+Follow
蚂蚁移山
No personal profile
15
Follow
0
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
蚂蚁移山
2022-11-27
Keep learning
Howard talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year
蚂蚁移山
2022-08-22
FYI
Sorry, the original content has been removed
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3584594238720284","uuid":"3584594238720284","gmtCreate":1621500214229,"gmtModify":1621502143915,"name":"蚂蚁移山","pinyin":"myysmayiyishan","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/86dfdfe60a3e550fa61f48cb49ed9bc0","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":15,"tweetSize":32,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":3,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":17,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-1","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Debut Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.10.08","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001}],"userBadgeCount":1,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":620180909,"gmtCreate":1669529993303,"gmtModify":1676538205469,"author":{"id":"3584594238720284","authorId":"3584594238720284","name":"蚂蚁移山","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/86dfdfe60a3e550fa61f48cb49ed9bc0","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3584594238720284","authorIdStr":"3584594238720284"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Keep learning","listText":"Keep learning","text":"Keep learning","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/620180909","repostId":"1109716414","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1109716414","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1669433910,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1109716414?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-11-26 11:38","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Howard talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1109716414","media":"投资有道","summary":"霍华德·马克斯1995年与人联合创建橡树资本（Oaktree Capital），他撰写的“投资备忘录”因预言科技股泡沫破裂而成为华尔街必读文件，巴菲特也推崇不已。作为知名投资大师，霍华德·马克斯曾和另","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>Howard Marks co-founded Oaktree Capital in 1995. His \"investment memo\" became a must-read document on Wall Street because he predicted the bursting of the technology stock bubble, and Buffett also praised it.</p><p>As a well-known investment guru, Howard Marks once had a very classic conversation with another guru-Joel Greenblatt (Joel Greenblatt).</p><p>Joel is a visiting professor at Columbia University Business School, founder and partnership manager of GothamCapital.</p><p>In the 20 years from its establishment in 1985 to 2005, Gotan Capital's assets increased from US $7 million to US $830 million, with an average annual return of 40%, which can be called an investment miracle on Wall Street.</p><p>Even after the financial crisis in 2008, the asset management scale of Gotan Capital remained at the level of 900 million US dollars, and the annualized rate of return was still as high as 30%.</p><p>Observing the wonderful dialogue between these two people about value investing, we can see how outstanding investors think, how to outperform others, their insights into human nature, their views on investors, how to treat mistakes, etc., which is very logical and wise.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today we were lucky enough to have Joel talk to us about investing. I met Joel 25 years ago through a friend's introduction.</p><p>In the late 1970s, Wharton had many successful investors. If we have time, we can talk about why this is so.</p><p>Joel is definitely one of the standouts. Joel teaches value investing at Columbia University. Later, he asked me to give a lecture to his students once a year, and I readily agreed. Today, I invited him to Walton. Joel is a real investor. Those of you who are interested in becoming investors, please listen carefully to Joel.</p><p>I wrote a few questions in advance myself and asked Joel to take a look at them. Later, my son Andrew sent me the questions he had to ask. Andrew also graduated from Wharton. I think he asked better questions.</p><p>I suggest we ask Joel to answer Andrew's question first. Joel hadn't read these questions beforehand, so we asked him to answer them on the spot. I think Andrew's question is well written. Joel, if you don't mind, I'll just read it.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Yeah, well.</p><p><b>Look for opportunities in places with few people</b><b>HOWARD:</b>You wrote a book about investing under special circumstances, and you talked about how to profit from splits, restructuring, bankruptcies, mergers and acquisitions, etc.</p><p>Before you, no one has talked about special circumstances investing in such detail. How did you come up with this investment style? You know what you want to focus on, where you can and can't make money. How do you know that?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Excellent question, indeed.</p><p>My first job was at a hedge fund, a firm that did risk arbitrage. The risk arbitrage it does is also called M&A arbitrage, which is to buy a company after seeing the announcement of M&A, hoping to make a profit through the completion of M&A.</p><p>The risks and benefits of this operation are basically as follows: if the merger is successful, you will earn 1 yuan. If the merger fails, you will lose 10 or 15 yuan. Personally, I don't think such a risk-benefit ratio is appropriate.</p><p>So, I began to study other operating methods. Later, I found out that there are some stocks worth watching in M&A. I don't do the kind of M&A arbitrage mentioned earlier. I start to pay attention to the special events of the company, such as restructuring, splitting, etc.<b>What I am looking for is an opportunity to earn 1 yuan, but only lose 10 cents. It can be said that I am looking for opportunities in places with few people.</b></p><p>When I was studying at Wharton, Wharton belonged to the school of efficient market theory, and the class talked about efficient market theory. This theory doesn't resonate with me. During my junior year, I came across an article about Benjamin Graham. After reading this article, I suddenly enlightened and felt that it made too much sense.</p><p>I read everything Graham wrote. My concept of investing has changed completely. I know what to do and what not to do about investing.</p><p><b>In fact, it is to find out how much something is worth, and then buy it at a very low price, leaving enough margin of safety.</b>I put this philosophy into practice in special situation investing.</p><p>I wrote a book, \"You Can Too Become a Stock Market Genius\". The title of this book is really not good. What the title wants to express is that even fools can become a stock market genius. At the time of writing this book, the Motley Fool website was particularly hot. The editor suggested I use the word \"fool\" in the title of the book.</p><p>My dad gave me a suggestion called \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius,\" and then added a subtitle, \"You Can Do It Even If You Are Not Smart.\" I laughed when I heard it. The editor asked me to finalize the title within a day. I used the title my dad gave me. The title of the book is bad.</p><p>I told a story at the beginning of the book about my father-in-law and mother-in-law. They live in Connecticut for several months of the year. They mainly shop for antiques in Connecticut, and often attend various auctions to look for cheap antiques.</p><p>How do they find treasures at auctions? For example, they saw a painting at an auction. At other auctions, they have seen paintings of similar works, similar sizes and similar themes, but the transaction price is two or three times that of the current painting. They'll buy it. They don't have to study whether this painting can be the next Picasso. It's harder to find the next Picasso.</p><p>I said at the beginning of the book that special circumstances investing is similar.<b>We don't have to go to great lengths to find the next Picasso. We'd better look for opportunities in places where there are few people and where others don't pay attention to them.</b></p><p>It may be that the market value is small, it may be that the situation is special, or it is very complicated, and most people will not study it in depth. Sometimes it takes more than 400 pages of announcements to read, and sometimes the stocks that are split out are something people don't want. The business that was split was abandoned by the company, and the people who bought the original stock of the company didn't want it. To invest in stocks whose price is lower than fair value, I personally think it is relatively simple to practice this concept in special circumstances.</p><p>At the end of the first chapter of the book \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius, Too\", I told a story about repairing plumbing. Your plumbing is broken, call in a plumber to fix it. The plumber knocked on the pipe and then said it would cost 200 yuan to repair the pipe. You said, \"Want 200 yuan? Just knock down the pipe for 200 yuan?\" The plumber said, \"It only costs 5 yuan to knock down the pipe, and it costs 195 yuan to knock down.\"</p><p>This story can illustrate my understanding of investing in special circumstances, and I have to find what I find easier to do.<b>I don't want to go to my best. I want to be lazy. As Buffett said, pick a 30-centimeter-high hurdle. Since you can find a 30-cm-high hurdle, why rush to a 3-meter-high hurdle?</b></p><p>In a word,<b>As long as I find the right place, I don't have to be too smart to do well.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, in a memo I wrote this year, I also told a story.</p><p>There's a guy who wants to be a poker master. He studied how to get good cards, how to make his cards outperform his opponents, and how to see through their opponents' bluffs. His uncle said to him. No matter how much you study, you can't become a poker master. Just find something easier to play?