receivables periods and start requesting letters of credit. This would escalate the company’s problems. Hail Marys are acts of desperation. Putting this in the context of the likely Model 3 cancellations, — Tesla’s cash burn has likely gotten a lot worse.

 How effective is Musk at running Tesla?

Tesla is Elon Musk. He has achieved more than many of us will achieve in a thousand lifetimes. But today Musk is running half a dozen companies (Tesla, SpaceX, Solar City, Boring, OpenAI, Hyperloop). To make matters worse, he is also an incredible micromanager. I read that he interviews (or at least used to) every new employee who joins Tesla and SpaceX.

It is clear that Musk is quite exhausted, and his behavior is becoming more erratic. In a conference call snafu in April, he called the British diver who saved the Thai cave kids a “pedo” on Twitter. This sort of thing undermines Musk’s Iron Man image — if he loses that, the confidence game is lost and Tesla is done.

Another red flag went up recently: Musk started to attack short sellers. A short seller who went under the name of Montana Sceptic posted negative research on Tesla on Twitter and SeekingAlpha. Elon Musk personally called the man’s employer and threatened a lawsuit if the employer didn’t silence Montana Sceptic. Historically, companies that have gone after short sellers have had something to hide or were playing a confidence game. (The short sellers were interfering with the misdirection to shiny objects.)

Assessment

Tesla investors are still fascinated by the shiny objects, but I note that CDS insurance on Tesla’s bonds prices in a 24% risk of default by 2025. I am not long or short the stock. But if I were long Tesla’s shares I’d be asking myself these questions. After all, you’re paying $50 billion for a company that trades completely on the spoils of future dreams.

 Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

***

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

 

Crossing Warren Buffett, Richard Branson and Steve Jobs?

What would you get if you crossed Warren Buffett, Richard Branson and Steve Jobs?

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Introduction

Masayoshi Son, the Korean-Japanese, University of California, Berkeley-educated founder of one of Japan’s most successful companies, SoftBank Group.

Like Buffett, Son is a tremendous capital allocator with a highly impressive record: Over the past nine and a half years, SoftBank’s investments have delivered a 45% annualized rate of return. A big chunk of this success can be attributed to one stock: Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba, a $100 million investment SoftBank made in 2001 that is worth about $80 billion today.

Though you may put Alibaba in the (positive) black swan column, Son’s success as an investor goes well beyond it — the list of his investments that have brought multibagger returns is long. The 57-year-old Son is Japan’s richest person, and SoftBank, which he started in 1981 and owns 19% of, has a market capitalization of $72 billion.

Like Apple co-founder Jobs, Son is blessed with clairvoyance. He saw the internet as an transformative force well before that fact became common knowledge. In 1995 he invested in a then-tiny company, Yahoo!, earning six times his investment. But he didn’t stop there; he created a joint venture with Yahoo! by forming Yahoo! Japan, putting about $70 million into a company that today is worth around $8 billion. (Yahoo! Japan is a publicly traded company listed in Japan.)

What is shocking is that Son saw that the iPhone would revolutionize the telecom industry before Apple announced it or even invented it. See for yourself in this excerpt from an interview with Charlie Rose, where Son describes his conversation with Jobs in 2005 — two years before the iPhone was introduced:

“I brought my little drawing of [an] iPod with mobile capabilities. I gave [Jobs] my drawing, and Steve says, “Masa, you don’t give me your drawing. I have my own.” I said, “Well, I don’t need to give you my dirty paper, but once you have your product, give me for Japan.” He said, “Well, Masa, you are crazy. We have not talked to anybody, but you came to see me as the first guy. I give to you.”

Like Virgin Group founder Branson, who created Virgin Atlantic Airways in the U.K. to compete against the state-owned behemoth British Airways, Son started two telecom businesses in Japan — one fixed-line and one wireless — with which he challenged the state-owned NTT monopoly. In 2001, disgusted with Japan’s horrible broadband speeds, he convinced the government to deregulate the telecom industry. When no other companies emerged to rival NTT, Son took it upon himself to start a fixed-line competitor, Yahoo! BB (broadband). Thanks to him, now Japan enjoys one of the highest broadband speeds in the world and Yahoo! BB is a leading fixed-line telecom.