</p><p>Joel, you said you found what you thought was a relatively simple way to invest. We wanted to go together.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Exactly that. I also told a story in the book, which is the same truth.</p><p>Here's the story. I lost a bet with my friend. The loser had to invite the winner to dinner at the most famous restaurant. At that time, the most famous restaurant in new york was Lutece Restaurant. Lutece Restaurant is managed by world-class chef Andre Soltner.</p><p>I called first to make a reservation, but the restaurant told me that it was not possible to make a reservation. I said whatever day, whenever. Still won't order it for me. I don't understand what's going on at first. Later, I learned that I had to make a reservation 30 days in advance. Only available 30 days in advance.</p><p>I kept calling and finally got a reservation. I came to this restaurant with my friends. When ordering, I didn't pay attention to who was standing next to me. I pointed to an appetizer on the menu and casually asked, \"Is this good?\" Chef Andre Soltner looked at me and said, \"It tastes terrible.\"</p><p>In the face of a world-class chef, I actually asked him if the food he cooked was delicious. That's what he meant, I wondered. Every dish on the menu was delicious. This is the best restaurant in the world.</p><p>That's the truth,<b>Pick up at the best place and everything here is good. I just need to pick better from the good things</b>。</p><p><b>Margin of safety can give way to growth</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, you just talked about buying at well below value, which is the margin of safety. Do you think this is at the heart of value investing? Do you think it is necessary to talk about it, or is it enough to remember this? One more question, you just told the story of your father-in-law and mother-in-law, and you think they are right not to look for the next Picasso. Do you think investing in growth stocks is looking for the next Picasso?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>It has this meaning.<b>My definition of value investing is to figure out how much it is worth and then buy at a very low price, which has nothing to do with low price-to-book ratio or low price-to-sales ratio.</b></p><p>Russell, Morningstar and other institutions, as well as many others, think that value investors invest based on the price-to-book ratio and price-to-sales ratio. According to this classification standard, I am not a value investor or a growth investor. Others can't tell what kind of class we are.</p><p>As Buffett said, value and growth are the same thing after all. The long-term growth of a company is part of its investment value. The line between value and growth is not as sharp as institutions such as Russell or Morningstar draw. Perhaps value stocks have lower growth potential, while growth stocks have higher growth potential. Divisions are artificial divisions. I'm just looking for a cheap and good company.</p><p>Ben Graham said, research understands how much it is worth, buy it at a very low price, leave a sufficient margin of safety between the two, and the difference between price and value should be large enough. Warren Buffett was Graham's most distinguished disciple. Buffett improved his teacher's philosophy slightly and later became the richest man in the world. Buffett put it very simply, if you can buy a good company at a cheap price, it will be even better.<b>The goodness of a good company includes its long-term growth.</b></p><p>I gradually gained this understanding. It took me a long time to figure it out in my first 10 years of investing. I am increasingly inclined to invest according to Warren Buffett's method. He is looking for good and cheap companies. Growth is a characteristic of good companies.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>We know that Buffett was not fascinated by good companies in the early days. He started by picking up cigarette butts. At the beginning, he focused not on the texture, but on whether it was cheap enough. His style later shifted.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>right. When I was a graduate student at Wharton, I studied the strategy of buying cheap stocks with several classmates, and wrote a graduation thesis, which was later published in the journal Portfolio Management.</p><p>We looked at NetNet, buying stocks below liquidation value. Our research shows that as long as you buy it cheap enough, you can make a lot of money. Warren Buffett did just that early on.</p><p>But why do we gradually tend to be qualitative?</p><p>For example, we found a stock that is worth 10 yuan and the price is 6 yuan. It's cheap. The problem is, we don't have a controlling stake in this company, and its business is not a good business yet. Over time, our margin of safety may become smaller and smaller. Because there is no way to control the company's assets, the original 10 yuan may become 8 yuan.</p><p>Personally, I think that looking for companies where 10 yuan may become 12 yuan will increase our margin of safety. In what I think<b>With the potential for growth, I can make some concessions on the margin of safety.</b></p><p>Having said that, it is feasible to buy cheap stocks, and you can make money simply by being cheap. I have no objection to this investment method, except that it can't accommodate large funds. At present, the scale of funds managed by Buffett is about $100 billion. He wants to invest 5 billion to buy a stock, and then sell it at a higher price. It is difficult to find such a large counterparty. The scale is too big.</p><p>About 2000, he said \"Give me $1 million and I can make 50% a year\". With a scale of $1 million, there are many opportunities to grasp.<b>The larger the scale of funds, the fewer investment opportunities. Small funds are not restricted in investment, and all companies can choose and buy whatever they want.</b></p><p>Buffett can only choose from 300 large-cap stocks now, and small-scale investments are meaningless to his capital. Everyone here can choose as much as you like in special circumstances investment.</p><p><b>Outperforming the market can be done</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>A lot of my students have asked me a question. For five or six years, people have asked almost every year. My students told me that when you were young, it was easier to invest. They didn't directly say I was old, just when I was young.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Very implicit.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I admit that I am old.</p><p>In short, the students felt that it was better for me to invest at that time. When I entered the industry, there was not so fierce competition as it is now, there were not so many hedge funds, not so many computers involved, and not so many people with high IQ engaged in investment. When I chatted with Howard before, I also said that when I entered the industry to invest, the stock market hadn't risen in the past 13 years. The stock market was unattractive back then.</p><p>My students said that it was easy for you to invest back then, but it must be difficult now. You are still so stupid to write a book about investment, and now others can do it too. I don't think it has much to do with me writing books. In short, the students said that it was more difficult for them to invest, and it was easy for me to invest at that time.</p><p>In answering this question, I talked about two aspects.</p><p>First, some people are good at investing in special circumstances. They invest in places with few people and look for opportunities in liquidation, restructuring and splitting. Many of them are limited by mobility. Warren Buffett made a lot of money investing in this area in his early days, but then he went on a large scale.</p><p>Some people are particularly good at analyzing companies and looking for opportunities in places with fewer people. I asked my students, do you know what happened to these people? Then these people made a lot of money.</p><p>As a result, the scale of their funds has become larger, and they can't invest as before. Therefore, there are always new people who can come in and seize opportunities that can accommodate small funds. There are still unobtrusive small opportunities, but those who have done well in these small opportunities in the past can no longer make this money. There is a lot of room for newcomers to come in.</p><p>On the other hand, we should look at it from the general environment. As we know, efficient market theory is still popular. Efficient market theory warns people that active investment won't work. Didn't even Warren Buffett suggest buying index funds? I think this is true for most people, most people don't know how to value companies.</p><p>I oppose efficient market theory. That's what I told my students.</p><p>Most of my students are young people in their 20s. I said to them, let's go back to when you were about 10 years old. Since then, maybe you have heard a little about the stock market. Let's look at the most watched stock market in the world at that time. Yes, it was the U.S. stock market. Let's look at the most watched stocks in the U.S. stock market. Yes, they are S&P 500 constituent stocks.</p><p>Let's look at the situation of these 500 stocks since you were 10 years old. From 1996 to 2000, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2000 to 2002, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2002 to 2007, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2007 to 2009, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2009 to now, the S&P has tripled.</p><p>I'm just saying this to say,<b>Man's madness hasn't changed.