It took Son four years to bring his broadband business to profitability. This is how the Wall Street Journal described that period in 2012: “The problems at the broadband unit contributed to losses for the entire company for four consecutive years. Mr. Son set up an office in a meeting room 13 floors below his executive suite to be closer to the problem unit. He slept in the office at times and routinely summoned executives and partners for meetings late at night. . . . He worked out of the meeting room for 18 months, until the broadband unit had cut enough costs and moved enough customers to more lucrative plans.”

stock-exchange-

A normal person might have taken a break and enjoyed the fruits of his labor at that point, but not Son. Just as his broadband business went into the black, Son executed on his vision for the internet and bought Vodafone K.K., a struggling, poorly run wireless telecom in Japan. SoftBank paid about $15 billion, borrowing $10 billion.

Fast-forward eight years, and SoftBank Mobile is a success. It is one of the largest mobile companies in Japan, even faster-growing than DoCoMo (a subsidiary of almighty NTT). Today it spits out about $5 billion in operating profits annually — not bad for a $5 billion equity investment.

Son has a highly ambitious goal for SoftBank: He wants it to become one of the largest companies in the world. Unlike the average Wall Street CEO, whose time horizon has shrunk to quarters, Son thinks in centuries: He has a 300-year vision for SoftBank. Practically speaking, 300 years is a bit challenging even for long-term investors, but at the core of his vision Son is building a company that he wants to last forever (or 300 years, whichever comes first).

Son views SoftBank as an internet company and is committed to investing in internet companies in China and India. He believes that as these countries develop, their GDPs will eclipse those of the U.S. and Europe.

Jobs, Branson, Buffett — it is rare for somebody to embody strengths of each of these business giants. None of them has the qualities of the other two. Buffett is a business builder but does not run the companies in his portfolio. Branson is not a visionary — in his book Losing My Virginity he admits to not seeing analog music (CDs) being destroyed by digital music (iTunes) and demolishing his music store business. Jobs probably came the closest, as both a visionary and a business builder, but he was not known for his investing acumen.

Valuation (updated)

You’d think SoftBank would be priced to reflect Son’s premium. Instead, its stock currently trades at around a 50% discount to the fair value of its known assets (SoftBank has about 1,300 investments, many of them not consolidated on its financials).

The gap between what SoftBank is worth (its fair value) and its stock price has widened substantially over the last few years despite the stock’s appreciation. Our fair-value estimate of SoftBank shares is about $80.

Frustrated with SoftBank’s valuation, Son has begun to make strategic moves to deleverage SoftBank. Last February, SoftBank announced it may take its Japanese telecom business public. SoftBank is expected to sell about 30% of its stake and should raise about $20 billion.

SoftBank owns a large chuck of Didi, the largest Chinese ride-hailing company, a Chinese version of Uber, which in fact bought Uber’s assets in China. Didi is a privately held company. Recently SoftBank announced that it is going to sell its shares of Didi to Vision Fund for $20 billion. Vision Fund is a $100-billion private equity-like investment vehicle created by Son. SoftBank owns one-third of Vision fund and has an even larger economic interest in it.

And then there is Sprint — SoftBank owns 82% of its publicly listed shares. After dating T-Mobile for almost a year, Sprint and T-Mobile finally decided to merge. There is a chance that the government might not approve this merger, but we think the probability of approval is high. The telecom industry requires scale: the cost of a network (cell towers, equipment, and spectrum) is mostly fixed, and profitability of a carrier is for the most part determined by the number of users.

T-Mobile and Sprint are each half the size of giant incumbents Verizon Communications and AT&T, which achieved their size through dozens of acquisitions. The combination of Sprint and T-Mobile would reduce competition in the short run, but in the long run it would create a strong and viable competitor and thus stable prices for consumers. T-Mobile and (especially) Sprint on their own would eventually get marginalized into irrelevance by AT&T and Verizon by the large cost of 5G rollout.