</b></p><p>Actually, it's more than that. The S&P 500 is an average index containing 500 constituent stocks. There is a huge differentiation in the S&P 500 index, with some popular stocks becoming popular stocks, and some disliked stocks becoming unpopular stocks.</p><p>The volatility of individual stocks is far more violent than that of indexes. People always have likes and dislikes, and there is a world of difference between sought after and hated stocks. Behind the average of the index, the hustle and bustle never stops.</p><p>That being the case, Ben Graham is not out of fashion. Graham tells us that this is fair value, the market price is like this. Prices fluctuate around fair value.</p><p>We value companies realistically and do investment operations realistically. We can buy when the price is below value, and sometimes we can short when the price is above value.</p><p>Every time in the first class, I always make two assurances to my students.</p><p>The first guarantee, I guarantee, is that if they do a good job in valuation, they will be recognized by the market.</p><p>I just didn't tell them when it would be. Maybe two or three weeks, maybe two or three years. But I guarantee the market will approve of their valuation.</p><p>We can draw a strong inference from this.</p><p>I told the students,<b>As long as their valuation work is done well, in 90% of cases, within two or three years, the market will definitely recognize the value of a stock. If you make a portfolio with several stocks, on average, the market will recognize the valuation faster.</b></p><p>You can see how powerful my reassurances and inferences are. Do the job well and the market will pay us back.</p><p><b>People can't beat the market, not because the market is efficient or close to efficient, not because the market is not affected by emotions, on the contrary, the market is very emotional. Outperforming the market can be done.</b>Why can't people win? It may be that institutions are constrained for many reasons, but it is definitely not because the market price is effective.</p><p>If you don't believe me, let's watch the news, observe what's happening around you, and think about what I just said about the changes in the S&P index since my students were 10 years old. There is no doubt that people's madness has not changed, and investment opportunities are still there.</p><p><b>Only by loving can you invest well</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, go back to when you first graduated from Wharton, what advice would you now give to yourself then? Perhaps you have already talked about it earlier. Is there anything to add? Also, what advice would you give to yourself when you first entered the business?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>First of all, I shouldn't have read law. I went to law school for a year and dropped out. You shouldn't read law.</p><p>I think I'm lucky. Investment requires effort, and investors must figure out what is going on. Many companies can study it, always wondering whether this is logical and whether that is logical. I just love investing. Everything that happens in the world is related to investing.</p><p>I watch the news, learn about a lot of companies, and always learn something new. I have loved making investments since the beginning. I'm really lucky. I do investing because I really like investing.</p><p>Since teaching at Columbia University, I have taught more than 800 students.</p><p>When I first entered the business, the stock market hadn't gone up in the previous 13 years. At that time, many people who invested were not aiming at making a lot of money at all. At that time, people who invested had no idea that they could make a lot of money. The market hasn't gone up in 13 years. After I entered the industry, the market began to rise in a straight line. I'm so lucky. You can not take what I am saying too seriously. After all, when I entered the business, the timing was good.</p><p>I did notice such a phenomenon:<b>As long as you are good at investing, you can really make a lot of money in the stock market.</b>Being good at investing is not that great, but you can really make a lot of money. I also found a phenomenon: among my students,<b>Those who do the best investments are those who really love investing.</b></p><p>Let me give you a piece of advice:<b>Don't invest with the purpose of making money.</b></p><p>You all have high IQs, or you wouldn't be sitting here.<b>There are many meaningful things in the world that are worth doing. You must invest because you like it, not for anything else. Enjoy making investments.</b>I ask my students to promise to invest because they like it. Everyone, I don't think that picking stocks well can make much contribution to society.</p><p>Some people say that because of good investors, the market has sufficient liquidity and the reasonable allocation of capital can be realized. Personally, I think that without us investors, the market will still turn. Where have we achieved a reasonable allocation of capital? Isn't the market still going crazy all the time? Of course, in the long run, we have played a role. This is one of our contributions. I still think it doesn't matter if we lack.</p><p>I told my students,<b>Investing in stocks doesn't create much social value.</b>I ask the students to guarantee that if their investment is done well... Let's put it this way, I personally don't think investment has much social value, but I still teach students to make investments. Isn't it meaningless for me to teach investment?</p><p>So, I asked my students to promise to do something good if they invested well. When their investment is successful, they should do something that they think is meaningful.</p><p>On the other hand, if you really like investing, there is nothing wrong with investing, as long as you really like it, what do you think? Don't do it for money. Everyone here, you can succeed in everything you do. If you choose to invest, you must be because you like it.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, that's so well said.</p><p>Looking back on your investing career, what successful investment has remembered you the most? How did you find this investment? What's your logic?</p><p><b>An outstanding investor must have courage</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>There is an investment that I am very impressed with. It is also because of this investment that I created the Value Investors Club website.</p><p>At that time, we were managing our own funds. We managed external funds, managed them for 10 years, and then returned all external funds. Then, in 2009, I began to accept external funding again. When we discovered this investment opportunity, we didn't manage external funds, just looking for investment opportunities for ourselves.</p><p>We found an opportunity. We have never encountered such a good investment opportunity. The price of this company is only half the cash value, and the business of this company is still good business.</p><p>When determining the proportion of positions, I generally don't consider how much I can earn.<b>When I arranged the largest position, I didn't choose what I thought was the most profitable, but what I thought was impossible to lose money.</b>I can buy a lot of such investment opportunities, and the risk is low. If you are lucky, it may rise sharply. Such an opportunity is perfect.</p><p>The opportunity I'm talking about has a market value of only half the cash value, and the company's business is very good. The capital structure of this company is very complicated. Most people have never seen this kind of capital structure before, so they can't figure it out. If you can figure it out, you will definitely catch it at first glance. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. Of course we bought in a lot.</p><p>We felt smart and felt that we were the only ones who spotted this opportunity.</p><p>One day, my partner discovered that someone on Yahoo's message board actually analyzed the complex capital structure of this company very clearly. I really didn't expect that the gentleman who posted the post worked in the supermarket. He's really smart. Our eyes shine. There are really smart people in the outside world. If only we could bring these people together.</p><p>It was 1999, and everyone was keen on the Internet. I think the internet is amazing. Surfing the Internet is like meeting, and you can communicate with people all over the country and the world. We can start a community. I really want to set up such an investment community.</p><p>The gentleman who worked in the supermarket became our first member. Our aim is to attract smart investors to share investment opportunities. Joining is free, but a valuable investment opportunity must be shared. We got an inspiration from this incident: there are masters among the people.</p><p>In short, this opportunity is really good. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. It is undervalued because its capital structure is relatively complex.</p><p>There is another investment that I am deeply impressed with. This investment is not the worst I have ever made, but it can be said to be the worst.</p><p>One of my partners, Rob Golson, started working with me in 1989. He loves to be joking. He said that if we had worked for others in the past 15 years, we would have been fired eight times. When investing, it is inevitable to make mistakes. We have to accept this fact.</p><p>Here's how this investment goes. We bought a split company, and its Comdex company is the best computer show. Before the split, we can buy at $3 per share by operation. The parent company planned to issue new shares for $6, and there was no official announcement at that time. However, we can lock in the split company at $3 by buying the parent company and doing a short operation accordingly.</p><p>Speaking of which, this investment is fine.</p><p>However, then we fell in love with the business of this company. Comdex operates the show business in Las Vegas. There are plenty of venues in Las Vegas, and it can be rented casually. It rented the venue for $2 per square foot, and sublet it out for $62 per square foot. Running out of space at the show, it can be rented for another $2 and then rented out for another $62. We particularly like the business model of this company.</p><p>Its share price started at $3, and later issued some additional issues at $6. Later, the stock price rose to $12. At $3, we invested heavily because we were confident that we could sell at $6. Getting to $6, we didn't sell it. We fell in love with this company. It later went up to $12.</p><p>Speaking of which, it's still fine.</p><p>Then, we were out of luck. On September 9, 2001, this company acquired another show company and borrowed a lot of money. After 9/11, no one dared to go to the show, the company's business plummeted, and everyone understood the dangers of financial leverage. As we all know, it's not good to borrow more money. Borrowing money is a risk. I only have $1, but I borrow $9. The risk is too high.</p><p>In this investment, I understood what operating leverage is. A company, putting in $2, can make $62. When the sales revenue declines, the revenue is $62 less, and the profit of $60 is gone. The net profit suddenly dropped. This is operating leverage. I learned my lesson and understood what operating leverage is.</p><p>Finally, we cleared at just over $1.</p><p>Things are unpredictable. In this investment, I have a deeper understanding of concentrated investment and operating leverage.</p><p>I've learned a lot, so to speak,<b>I've been learning and I've been making mistakes. I try to avoid repeating mistakes. Unfortunately, the same mistakes often appear again.</b>The mistake is still the original mistake, changing the soup without changing the medicine, and accidentally repeating it.</p><p><b>My advice to you is: Don't be afraid to make mistakes, everyone will inevitably make mistakes.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>This point Joel just said is important. I hope everyone here can understand this truth. In April, I wrote a memo \"Dare to be Great\".</p><p><b>A brilliant investor must have guts. Everyone wants to achieve something. Always just like everyone else, never getting ahead.</b>What others think, so do you. What others do, so do you. That must be the same as someone else. How can you achieve anything by following the crowd? To be successful, you must be different from others. Have the courage to make mistakes. How can there be people who never make mistakes?</p><p>Even the best baseball players can only hit 40% of their hits in a game. Some investors have a higher success rate than 40%, but no one does not make mistakes. Joel said that if he worked for someone else, he might have been fired eight times.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I'm a soft-hearted boss and wouldn't fire myself.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today, I had lunch with a Berkshire Hathaway employee. We talked about why Warren succeeded. I mentioned a bit because he's not afraid of getting fired. Unfortunately, few people have this advantage. Most people are worried about being fired by their bosses.</p><p>We don't have a boss, but we are also worried about being fired by customers. Can we still not be afraid to take risks and stick to our ideas? Nothing is foolproof. Sometimes, can we keep going knowing we might make a mistake? I think, we should persist and not be afraid of making mistakes.</p><p>Joel, one last question. You once achieved brilliant results. Why did you decide to return the funds to your customers later?</p><p><b>There are only three ways to earn 50% a year</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>This question is easier to answer.</p><p>In 1985, I set up my own company. Ten years later, in 1994, we returned all external funds. Our average annual rate of return, before expenses, was 50% during this decade. Ten years later, we returned the funds.</p><p><b>There are only three ways to make 50% a year. The first is to keep it small.</b>Five years after opening, we returned half of our external funds. Ten years later, we returned all external funds.<b>The second is concentrated investment.</b>In that decade, six to eight stocks made up 80% of our portfolio. Our investments are very concentrated.<b>The third is that a little good luck is needed.</b>Our investment is particularly concentrated, and we definitely need a little good luck.</p><p>No matter how powerful or high your level is, if you concentrate on investing in 6 to 8 stocks, you will always encounter a problem. Every two or three years, there's always one or two stocks that don't perform as well as expected, giving us a 20% to 30% decline. Every two or three years, we will encounter such a situation, without exception.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because the market at that time doesn't like the stocks we are bullish on. In this case, we don't care. The stock is still in our hands, but it is cheaper. We understand the stock in our hands, but it's cheaper, and it doesn't matter.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because we make mistakes. I can accept mistakes calmly.</p><p>I know the stocks I have, sometimes I am wrong, and sometimes the stocks are cheaper.</p><p>I can accept this reality. I also know that it is normal to fall by 20% to 30%, and this is the case for stock market investment.</p><p>The problem is, it makes me feel bad to manage money for others.</p><p>I feel like a mature person. I know the stocks in my hand and what I am doing. I just always think that this is someone else's money... My investors are actually very good, and they are all very good people.</p><p>The problem is with myself. Whenever I encounter a big drop, I always feel bad involuntarily. I think everyone can understand that I am a competitive person. I hope to do a good job in my investment, but it's very uncomfortable to lose other people's money.</p><p>Later, we grew large, and even if the funds were returned to investors, our company could still operate, and I could still continue to invest. I decided to return the external funds. I have two choices, one is to change myself and the other is to change the environment.<b>It is easier to change the environment than to change yourself.</b>So, that's what I did.</p><p>Now we do a long and short portfolio, with hundreds of stocks on both sides of the long and short. Our worst performance was 20 to 30 basis points behind. In this way, I overcame my worry of managing money for others, and began to accept external funds again.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Thank you. After listening to Joel's words, I believe you have understood how outstanding investors think. Very logical, intelligent, and deeper than most. Answer speaks for itself.</p><p>The same thing as others see, how can it be better than others? Joel also talked about insights into human nature, investors' views, and how to treat mistakes. Plus, we get to see that Joel is a real person.</p><p>Thanks to Joel, we had a lot today.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"lsy1646967994584","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Howard talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHoward talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">投资有道</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-11-26 11:38</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>Howard Marks co-founded Oaktree Capital in 1995. His \"investment memo\" became a must-read document on Wall Street because he predicted the bursting of the technology stock bubble, and Buffett also praised it.</p><p>As a well-known investment guru, Howard Marks once had a very classic conversation with another guru-Joel Greenblatt (Joel Greenblatt).</p><p>Joel is a visiting professor at Columbia University Business School, founder and partnership manager of GothamCapital.</p><p>In the 20 years from its establishment in 1985 to 2005, Gotan Capital's assets increased from US $7 million to US $830 million, with an average annual return of 40%, which can be called an investment miracle on Wall Street.</p><p>Even after the financial crisis in 2008, the asset management scale of Gotan Capital remained at the level of 900 million US dollars, and the annualized rate of return was still as high as 30%.</p><p>Observing the wonderful dialogue between these two people about value investing, we can see how outstanding investors think, how to outperform others, their insights into human nature, their views on investors, how to treat mistakes, etc., which is very logical and wise.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today we were lucky enough to have Joel talk to us about investing. I met Joel 25 years ago through a friend's introduction.</p><p>In the late 1970s, Wharton had many successful investors. If we have time, we can talk about why this is so.</p><p>Joel is definitely one of the standouts. Joel teaches value investing at Columbia University. Later, he asked me to give a lecture to his students once a year, and I readily agreed. Today, I invited him to Walton. Joel is a real investor. Those of you who are interested in becoming investors, please listen carefully to Joel.</p><p>I wrote a few questions in advance myself and asked Joel to take a look at them. Later, my son Andrew sent me the questions he had to ask. Andrew also graduated from Wharton. I think he asked better questions.</p><p>I suggest we ask Joel to answer Andrew's question first. Joel hadn't read these questions beforehand, so we asked him to answer them on the spot. I think Andrew's question is well written. Joel, if you don't mind, I'll just read it.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Yeah, well.</p><p><b>Look for opportunities in places with few people</b><b>HOWARD:</b>You wrote a book about investing under special circumstances, and you talked about how to profit from splits, restructuring, bankruptcies, mergers and acquisitions, etc.