If the merger goes through it would improve the optics of SoftBank’s balance sheet. SoftBank owns 82% of Sprint and thus has to consolidate Sprint’s $30 billion of debt on its balance sheet. Despite SoftBank’s control of Sprint, in the event of bankruptcy SoftBank is not liable for Sprint’s debt. After the merger SoftBank will own around 27% of the combined entity and thus, magically, the debt of the new company will migrate from SoftBank’s balance sheet to the balance sheet of Deutsche Telecom — the majority owner of T-Mobile.

Between the sale of Didi, the Japanese telecom IPO, and the Sprint/T-Mobile merger, SoftBank should see its debt drop by about $70 billion. The current discount between the fair value of SoftBank’s assets and its stock price is caused by the perception of enormous leverage, and as the leverage gets cured so will the perception.

Conclusion

There are many ways to look at SoftBank. You can think of it as buying a stock at a roughly 50% discount to the market value of its assets or as a way to buy Alibaba at less than half its current price. Alibaba is a great play on the Chinese consumer who is spending more and more money shopping online. Alibaba is synonymous with Chinese online shopping, whose growth may accelerate with higher smartphone penetration and, just as important, the ongoing rollout of a fast wireless LTE network.

You can also look at SoftBank as a vehicle through which to invest in emerging markets — not just China but India as well. It is almost like hiring the combination of Buffett, Branson and Jobs to go to work for you investing in markets whose economies in a few decades will surpass that of the U.S., while also investing in a segment of the economy — the internet — that is growing at a much faster rate than the overall economy. And, of course, you have Masayoshi Son, the Buffett-Branson-Jobs fusion, making these investments for you. With SoftBank at this valuation, you can ditch your emerging-markets mutual fund.

stock market

Additional thoughts

Some additional thoughts. I don’t expect every bet Mr. Son makes in Vision Fund to work out. Not at all. I look at Vision Fund as a portfolio of bets. For instance, his investment in WeWork and WeWork’s valuation make me cringe. I am also concerned that he feels the need to spend $100 billion all at once. There will be a time when this money will buy a lot more than it does today.

I feel uneasy that the $100 billion will be like a pig going through the python of Silicon Valley, inflating the prices of technology companies. But a few things let me sleep well owning Softbank: First, Mr. Son owns 20% of the company – every dollar Softbank spends, 20 cents are his. As Nassim Taleb would put it, Mr. Son has skin in the game. Second, the discount of Softbank stock to the fair value of its assets is so huge that it could absorb the blow-up of Vision Fund. And finally, I remind myself that I’d probably have had a similar feeling of uneasiness about Mr. Son’s decisions at any time in his 30-plus-year career (PCs in the ’80s, Internet in the ’90s, telecom Japan and internet in China in the ’00s). And this is when I remember Einstein’s quotes.

P.S.
To understand Mr. Son’s thinking, read my article on exponential growth. To understand the structure of Vision Fund, read this article.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

DOCTORS:

“Insurance & Risk Management Strategies for Doctors” https://tinyurl.com/ydx9kd93

“Fiduciary Financial Planning for Physicians” https://tinyurl.com/y7f5pnox

“Business of Medical Practice 2.0” https://tinyurl.com/yb3x6wr8

HOSPITALS:

“Financial Management Strategies for Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/yagu567d

“Operational Strategies for Clinics and Hospitals” https://tinyurl.com/y9avbrq5

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

Options, Hurricanes and Hedging

Options, Hurricanes and Hedging

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

We always look at our investment process and ask ourselves, “What can we do better?” How can we increase returns and lower risk? We think we have found a new, sensible way to do both.