</p><p>Before you, no one has talked about special circumstances investing in such detail. How did you come up with this investment style? You know what you want to focus on, where you can and can't make money. How do you know that?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Excellent question, indeed.</p><p>My first job was at a hedge fund, a firm that did risk arbitrage. The risk arbitrage it does is also called M&A arbitrage, which is to buy a company after seeing the announcement of M&A, hoping to make a profit through the completion of M&A.</p><p>The risks and benefits of this operation are basically as follows: if the merger is successful, you will earn 1 yuan. If the merger fails, you will lose 10 or 15 yuan. Personally, I don't think such a risk-benefit ratio is appropriate.</p><p>So, I began to study other operating methods. Later, I found out that there are some stocks worth watching in M&A. I don't do the kind of M&A arbitrage mentioned earlier. I start to pay attention to the special events of the company, such as restructuring, splitting, etc.<b>What I am looking for is an opportunity to earn 1 yuan, but only lose 10 cents. It can be said that I am looking for opportunities in places with few people.</b></p><p>When I was studying at Wharton, Wharton belonged to the school of efficient market theory, and the class talked about efficient market theory. This theory doesn't resonate with me. During my junior year, I came across an article about Benjamin Graham. After reading this article, I suddenly enlightened and felt that it made too much sense.</p><p>I read everything Graham wrote. My concept of investing has changed completely. I know what to do and what not to do about investing.</p><p><b>In fact, it is to find out how much something is worth, and then buy it at a very low price, leaving enough margin of safety.</b>I put this philosophy into practice in special situation investing.</p><p>I wrote a book, \"You Can Too Become a Stock Market Genius\". The title of this book is really not good. What the title wants to express is that even fools can become a stock market genius. At the time of writing this book, the Motley Fool website was particularly hot. The editor suggested I use the word \"fool\" in the title of the book.</p><p>My dad gave me a suggestion called \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius,\" and then added a subtitle, \"You Can Do It Even If You Are Not Smart.\" I laughed when I heard it. The editor asked me to finalize the title within a day. I used the title my dad gave me. The title of the book is bad.</p><p>I told a story at the beginning of the book about my father-in-law and mother-in-law. They live in Connecticut for several months of the year. They mainly shop for antiques in Connecticut, and often attend various auctions to look for cheap antiques.</p><p>How do they find treasures at auctions? For example, they saw a painting at an auction. At other auctions, they have seen paintings of similar works, similar sizes and similar themes, but the transaction price is two or three times that of the current painting. They'll buy it. They don't have to study whether this painting can be the next Picasso. It's harder to find the next Picasso.</p><p>I said at the beginning of the book that special circumstances investing is similar.<b>We don't have to go to great lengths to find the next Picasso. We'd better look for opportunities in places where there are few people and where others don't pay attention to them.</b></p><p>It may be that the market value is small, it may be that the situation is special, or it is very complicated, and most people will not study it in depth. Sometimes it takes more than 400 pages of announcements to read, and sometimes the stocks that are split out are something people don't want. The business that was split was abandoned by the company, and the people who bought the original stock of the company didn't want it. To invest in stocks whose price is lower than fair value, I personally think it is relatively simple to practice this concept in special circumstances.</p><p>At the end of the first chapter of the book \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius, Too\", I told a story about repairing plumbing. Your plumbing is broken, call in a plumber to fix it. The plumber knocked on the pipe and then said it would cost 200 yuan to repair the pipe. You said, \"Want 200 yuan? Just knock down the pipe for 200 yuan?\" The plumber said, \"It only costs 5 yuan to knock down the pipe, and it costs 195 yuan to knock down.\"</p><p>This story can illustrate my understanding of investing in special circumstances, and I have to find what I find easier to do.<b>I don't want to go to my best. I want to be lazy. As Buffett said, pick a 30-centimeter-high hurdle. Since you can find a 30-cm-high hurdle, why rush to a 3-meter-high hurdle?</b></p><p>In a word,<b>As long as I find the right place, I don't have to be too smart to do well.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, in a memo I wrote this year, I also told a story.</p><p>There's a guy who wants to be a poker master. He studied how to get good cards, how to make his cards outperform his opponents, and how to see through their opponents' bluffs. His uncle said to him. No matter how much you study, you can't become a poker master. Just find something easier to play?</p><p>Joel, you said you found what you thought was a relatively simple way to invest. We wanted to go together.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Exactly that. I also told a story in the book, which is the same truth.</p><p>Here's the story. I lost a bet with my friend. The loser had to invite the winner to dinner at the most famous restaurant. At that time, the most famous restaurant in new york was Lutece Restaurant. Lutece Restaurant is managed by world-class chef Andre Soltner.</p><p>I called first to make a reservation, but the restaurant told me that it was not possible to make a reservation. I said whatever day, whenever. Still won't order it for me. I don't understand what's going on at first. Later, I learned that I had to make a reservation 30 days in advance. Only available 30 days in advance.</p><p>I kept calling and finally got a reservation. I came to this restaurant with my friends. When ordering, I didn't pay attention to who was standing next to me. I pointed to an appetizer on the menu and casually asked, \"Is this good?\" Chef Andre Soltner looked at me and said, \"It tastes terrible.\"</p><p>In the face of a world-class chef, I actually asked him if the food he cooked was delicious. That's what he meant, I wondered. Every dish on the menu was delicious. This is the best restaurant in the world.</p><p>That's the truth,<b>Pick up at the best place and everything here is good. I just need to pick better from the good things</b>。</p><p><b>Margin of safety can give way to growth</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, you just talked about buying at well below value, which is the margin of safety. Do you think this is at the heart of value investing? Do you think it is necessary to talk about it, or is it enough to remember this? One more question, you just told the story of your father-in-law and mother-in-law, and you think they are right not to look for the next Picasso. Do you think investing in growth stocks is looking for the next Picasso?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>It has this meaning.<b>My definition of value investing is to figure out how much it is worth and then buy at a very low price, which has nothing to do with low price-to-book ratio or low price-to-sales ratio.</b></p><p>Russell, Morningstar and other institutions, as well as many others, think that value investors invest based on the price-to-book ratio and price-to-sales ratio. According to this classification standard, I am not a value investor or a growth investor. Others can't tell what kind of class we are.</p><p>As Buffett said, value and growth are the same thing after all. The long-term growth of a company is part of its investment value. The line between value and growth is not as sharp as institutions such as Russell or Morningstar draw. Perhaps value stocks have lower growth potential, while growth stocks have higher growth potential. Divisions are artificial divisions. I'm just looking for a cheap and good company.</p><p>Ben Graham said, research understands how much it is worth, buy it at a very low price, leave a sufficient margin of safety between the two, and the difference between price and value should be large enough. Warren Buffett was Graham's most distinguished disciple. Buffett improved his teacher's philosophy slightly and later became the richest man in the world. Buffett put it very simply, if you can buy a good company at a cheap price, it will be even better.<b>The goodness of a good company includes its long-term growth.</b></p><p>I gradually gained this understanding. It took me a long time to figure it out in my first 10 years of investing. I am increasingly inclined to invest according to Warren Buffett's method. He is looking for good and cheap companies. Growth is a characteristic of good companies.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>We know that Buffett was not fascinated by good companies in the early days. He started by picking up cigarette butts. At the beginning, he focused not on the texture, but on whether it was cheap enough. His style later shifted.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>right. When I was a graduate student at Wharton, I studied the strategy of buying cheap stocks with several classmates, and wrote a graduation thesis, which was later published in the journal Portfolio Management.</p><p>We looked at NetNet, buying stocks below liquidation value. Our research shows that as long as you buy it cheap enough, you can make a lot of money. Warren Buffett did just that early on.