We can hedge a portion of our market exposure with put options. Put options are contracts that trade on an exchange that give buyer (us) a right, not an obligation, to sell stock (or in our case Exchanged Traded Fund, ETF that mimics a market index) at a specific price for a certain period of time. Put options are cash settled, so when we exercise it or it expires we get cash in lieu of its value. Buying put options is very similar to buying hurricane insurance. We pay a premium, and that is the only cost we bear. Let’s restate this: The only risk we take is that the hurricane doesn’t hit or, in our case, that the stock market doesn’t decline, in which case our premium was “wasted.”

When you buy hurricane insurance you don’t suddenly start wishing for a hurricane, but you do get peace of mind from knowing that if Richard or Betty (we name hurricane like we name pets – makes TV watching so much more exciting, especially if your name is Richard or Betty) pays you a visit, the insurance company will restore your house to its original state.

We look at options “insurance” the same way we look at any asset: It can make sense at one price but make no sense at another. As you will see, at today’s price they make a lot of sense.

For the sake of simplicity let’s make a few assumptions: First, your portfolio is 100% correlated to the stock market. Second, your portfolio is 100% invested. And finally, let’s assume we’d be buying put options to insure your whole portfolio. These assumptions will simplify our example – we’ll modify them later.

Based on our assumptions, we’d buy put options on ETFs that track a particular stock market index – let’s say the S&P 500. As of January 2018, if we were to buy options on the S&P 500 ETF, SPY, that expire in one year and that are 5% out of the money (they don’t start paying us until the S&P declines 5% or more – think of this 5% as our deductible), the cost of insuring the entire portfolio would be about 4% of its total value. For a $1 million portfolio it would be $40,000.

If the stock market decline is greater than 5%, the insurance kicks in. After a 5% decline the value of our stock options starts going up proportionally to the decline in the portfolio. If stock market falls 20%, the $1 million portfolio declines to $800,000, but this $200,000 loss is offset by the appreciation of our put options, which go up by roughly $150,000. Thus the value of the portfolio is now $950,000 (remember our 5% deductible). Actually that number will most likely be less – somewhere between $910,000 and $950,000, because we paid $40,000 for the put options.

Without getting too deep into the weeds, the price of an option is driven by two additional factors: time (options are not good wine; they get cheaper with age) and expected volatility, which we’ll discuss next.

Let’s say you are insuring a home somewhere on the Florida coast. The general formula to calculate the cost of insurance is probability of loss times severity of loss. According to a study by Colorado State University, the climatological probability that the coast of Florida will get hit by a major hurricane in any particular year is 21%, so once every five years or so.

A 21% probability doesn’t mean that a hurricane will pay a visit every fifth year; no, it actually means that over a 100-year period there will on average be 20 hurricanes hitting the Florida coast. Hurricanes may, however, decide to pay a visit two or three years in a row and then take eight or ten years off.

21% is the number an insurance company uses to figure out the intrinsic cost of the insurance. But this is where we have to draw a distinction between climatological probability of loss (intrinsic or true cost) and expected probability of loss.

There are other factors that go into the total cost of the insurance contract, including the size of the policy, its duration, and the deductible. But if you hold all these factors constant, the only number that fluctuates due to supply and demand in insurance market is the expected probability of loss.

A year after a hurricane, homeowners are still licking their wounds from last year’s Richard or Betty. The pain is so recent that those who were hit expect that hurricanes will happen a lot more often and thus the expected probability (in the eyes of these consumers) rises to … pick a number; let’s say 50% (a hurricane every two years). (The insurance industry may have had its capital depleted by recent hurricanes, which will also drive prices higher, but we’ll ignore this factor in our discussion.)

However, if there is no hurricane for a while, let’s say for eight years, the memory and the pain of the last hurricane fade away. A new wave of homeowners moves in, who have seen hurricanes only from the comfort of their leather couches on the Weather Channel. Now the expectation of another hurricane drops to, let’s say, 10% (a storm every ten years).

Thus, though expected probability and thus insurance cost has fluctuated dramatically from 50% to 10%, intrinsic value has not changed; it is still 21%. This example is extremely oversimplified, but the key point is still the same: A rational homeowner would want to buy insurance when no one expected a hurricane to visit Florida and lock in that price for as long as possible. If you are an insurance company you want to write as much insurance as you can when hurricanes are priced at 50% expected probability, and you want to be out of the market when they are priced at a 10% probability.

In the options market, expected probability of loss is expressed in terms of the volatility that is priced into options. Ten years of bull market have eroded even the most unpleasant memories of the 2008 decline. Fear has been replaced by euphoria that has been further amplified by the steady daily appreciation of stocks. The mindset that markets will never decline ever again has gradually seeped into the collective stock market psyche. This is why volatility is cheap! How cheap? Average volatility priced into options since 2004 was about 18%; today it is at 10%. In 2008 it reached 80%, and it has reached 40% a few times since 2008.

Volatility is quickly becoming one of the most interesting assets in the otherwise not very interesting stock market. But the situation in the stock market is even more interesting than in the hurricane insurance market.

Stock markets are fueled by two often contradictory forces: human emotions and movement towards fair value. Human emotions may divorce stocks from their fair value for a considerable period of time, but movement towards fair value can only be postponed but not suspended. During bull markets greed begets greed and stock market valuations go from cheap to average to high to super-high to extra-super-high – we are running out of superlatives, but we hope you get the point: Valuations march ever higher … until the music stops.

It is hard to know what will trigger the “stops” part, but in the late stage of the bull market, stock market behavior is driven less and less by fundamental factors and more and more resembles a Ponzi scheme (though market commentators come up with plenty of rational explanations to wrap around their “this time is different” narrative).

Stocks march higher until the market runs out of buyers and collapses under its own weight. This is how movement towards fair value takes place – except that, historically, markets have rarely stopped at fair value; they have fallen to levels well below fair value. (Vitaliy wrote two books on this subject – we’d be happy to send you copies.)

***

***

We are not meteorologists, but we believe there is an important difference between hurricanes and stocks. Just as when you flip a coin each flip is an independent event and completely unconnected to the previous flip, hurricanes are independent events – just because Richard paid a visit to Florida last year does not change the probability of Betty’s appearance next year. Betty is not aware of Richard’s past misdeeds.

In contrast, the probability of a significant market decline is not constant; it is dependent on past movements of stocks. As markets stretch higher and higher, bulk of the appreciation was driven by expansion of price to earnings. Market valuation which was already high went higher. The gap between the price and intrinsic value creates a rubber band-like tension. The wider the gap the greater the tension and risk of eventually embarking on the return trip towards fair value.

Thus, in the case of the hurricane the climatological probability of 21% of loss remains constant no matter whether Richard or Betty appears, but in the stock market the probability of a sharp decline (an equities hurricane) increases as the gap between price and fair value widens.

In other words, today the value of volatility has increased while its price is making new lows. This is why we believe volatility is one of the most interesting assets we see now.

We are not market timers. We have no idea what the stock market will do in 2018, but we look at buying put options as an opportunity to hedge our portfolios with what we believe is significantly undervalued insurance.

Let’s delve into the practicality of our hedging strategy and modify some assumptions we made in the oversimplified example above. First, our portfolios are not 100% correlated to market indices. Considering that we own high-quality companies that are significantly undervalued, we believe our stocks will (temporarily) decline less than the market if there is a significant correction. Second, we have a lot of cash, which doesn’t require hedging.

Let’s say your account is 60% invested. We only need to worry about hedging that 60%. And considering that our stocks will decline less than the market, we need to buy puts to protect less than 60%. How much less? Historically our stocks have declined a lot less than the market during significant sell-offs. Our average portfolio was down 17-18% in 2008 when markets were down 35-45%. Our guestimate, therefore, is that we need to hedge about half of 60% or 30% of the total portfolio. So the total cost of insuring the portfolio against a decline of 5% or greater for a year would be 1.2% (4% – the cost of “insuring” the total portfolio – times 30%).