</p><p>But why do we gradually tend to be qualitative?</p><p>For example, we found a stock that is worth 10 yuan and the price is 6 yuan. It's cheap. The problem is, we don't have a controlling stake in this company, and its business is not a good business yet. Over time, our margin of safety may become smaller and smaller. Because there is no way to control the company's assets, the original 10 yuan may become 8 yuan.</p><p>Personally, I think that looking for companies where 10 yuan may become 12 yuan will increase our margin of safety. In what I think<b>With the potential for growth, I can make some concessions on the margin of safety.</b></p><p>Having said that, it is feasible to buy cheap stocks, and you can make money simply by being cheap. I have no objection to this investment method, except that it can't accommodate large funds. At present, the scale of funds managed by Buffett is about $100 billion. He wants to invest 5 billion to buy a stock, and then sell it at a higher price. It is difficult to find such a large counterparty. The scale is too big.</p><p>About 2000, he said \"Give me $1 million and I can make 50% a year\". With a scale of $1 million, there are many opportunities to grasp.<b>The larger the scale of funds, the fewer investment opportunities. Small funds are not restricted in investment, and all companies can choose and buy whatever they want.</b></p><p>Buffett can only choose from 300 large-cap stocks now, and small-scale investments are meaningless to his capital. Everyone here can choose as much as you like in special circumstances investment.</p><p><b>Outperforming the market can be done</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>A lot of my students have asked me a question. For five or six years, people have asked almost every year. My students told me that when you were young, it was easier to invest. They didn't directly say I was old, just when I was young.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Very implicit.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I admit that I am old.</p><p>In short, the students felt that it was better for me to invest at that time. When I entered the industry, there was not so fierce competition as it is now, there were not so many hedge funds, not so many computers involved, and not so many people with high IQ engaged in investment. When I chatted with Howard before, I also said that when I entered the industry to invest, the stock market hadn't risen in the past 13 years. The stock market was unattractive back then.</p><p>My students said that it was easy for you to invest back then, but it must be difficult now. You are still so stupid to write a book about investment, and now others can do it too. I don't think it has much to do with me writing books. In short, the students said that it was more difficult for them to invest, and it was easy for me to invest at that time.</p><p>In answering this question, I talked about two aspects.</p><p>First, some people are good at investing in special circumstances. They invest in places with few people and look for opportunities in liquidation, restructuring and splitting. Many of them are limited by mobility. Warren Buffett made a lot of money investing in this area in his early days, but then he went on a large scale.</p><p>Some people are particularly good at analyzing companies and looking for opportunities in places with fewer people. I asked my students, do you know what happened to these people? Then these people made a lot of money.</p><p>As a result, the scale of their funds has become larger, and they can't invest as before. Therefore, there are always new people who can come in and seize opportunities that can accommodate small funds. There are still unobtrusive small opportunities, but those who have done well in these small opportunities in the past can no longer make this money. There is a lot of room for newcomers to come in.</p><p>On the other hand, we should look at it from the general environment. As we know, efficient market theory is still popular. Efficient market theory warns people that active investment won't work. Didn't even Warren Buffett suggest buying index funds? I think this is true for most people, most people don't know how to value companies.</p><p>I oppose efficient market theory. That's what I told my students.</p><p>Most of my students are young people in their 20s. I said to them, let's go back to when you were about 10 years old. Since then, maybe you have heard a little about the stock market. Let's look at the most watched stock market in the world at that time. Yes, it was the U.S. stock market. Let's look at the most watched stocks in the U.S. stock market. Yes, they are S&P 500 constituent stocks.</p><p>Let's look at the situation of these 500 stocks since you were 10 years old. From 1996 to 2000, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2000 to 2002, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2002 to 2007, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2007 to 2009, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2009 to now, the S&P has tripled.</p><p>I'm just saying this to say,<b>Man's madness hasn't changed.</b></p><p>Actually, it's more than that. The S&P 500 is an average index containing 500 constituent stocks. There is a huge differentiation in the S&P 500 index, with some popular stocks becoming popular stocks, and some disliked stocks becoming unpopular stocks.</p><p>The volatility of individual stocks is far more violent than that of indexes. People always have likes and dislikes, and there is a world of difference between sought after and hated stocks. Behind the average of the index, the hustle and bustle never stops.</p><p>That being the case, Ben Graham is not out of fashion. Graham tells us that this is fair value, the market price is like this. Prices fluctuate around fair value.</p><p>We value companies realistically and do investment operations realistically. We can buy when the price is below value, and sometimes we can short when the price is above value.</p><p>Every time in the first class, I always make two assurances to my students.</p><p>The first guarantee, I guarantee, is that if they do a good job in valuation, they will be recognized by the market.</p><p>I just didn't tell them when it would be. Maybe two or three weeks, maybe two or three years. But I guarantee the market will approve of their valuation.</p><p>We can draw a strong inference from this.</p><p>I told the students,<b>As long as their valuation work is done well, in 90% of cases, within two or three years, the market will definitely recognize the value of a stock. If you make a portfolio with several stocks, on average, the market will recognize the valuation faster.</b></p><p>You can see how powerful my reassurances and inferences are. Do the job well and the market will pay us back.</p><p><b>People can't beat the market, not because the market is efficient or close to efficient, not because the market is not affected by emotions, on the contrary, the market is very emotional. Outperforming the market can be done.</b>Why can't people win? It may be that institutions are constrained for many reasons, but it is definitely not because the market price is effective.</p><p>If you don't believe me, let's watch the news, observe what's happening around you, and think about what I just said about the changes in the S&P index since my students were 10 years old. There is no doubt that people's madness has not changed, and investment opportunities are still there.</p><p><b>Only by loving can you invest well</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, go back to when you first graduated from Wharton, what advice would you now give to yourself then? Perhaps you have already talked about it earlier. Is there anything to add? Also, what advice would you give to yourself when you first entered the business?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>First of all, I shouldn't have read law. I went to law school for a year and dropped out. You shouldn't read law.</p><p>I think I'm lucky. Investment requires effort, and investors must figure out what is going on. Many companies can study it, always wondering whether this is logical and whether that is logical. I just love investing. Everything that happens in the world is related to investing.</p><p>I watch the news, learn about a lot of companies, and always learn something new. I have loved making investments since the beginning. I'm really lucky. I do investing because I really like investing.</p><p>Since teaching at Columbia University, I have taught more than 800 students.</p><p>When I first entered the business, the stock market hadn't gone up in the previous 13 years. At that time, many people who invested were not aiming at making a lot of money at all. At that time, people who invested had no idea that they could make a lot of money. The market hasn't gone up in 13 years. After I entered the industry, the market began to rise in a straight line. I'm so lucky. You can not take what I am saying too seriously. After all, when I entered the business, the timing was good.</p><p>I did notice such a phenomenon:<b>As long as you are good at investing, you can really make a lot of money in the stock market.</b>Being good at investing is not that great, but you can really make a lot of money. I also found a phenomenon: among my students,<b>Those who do the best investments are those who really love investing.</b></p><p>Let me give you a piece of advice:<b>Don't invest with the purpose of making money.</b></p><p>You all have high IQs, or you wouldn't be sitting here.<b>There are many meaningful things in the world that are worth doing. You must invest because you like it, not for anything else. Enjoy making investments.</b>I ask my students to promise to invest because they like it. Everyone, I don't think that picking stocks well can make much contribution to society.