You can see how this strategy can reduce risk, but can it increase returns? The answer is a bit more complex and has two parts: First, if the market takes a deep dive, our appreciated put options together with cash will have increased buying power, since everything around us will be cheaper. And second, depending of when it happens – how much time value is left in the option – the value of the option may jump dramatically, as the market will be pricing in not 10% volatility but a much higher number – 30%, 40%? – your guess is as good as ours.

IMA’s ultimate goal is produce good risk-adjusted returns while keeping volatility of our clients’ blood pressure level to a minimum. We try to achieve this through our conservative stock selection, our transparent (sometimes overly long) communication, and now through buying inexpensive insurance on the portion of your portfolio.

Assessment

Our view on what true risk is has not changed. To value investors, true risk is not volatility (a stock temporarily declining in price), but a permanent loss of capital (the stock price decline is permanent). Our hedging strategy goal is to take advantage of an undervalued asset – volatility – and to decrease your (future) blood pressure just a little.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/
Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

***

***

How Amazon could lose its health-care bid

 While drug distributor stocks win

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

Amazon.com has been one of the most innovative and disruptive companies of this century, with incredible success in areas that lie outside of what has been historically perceived as its core business (book selling).

Thus every announcement or speculation that Amazon will enter into a particular industry sends stocks of that industry into a tailspin. Investors sell first and ask questions later. When Amazon announced its purchase of Whole Foods, grocery stores declined as much as 30%. Even Tesco separated by an ocean from Whole Foods, was down on that news.

A big part of Amazon’s success has come from not being taken seriously by its competition. Amazon was able to create a huge lead in AWS (Amazon Web Services) because the competition (Alphabet and Microsoft did not give Amazon enough respect. Competitors thought, “what does a book seller know about the cloud?” Well, according to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, such thinking gave Amazon a much bigger lead over its rivals. Today, everyone takes Amazon seriously. Indeed, fear of Amazon is reaching paranoia levels.

McKesson

McKesson shares, for example, took a 20% dive during the fourth quarter of 2017 on speculation that Amazon would start distributing pharmaceuticals in the U.S. As McKesson shareholders, my firm took this speculation seriously, but upon further investigation, it became evident that such concerns were overblown. After the market cooled off from fourth-quarter worry about Amazon, McKesson shares recovered.

Then in late January, news that Amazon, JPMorgan Chase, and Berkshire Hathaway will join forces to drive down U.S. health-care costs hit health-care sector stocks, including McKesson.

How big of a punch could this be? McKesson is the largest distributor of pharmaceuticals in the U.S. Its 2018 sales are on track to exceed $210 billion. It is important to point out that McKesson is not a retailer but a distributor. It is one of three railroads for drugs in the U.S. McKesson distributes drugs to thousands of independent pharmacies, as well as giants like CVS Health, Rite Aid and Walmart McKesson operates two distinct distribution businesses: branded and generics. Though these businesses may look similar on the surface, the economic models of branded and generic businesses are quite different.

In the distribution of branded drugs (about 70% of McKesson’s revenue and 30% of profits) McKesson has a fee-for-service model. Pharmaceutical companies want to be involved in high-value activities: chiefly, inventing and manufacturing drugs. Getting drugs to thousands of pharmacies on a timely basis and collecting accounts receivable is not the business they want to be in. They don’t have the scale and distribution know-how of McKesson, Cardinal Health, and AmerisourceBergen — that collectively control 90% of drug distribution in the U.S. Thus the likes Pfizer and Bristol-Meyers Squibb pay drug distributors a small “fee for service,” and pharmaceutical companies (not distributors) negotiate prices with pharmacies.

More than 90% of McKesson’s profit in this segment is driven by volume, while just 10% is linked to changes in drug prices. Pfizer, for instance, despite its might, would still have higher distribution costs than McKesson because it doesn’t have McKesson’s scale and focus on distribution efficiency. So Pfizer is happy to pay McKesson this service fee and not think about drug distribution.

In its generic drug distribution business (about 30% of sales, 70% of earnings), McKesson uses its enormous buying power to buy drugs at low prices from generics manufacturers and sell at higher prices to pharmacies. Since it can source the same drug from various manufacturers, it leverages better prices from the likes of Mylan and Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries. Drug distributors are a significant deflationary force in generic pricing — good for consumers, not great for Teva or Mylan.

***

Moats

So McKesson has a wide protective moat, which includes the distinct possibility that Amazon’s adventure into drug distribution could lead to miserable failure. Here’s why:

1. Amazon cannot match McKesson’s buying power or negotiating power when it comes to generics. Current Amazon sales of pharmaceuticals are somewhere between zero and slightly above zero. McKesson’s sales are pushing $210 billion, about $65 billion of which comes from generics. Walmart is the fourth-largest pharmacy in the U.S., with sales of $20 billion. It had distributed drugs, but in 2016 it signed a distribution deal with McKesson. Walmart realized it could get better prices for generics through McKesson. Amazon, with near-zero sales, doesn’t stand a chance.

2. Amazon has no structural advantage. In the fight against Barnes & Noble and Best Buy, Amazon could charge lower prices than brick-and-mortar retailers because it had a structural advantage — it did not own stores and have all the extra costs associated with them. On one of his conference calls, McKesson CEO John Hammergren said his company was Amazon before Amazon was Amazon. Indeed. McKesson has highly specialized warehouses designed to distribute drugs. It can get any drug to any pharmacy in the U.S. within hours.

3. McKesson’s pretax margins are just 1.7%. If Amazon is looking to cut fat in the pharmaceutical industry, this is not where the fat is.

4. Distributing and selling drugs is not like selling or distributing most anything else. First, some drugs require refrigeration and others are controlled substances. Distributing them puts an extra regulatory (and self-policing) burden on distributors. McKesson has paid fines and recently received plenty of negative publicity from “60 Minutes” for distributing opioid pain medications to legal pharmacies who illegally sold the medicine on the black market.

Next, unlike in almost any other industry, pharma consumers are price-insensitive. If you are on Medicare, Medicaid, or a copay/low-deductible private insurance plan, you really don’t care if you are paying the lowest price because you don’t see the price (other than for copay). For this group of drug consumers, which constitutes the bulk of the U.S. population, lower drug prices are not an incentive to switch.

Moreover, let’s say Amazon starts an online pharmacy and self-distributes. Internet-savvy millennials are not the ones consuming most of the drugs in the U.S. Their parents and grandparents are. This demographic still has brick-and-mortar habits that are less likely to be broken anytime soon. Also, major pharmacies already have mail-order operations. It would be logical for Amazon to try to get into the almost-trillion-dollar pharma business, but its success here will be limited, and it will take decades to gain a meaningful market share

5. Suppose Amazon opens an online pharmacy and succeeds. It would probably take five to 10 years to reach sales of, let’s say, $10 billion (half of Walmart’s current drug sales). Let’s assume that Amazon self-distributes and will not use McKesson, or that it decides to employ the services of Cardinal Health. This would steal less than a year of current growth from McKesson, in five to 10 years.

Put simply, the laws of economics still apply — even to Amazon. Drug distributors are strong financially and have great scale and a tremendous purchasing-power advantage. Distributors’ stocks may take a dive but their business will be fine in the long run. The only competitive advantage Amazon has against drug distributors is that Wall Street completely ignores its profitability and focuses only on revenue growth.
McKesson is one of the U.S. stock market’s most interesting investments. Its business is future-proof. The demand for its product is not cyclical and is likely to continue to grow as the U.S. population ages. Higher or lower interest rates, recession or no recession, inflation or deflation, McKesson’s earnings power will continue to march ahead for a long time.

McKesson has a conservative balance sheet; it can pay off its debt in less than two years. McKesson pays a lower dividend than its competitors, but it has purchased a third of its shares over the last decade. Expected earnings of about $13 a share this year could grow to $15 in 2019. At a conservative 15 times earnings, McKesson is worth about $225 a share.