</p><p>Some people say that because of good investors, the market has sufficient liquidity and the reasonable allocation of capital can be realized. Personally, I think that without us investors, the market will still turn. Where have we achieved a reasonable allocation of capital? Isn't the market still going crazy all the time? Of course, in the long run, we have played a role. This is one of our contributions. I still think it doesn't matter if we lack.</p><p>I told my students,<b>Investing in stocks doesn't create much social value.</b>I ask the students to guarantee that if their investment is done well... Let's put it this way, I personally don't think investment has much social value, but I still teach students to make investments. Isn't it meaningless for me to teach investment?</p><p>So, I asked my students to promise to do something good if they invested well. When their investment is successful, they should do something that they think is meaningful.</p><p>On the other hand, if you really like investing, there is nothing wrong with investing, as long as you really like it, what do you think? Don't do it for money. Everyone here, you can succeed in everything you do. If you choose to invest, you must be because you like it.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, that's so well said.</p><p>Looking back on your investing career, what successful investment has remembered you the most? How did you find this investment? What's your logic?</p><p><b>An outstanding investor must have courage</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>There is an investment that I am very impressed with. It is also because of this investment that I created the Value Investors Club website.</p><p>At that time, we were managing our own funds. We managed external funds, managed them for 10 years, and then returned all external funds. Then, in 2009, I began to accept external funding again. When we discovered this investment opportunity, we didn't manage external funds, just looking for investment opportunities for ourselves.</p><p>We found an opportunity. We have never encountered such a good investment opportunity. The price of this company is only half the cash value, and the business of this company is still good business.</p><p>When determining the proportion of positions, I generally don't consider how much I can earn.<b>When I arranged the largest position, I didn't choose what I thought was the most profitable, but what I thought was impossible to lose money.</b>I can buy a lot of such investment opportunities, and the risk is low. If you are lucky, it may rise sharply. Such an opportunity is perfect.</p><p>The opportunity I'm talking about has a market value of only half the cash value, and the company's business is very good. The capital structure of this company is very complicated. Most people have never seen this kind of capital structure before, so they can't figure it out. If you can figure it out, you will definitely catch it at first glance. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. Of course we bought in a lot.</p><p>We felt smart and felt that we were the only ones who spotted this opportunity.</p><p>One day, my partner discovered that someone on Yahoo's message board actually analyzed the complex capital structure of this company very clearly. I really didn't expect that the gentleman who posted the post worked in the supermarket. He's really smart. Our eyes shine. There are really smart people in the outside world. If only we could bring these people together.</p><p>It was 1999, and everyone was keen on the Internet. I think the internet is amazing. Surfing the Internet is like meeting, and you can communicate with people all over the country and the world. We can start a community. I really want to set up such an investment community.</p><p>The gentleman who worked in the supermarket became our first member. Our aim is to attract smart investors to share investment opportunities. Joining is free, but a valuable investment opportunity must be shared. We got an inspiration from this incident: there are masters among the people.</p><p>In short, this opportunity is really good. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. It is undervalued because its capital structure is relatively complex.</p><p>There is another investment that I am deeply impressed with. This investment is not the worst I have ever made, but it can be said to be the worst.</p><p>One of my partners, Rob Golson, started working with me in 1989. He loves to be joking. He said that if we had worked for others in the past 15 years, we would have been fired eight times. When investing, it is inevitable to make mistakes. We have to accept this fact.</p><p>Here's how this investment goes. We bought a split company, and its Comdex company is the best computer show. Before the split, we can buy at $3 per share by operation. The parent company planned to issue new shares for $6, and there was no official announcement at that time. However, we can lock in the split company at $3 by buying the parent company and doing a short operation accordingly.</p><p>Speaking of which, this investment is fine.</p><p>However, then we fell in love with the business of this company. Comdex operates the show business in Las Vegas. There are plenty of venues in Las Vegas, and it can be rented casually. It rented the venue for $2 per square foot, and sublet it out for $62 per square foot. Running out of space at the show, it can be rented for another $2 and then rented out for another $62. We particularly like the business model of this company.</p><p>Its share price started at $3, and later issued some additional issues at $6. Later, the stock price rose to $12. At $3, we invested heavily because we were confident that we could sell at $6. Getting to $6, we didn't sell it. We fell in love with this company. It later went up to $12.</p><p>Speaking of which, it's still fine.</p><p>Then, we were out of luck. On September 9, 2001, this company acquired another show company and borrowed a lot of money. After 9/11, no one dared to go to the show, the company's business plummeted, and everyone understood the dangers of financial leverage. As we all know, it's not good to borrow more money. Borrowing money is a risk. I only have $1, but I borrow $9. The risk is too high.</p><p>In this investment, I understood what operating leverage is. A company, putting in $2, can make $62. When the sales revenue declines, the revenue is $62 less, and the profit of $60 is gone. The net profit suddenly dropped. This is operating leverage. I learned my lesson and understood what operating leverage is.</p><p>Finally, we cleared at just over $1.</p><p>Things are unpredictable. In this investment, I have a deeper understanding of concentrated investment and operating leverage.</p><p>I've learned a lot, so to speak,<b>I've been learning and I've been making mistakes. I try to avoid repeating mistakes. Unfortunately, the same mistakes often appear again.</b>The mistake is still the original mistake, changing the soup without changing the medicine, and accidentally repeating it.</p><p><b>My advice to you is: Don't be afraid to make mistakes, everyone will inevitably make mistakes.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>This point Joel just said is important. I hope everyone here can understand this truth. In April, I wrote a memo \"Dare to be Great\".</p><p><b>A brilliant investor must have guts. Everyone wants to achieve something. Always just like everyone else, never getting ahead.</b>What others think, so do you. What others do, so do you. That must be the same as someone else. How can you achieve anything by following the crowd? To be successful, you must be different from others. Have the courage to make mistakes. How can there be people who never make mistakes?</p><p>Even the best baseball players can only hit 40% of their hits in a game. Some investors have a higher success rate than 40%, but no one does not make mistakes. Joel said that if he worked for someone else, he might have been fired eight times.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I'm a soft-hearted boss and wouldn't fire myself.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today, I had lunch with a Berkshire Hathaway employee. We talked about why Warren succeeded. I mentioned a bit because he's not afraid of getting fired. Unfortunately, few people have this advantage. Most people are worried about being fired by their bosses.</p><p>We don't have a boss, but we are also worried about being fired by customers. Can we still not be afraid to take risks and stick to our ideas? Nothing is foolproof. Sometimes, can we keep going knowing we might make a mistake? I think, we should persist and not be afraid of making mistakes.</p><p>Joel, one last question. You once achieved brilliant results. Why did you decide to return the funds to your customers later?</p><p><b>There are only three ways to earn 50% a year</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>This question is easier to answer.</p><p>In 1985, I set up my own company. Ten years later, in 1994, we returned all external funds. Our average annual rate of return, before expenses, was 50% during this decade. Ten years later, we returned the funds.</p><p><b>There are only three ways to make 50% a year. The first is to keep it small.</b>Five years after opening, we returned half of our external funds. Ten years later, we returned all external funds.<b>The second is concentrated investment.</b>In that decade, six to eight stocks made up 80% of our portfolio. Our investments are very concentrated.<b>The third is that a little good luck is needed.</b>Our investment is particularly concentrated, and we definitely need a little good luck.</p><p>No matter how powerful or high your level is, if you concentrate on investing in 6 to 8 stocks, you will always encounter a problem. Every two or three years, there's always one or two stocks that don't perform as well as expected, giving us a 20% to 30% decline. Every two or three years, we will encounter such a situation, without exception.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because the market at that time doesn't like the stocks we are bullish on. In this case, we don't care. The stock is still in our hands, but it is cheaper. We understand the stock in our hands, but it's cheaper, and it doesn't matter.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because we make mistakes. I can accept mistakes calmly.</p><p>I know the stocks I have, sometimes I am wrong, and sometimes the stocks are cheaper.</p><p>I can accept this reality. I also know that it is normal to fall by 20% to 30%, and this is the case for stock market investment.</p><p>The problem is, it makes me feel bad to manage money for others.</p><p>I feel like a mature person. I know the stocks in my hand and what I am doing. I just always think that this is someone else's money... My investors are actually very good, and they are all very good people.</p><p>The problem is with myself. Whenever I encounter a big drop, I always feel bad involuntarily. I think everyone can understand that I am a competitive person. I hope to do a good job in my investment, but it's very uncomfortable to lose other people's money.</p><p>Later, we grew large, and even if the funds were returned to investors, our company could still operate, and I could still continue to invest. I decided to return the external funds. I have two choices, one is to change myself and the other is to change the environment.<b>It is easier to change the environment than to change yourself.</b>So, that's what I did.</p><p>Now we do a long and short portfolio, with hundreds of stocks on both sides of the long and short. Our worst performance was 20 to 30 basis points behind. In this way, I overcame my worry of managing money for others, and began to accept external funds again.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Thank you. After listening to Joel's words, I believe you have understood how outstanding investors think. Very logical, intelligent, and deeper than most. Answer speaks for itself.</p><p>The same thing as others see, how can it be better than others? Joel also talked about insights into human nature, investors' views, and how to treat mistakes. Plus, we get to see that Joel is a real person.</p><p>Thanks to Joel, we had a lot today.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/sRsLs6mhDVRDTpa64oE3jg\">投资有道</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bc9f709d20edb2be754c018c636412d3","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/sRsLs6mhDVRDTpa64oE3jg","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1109716414","content_text":"霍华德·马克斯1995年与人联合创建橡树资本（Oaktree Capital），他撰写的“投资备忘录”因预言科技股泡沫破裂而成为华尔街必读文件，巴菲特也推崇不已。作为知名投资大师，霍华德·马克斯曾和另一位大师——乔尔·格林布拉特（Joel Greenblatt）有过一场非常经典的对话，乔尔是哥伦比亚大学商学院客座教授，戈坦资本（GothamCapital）创始人和合伙经理人。戈坦资本在1985年成立至2005年的二十年间，资产规模从700万美元增到8.3亿美元，年均回报率高达40%，堪称华尔街的一项投资奇迹。即便是经历了2008年的金融危机，戈坦资本的资产管理规模依然维持在9亿美元的水平，年化收益率仍高达30%。观察这两人关于价值投资的精彩对话，可以看到杰出投资者是如何思考的，怎么胜过别人，对人性的洞察，对投资者的看法，如何看待错误等等，非常有逻辑与智慧。霍华德：今天我们有幸请到了乔尔和我们聊投资。25年前，通过朋友介绍，我认识了乔尔。70年代末，沃顿商学院出了不少成功的投资者。有时间的话，我们可以聊聊为何如此。乔尔绝对是其中出类拔萃的一位。乔尔在哥伦比亚大学教授价值投资，后来他请我每年去给他的学生讲一次课，我欣然应允。今天，我把他请到了沃顿。乔尔是一位真正的投资者。有志成为投资者的各位，请认真听乔尔讲。我自己提前写好了几个问题，还请乔尔看了一下。后来，我儿子安德鲁把他要问的问题发给了我。安德鲁也是沃顿毕业的。我觉得他问的问题更好。我建议我们先请乔尔回答安德鲁的问题。这些问题乔尔事先没看过，我们请他现场回答。我觉得安德鲁的问题写得不错。乔尔，不介意的话，我就照着读了。格林布拉特：好。在人少的地方找机会霍华德：你写了一本关于特殊情况投资的书，分门别类的讲了如何从拆分、重组、破产、并购等事件中获利。在你之前，没人这么详细地讲过特殊情况投资。请问你是怎么研究出来这种投资风格的？你知道自己要关注什么，哪能赚钱，哪不能赚钱。你怎么知道的呢？格林布拉特：确实，很好的问题。我的第一份工作是在一家对冲基金，是一家做风险套利的公司。它做的风险套利也叫并购套利，就是在看到并购公告后买入一家公司，希望通过并购完成来获利。这么操作的风险和收益基本是这样的：并购成功，赚1块钱。并购失败，亏10或15块钱。我个人认为这样的风险收益比不合适。于是，我开始研究其他操作方法。后来，我发现并购中会出现一些值得关注的股票。我不做前面说的那种并购套利，我开始关注公司的特殊事件，例如，重组、拆分等等，我要找的是赚可以赚1块钱，但亏就只亏1毛钱的机会。可以说，我是在人少的地方找机会。当年，我在沃顿读书的时候，沃顿属于有效市场理论学派，课堂上讲的是有效市场理论。这套理论无法让我产生共鸣。大三那年，我偶然读到了一篇关于本杰明·格雷厄姆的文章。读了这篇文章，我豁然开朗，觉得太有道理了。我把格雷厄姆写的所有东西都找来读了。我的投资观念发生了彻底的改变。我知道投资该怎么做，不该怎么做了。其实就是要弄清楚一个东西值多少钱，然后花很低的价格买下来，留足安全边际。我把这个理念在特殊情况投资中付诸实践。我写了本书，《你也可以成为股市天才》，这书名起的实在不咋地，书名想表达的意思是傻子都能成为股市天才。写这本书的时候，Motley Fool网站特别火。编辑建议我在书名中用上“傻瓜”这个词。我老爸给我提了个建议，叫《你也可以成为股市天才》，然后再加个副标题，《就算你不聪明也能行》。我一听就笑了。编辑让我一天之内把书名定下来。我就用了老爸起的书名。这个书名起得不好。我在书的开头讲了一个故事，是关于我岳父岳母的。他们一年里有几个月住在康州。他们在康州主要是淘古玩，经常参加各种拍卖会，物色便宜的古董。他们在拍卖会上是怎么淘宝贝的呢？比如说，他们在拍卖会上看到了一幅画。在其他拍卖会上，他们看过相似作品、相似尺寸、相似题材的画作，但成交价是现在这幅画的两三倍。他们就会出手买下来。他们用不着研究这幅画能不能成为下一个毕加索作品。要找下一个毕加索可难多了。我在书的开头说，特殊情况投资也类似。我们用不着费尽心机寻找下一个毕加索。我们最好在人少的地方找机会，去别人不关注的地方找机会。可能是市值小，可能是情况特殊，或者很复杂，一般人不会深入研究。有时要读400多页的公告，有时被拆分出去的股票是人们不想要的。被拆分出去的业务是公司抛弃的，买公司原来的股票的人不想要。投资要找到价格低于公允价值的股票，我个人觉得在特殊情况中实践这个理念比较简单。在《你也可以成为股市天才》这本书的第一章末尾，我讲了一个修水管的故事。你家的水管坏了，找来水管工修理。水管工敲了一下水管，然后说修这个水管要200块。你说:\"要200块？你就敲下水管就200块啊？\"水管工说：\"敲下水管只要5块，知道敲哪要195块。\"这个故事可以说明我对特殊情况投资的理解，要找自己觉得比较容易的事做。我不愿费尽心机，我想偷点懒，像巴菲特说的，挑30厘米高的跨栏。既然找得到30厘米高的跨栏，何必非往3米高的跨栏上冲？一句话，只要我地方找对了，用不着太聪明，就能做得好。霍华德：乔尔，在今年我写的一篇备忘录中，我也讲了一个故事。有个人，一心想成为扑克高手。他钻研如何得到好牌，如何让自己的牌胜过对手，如何识破对手的虚张声势。他叔叔对他说。你再怎么研究都成不了扑克高手，找个更容易玩的不就得了？乔尔，你说你找到了自己觉得比较简单的投资方式。我们想到一块去了。格林布拉特：正是如此。我在书里还讲了一个故事，说的也是这个道理。故事是这样的。我和朋友打赌输了。输的人要请赢的人去最有名的饭店吃饭，那时纽约最有名的饭店是Lutece餐厅。Lutece餐厅由全球一流的大厨Andre Soltner主理。我先打电话订位，餐厅告诉我无法预订。我说不管哪天，什么时候都行。还是不给我订。我开始还不明白怎么回事。后来才知道，要提前30天订位。只有提前30天才订得到。我一直打电话，后来总算订到了。我和朋友来到了这家餐厅。点餐的时候，我也没注意旁边站的是谁。我就指着菜单上的一道开胃菜，随口就问道：“这个好吃吗？”大厨Andre Soltner看着我，说：“难吃的要命。”面对世界一流大厨，我竟然问他烹饪的美食好不好吃。我琢磨，他的话是这个意思，菜单上的每道菜都好吃。这可是全世界最顶级的餐厅。就是这个道理，在最好的地方选购，这里的所有东西都是好的。我只需要从好东西里选出更好的就行了。安全边际可以为成长性让步霍华德：乔尔，你刚才讲到了以远远低于价值的价格买入，这是安全边际。你认为这是价值投资的核心吗？你觉得是否有必要展开讲讲，还是记住这些就够了？再补充一个问题，你刚才讲到了你岳父岳母的故事，你认为他们不寻找下一个毕加索是对的。你觉得投资成长股是寻找下一个毕加索吗？格林布拉特：有这层意思。我对价值投资的定义是弄清楚值多少钱，然后在很低的价格买入，与低市净率无关、与低市销率无关。罗素、晨星等机构，还有很多人，觉得价值投资者就是看市净率、市销率投资的。按这样的划分标准，我不算价值投资者，也不算成长投资者。别人说不好我们算是哪一类。正如巴菲特所说，价值和成长说到底是一回事。公司的长期成长性是其投资价值中的一部分。价值和成长的界限并不像罗素或晨星等机构划分的那样泾渭分明。或许价值股成长性较低，成长股成长性较高。划分是人为的划分。我就是找便宜的好公司。本·格雷厄姆说了，研究明白值多少钱，在很低的价格买下来，在二者之间留足安全边际，价格和价值要相差足够大。沃伦·巴菲特是格雷厄姆最杰出的弟子。巴菲特对老师的理念稍加改进，后来成了全球首富。巴菲特说得很简单，要是在便宜的价格能买到好公司，那就更好了。好公司的好包括它的长期成长性。我是逐渐获得这个认识的。在我投资的第一个10年里，我花了很长时间才明白。我越来越倾向于按沃伦·巴菲特的方法投资，他找的是又好、又便宜的公司，成长性是好公司的一个特征。霍华德：我们知道，巴菲特早期不是对好公司很着迷。他是从捡烟头开始的，他初期关注的不是质地，只看重是否够便宜。他的风格后来发生了转变。格林布拉特：没错。在沃顿读研究生时，我和几个同学一起研究了买入廉价股的策略，写成了一篇毕业论文，后来在《Portfolio Management》期刊上发表了。我们研究的是NetNet，买入低于清算价值的股票。我们的研究表明，只要买的够便宜，能很赚钱。沃伦·巴菲特早期就是这么做的。可是我们为什么逐渐倾向于定性呢？举个例子，我们找到了一只股票，值10块钱，价格是6块钱。很便宜。问题是，我们没有这家公司的控股权，它的生意还不是好生意。时间长了，我们的安全边际可能越来越小。因为没办法控制公司的资产，原来的10块钱可能变成8块钱。我个人认为，要寻找10块钱可能变成12块钱的公司，让我们的安全边际随之增加。在我认为具备成长性的情况下，我可以在安全边际上做些让步。话说回来，买廉价股是行得通的，单纯是便宜就能赚钱。我毫不反对这种投资方法，只是它容纳不了大资金。现在巴菲特管理的资金规模大概是1000亿美元左右。他想投资50亿买一只股票，然后转手以更高的价格卖出去，很难找到这么大体量的交易对手。规模太大了。大概2000年的时候，他说“给我100万美元，我每年能赚50%”。100万美元的规模，有很多机会可以抓。资金规模越大，投资机会越少。小资金在投资中不受限制，所有公司可以随便挑、随便买。巴菲特现在只能从300只大盘股里挑选，小规模的投资对他的资金量没意义。在座的各位在特殊情况投资中可以尽情选择。跑赢市场是能做到的格林布拉特：我的很多学生都问过我一个问题。五六年来，几乎每年都有人问。我的学生和我说，你年轻的时候，做投资比较容易。他们没直接说我已经老了，只是说我年轻的时候。霍华德：很含蓄。格林布拉特：我承认自己老了。总之，学生们觉得我那时候投资更好做。我入行的那个年代，没有现在这么激烈的竞争，没这么多对冲基金、没这么多计算机的参与、没这么多高智商的人从事投资。我以前和霍华德聊天的时候也说过，我入行做投资时，股市在过去的13年都没涨。那时候股市不吸引人。我的学生说，你当年做投资容易，现在肯定难了。你还那么傻，竟然写书讲投资，现在别人也都会了。我觉得和我写书关系不大。总之，学生们说他们做投资更难了，我那时候投资好做。在回答这个问题时，我讲了两个方面。第一，有些人擅长做特殊情况投资，他们在人少的地方投资，在清算、重组、拆分中寻找机会。他们中有很多人受流动性的限制。沃伦·巴菲特早期的时候做这方面的投资赚了很多钱，但是后来他规模大了。有些人特别擅长分析公司，在人少的地方找机会。我问我的学生，你们知道这些人后来怎么样了吗？后来这些人赚了很多钱。结果他们的资金规模变大了，没办法像以前一样投资了。所以说，总有新人可以进来，捕捉可以容纳小资金的机会。不引人注目的小机会还是有，但从前在这些小机会中做得好的人，已经赚不了这个钱了。新人进来则有很大空间。另一个方面要从大环境来看。我们知道，有效市场理论还是大行其道。有效市场理论告诫人们主动投资行不通。不是连沃伦·巴菲特也建议买指数基金吗？我认为，这对大多数人来说是对的，大多数人不知道怎么给公司估值。我反对有效市场理论。我是这么和我的学生说的。我的学生大多数是20多岁的年轻人。我对他们说，咱们回到你们10岁左右的时候，从那时起，可能你们就对股市略有耳闻了。我们看看那时全世界最受关注的股市，没错，是美国股市。我们再看美国股市中最受关注的股票，没错，是标普500成分股。我们看看，从你们10岁起，这500只股票的情况。从1996年到2000年，标普500翻倍。从2000年到2002年，标普500腰斩。从2002年到2007年，标普500翻倍。从2007年到2009年，标普500腰斩。从2009年到现在，标普涨了三倍。我说这些，就是想说，人的疯狂没有改变。其实还不止如此。标普500是包含500只成分股的平均指数。标普500指数中存在巨大分化，有些受人们追捧的成为热门股，有些被人嫌弃的成为冷门股。个股的波动远比指数剧烈。人们总是有喜好和厌恶，被人们追捧和遭人厌恶的股票有天壤之别。在指数的平均值背后，喧嚣从未停止。既然如此，本·格雷厄姆没有过时。格雷厄姆告诉我们，这是公允价值，市场价格是这样的。价格围绕公允价值波动。我们实事求是地给公司估值，实事求是地做投资操作，可以在价格低于价值时买入，有时还可以在价格高于价值时做空。每次在第一堂课上，我总是向我的学生做两个保证。第一个保证，我保证，如果他们把估值工作做好，一定会得到市场的认同。我就是没告诉他们会是什么时候。可能两三个星期，也可能两三年。但是我保证市场会认可他们的估值。我们由此可以得出一个强有力的推论。我告诉学生们，只要他们估值工作做好了，在90%的情况下，在两三年时间内，市场一定会认识到一只股票的价值。要是做一个包含若干股票的投资组合，平均下来，市场认可估值的时间会更快。各位能明白，我的保证和推论有多大的威力。把工作做好，市场会给我们回报。人们跑不赢市场，不是因为市场有效或接近有效，不是因为市场不受情绪影响，恰恰相反，市场非常情绪化。跑赢市场是能做到的。人们为什么跑不赢呢？可能是机构受到种种束缚，原因很多，但绝对不是因为市场价格有效。不信我们看看新闻，观察一下周围发生的事情，再想想我刚才说的，从我的学生们10岁时起，标普指数的变化。毫无疑问，人们的疯狂没变，投资的机会仍在。热爱才能做好投资霍华德：乔尔，回到你刚从沃顿毕业时，现在的你会给那时的自己什么建议？或许你在前面已经讲过了，有没有什么补充的？另外，你会给刚入行时的自己什么建议呢？格林布拉特：首先，不应该读法律，我去法学院读了一年的书就退学了。不应该读法律。我觉得自己运气很好。投资要付出努力，投资者必须弄清楚是怎么回事，很多公司都可以研究，总要琢磨这样是否符合逻辑，那样是否符合逻辑。我就是喜欢投资。世界上发生的一切都与投资相关。我看新闻，了解很多公司的情况，总是能学到新东西。我从一开始就喜欢做投资。我真是运气很好。我做投资这件事，是因为我真心喜欢投资。在哥伦比亚大学任教以来，我教过800多个学生。我刚入行的时候，在之前的13年里，股市都没涨。那时候很多去做投资的人根本不是冲着赚大钱去的。那时候去做投资的人根本想不到能赚大钱。市场13年都没涨。我入行以后，市场就开始直线上涨。我真是运气好。各位可以不把我讲的太当真。毕竟，我入行的时候，时机很好。我倒是确实注意到这样一个现象：只要是善于做投资的人，真的能在股市赚大钱。善于做投资没那么了不起，但确实能赚很多钱。我还发现一个现象：在我的学生里，投资做得最好的，是那些真正热爱投资的。我给各位一个忠告：别带着赚钱的目的来做投资。你们的智商都很高，要不也不会坐在这。世界上有很多有意义的事，值得你们去做。一定要因为自己喜欢才做投资，别为了别的。做投资要乐在其中。我要求我的学生保证，要因为喜欢而做投资。各位，我不觉得挑股票挑得好能对社会做多大贡献。有人说，因为有好的投资者，市场才有充分的流动性，才能实现资本的合理分配。我个人认为，缺了我们这些投资者，市场照样转。我们哪里实现了资本的合理分配？市场不是还经常发疯吗？当然，长期来看，我们发挥了一定的作用。这算是我们的一个贡献。我还是觉得缺了我们也无所谓。我告诉我的学生，投资股票创造不了多少社会价值。我要求学生们保证，要是他们投资做好了……这么说吧，我本人觉得投资没多大社会价值，但是我还教学生们做投资，我教投资这件事不也是没意义的吗？所以，我让我的学生保证，要是他们投资做好了，要做些好事。等他们投资做成功了，要做一些自己觉得有意义的事。话说回来，你要是真喜欢投资，做投资没什么不对，只要是真喜欢，你们说呢？别为了钱。在座的各位，你们做什么都能成功，要是选择做投资，一定要因为是自己喜欢。霍华德：乔尔，说得太好了。回顾你的投资生涯，有哪笔成功的投资是你印象最深的？你是怎么找到这笔投资的？你的逻辑是什么？一个杰出的投资者必须有胆识格林布拉特：有一个投资，我印象很深。也是因为这个投资，我创建了Value Investors Club网站。那时，我们在管理自己的资金。我们管理外部资金，管了10年，然后把所有外部资金都还回去了。后来，到2009年，我才开始又接受外部资金。发现这个投资机会时，我们没管理外部资金，只是在为自己寻找投资机会。我们发现了一个机会，我们从没遇到过这么好的投资机会。这家公司的价格只有现金价值的一半，而且这家公司的生意还是好生意。在确定仓位占比的时候，我考虑的一般不是能赚多少。我在安排最大仓位的时候，选的不是我觉得能最赚钱的，而是我觉得不可能亏钱的。这样的投资机会，我可以买很多，风险低。运气好的话，可能大涨。这样的机会太完美了。我讲的这个机会，市值只有现金价值的一半，而且公司的生意很好。这家公司的资本结构很复杂，一般人以前没见过这种资本结构，所以搞不清楚。要是你能搞清楚的话，肯定会一眼就看上它。价格可只有现金的一半，还是好生意。我们当然大量买入了。我们觉得自己很聪明，觉得只有我们发现了这个机会。有一天，我的合伙人发现，在雅虎留言板上，有个人竟然把这家公司复杂的资本结构分析得很清楚。真是没想到，那位发帖子的先生，在超市里上班。他真是聪明啊。我们眼前一亮，外面的世界里还真有聪明人啊。我们要是能把这些人聚到一起该多好。那时是1999年，大