Assessment

However, McKesson has spun off its technology business into Change Healthcare, which could go public in 2019. McKesson owns 70% of Change Healthcare, and my firm estimates McKesson’s interest is worth about $25-$30 a share. Thus, a conservative estimate of McKesson’s value is about $250.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/
Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

***

https://www.amazon.com/Comprehensive-Financial-Planning-Strategies-Advisors/dp/1482240289/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418580820&sr=8-1&keywords=david+marcinko
***

Bitcoin – “Millennials Fake Gold”

Bitcoin – The  Digital Generation’s Gold Surrogate

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

I’ve been asked about Bitcoin a lot lately. I’ haven’t written anything about it because I find myself in an uncomfortable place in agreeing with the mainstream media: It’s a bubble.

Bitcoin started out as what I’d call “millennial gold” – the young (digital) generation looked at it as their gold substitute.

http://contrarianedge.com/2017/12/01/bitcoin-millennials-fake-gold/

***

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Book Marcinko: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/dr-david-marcinkos-bookings/

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, IT, business and policy management ecosystem.

***

APPLE and the iPhone X

Now Apple must show what’s next after iPhone X

By  Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA

The iPhone X is likely to be a phenomenal success for Apple. But its success will not be driven by anything new that the new phone packs inside. Instead, its success will be based on the phone’s screen size. Essentially, iPhone X provides the same screen real-estate as an iPhone Plus, but with the sleeker form factor of the iPhone 7 or 8.

Apple has done a great job at changing the paradigm of our thinking about the iPhone. If you only care about making phone calls, then an iPhone 4 is good enough. Why pay for more? You probably don’t even need to upgrade your phone for years, as long as the battery keeps holding its charge. However, for most, the actual “phone” function is the least important of the iPhone.

Earnings

From an earnings perspective, iPhone X will be a tremendous boost. It will increase the average selling price per unit by a few hundred dollars, which should help not just sales, but profit margins as well. This is actually healthy for both Apple and the entire iPhone ecosystem (including DRAM and solid state drive makers — for example, we still have a large position in Micron Technology). People were also postponing buying new iPhones while waiting for the iPhone X; thus, the number of units sold will probably exceed most optimistic expectations.

What is next?

Then the question becomes, What is next? Higher-priced iPhones will also change the dynamics of the upgrade cycle. Apple is going to have a harder time convincing iFanatics to shell out $1,000-$1,200 every year (or even every two years). The upgrade cycle will likely be elongating to three or four years.

***

***

Thus, any blow-out success of iPhone X in 2017 and early 2018 will be coming at the expense of future years. Even if you are a loyal Apple shareholder, you have to be prepared for this.

Assessment

Absent a new category of products, Apple is turning into a fully ripe stock. Yes, it will look statistically cheap based on 2018 earnings, but that will not be the case if you look at 2019 or 2020 earnings.

As all the excitement subsides, Apple stock will have to answer an extremely important question: What is next? After all, the value of any business is a lot more than the earnings generated next year, but far beyond that.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, urls and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements.

Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

Subscribe: MEDICAL EXECUTIVE POST for curated news, essays, opinions and analysis from the public health, economics, finance, marketing, I.T, business and policy management ecosystem.

***

How to Invest the Dale Carnegie Way

How to Invest the Dale Carnegie Way

By Vitaliy Katsenelson, CFA
The first time I read Dale Carnegie’s How to Win Friends and Influence People was in 1990. I was living in Russia; the Cold War had just ended.

Capitalist American books suddenly became very popular. Carnegie’s was one of the first to be translated into Russian and was “the book to read.” Everyone wanted to be a capitalist, and this book was supposed to make me a better one.

I decided, however, that it was stuffed with disingenuous fluff — that it taught the reader how to not be authentic; it turned you into a fake.

 

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, urls and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: marcinkoadvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

An Investor’s Guide to Better Writing

An Investor’s Guide to Better Writing — Seriously

By Vitaliy Katsenelson CFA / Institutional Investor Magazine

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

Risk Management, Liability Insurance, and Asset Protection Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™8Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners™

***

%d bloggers like this: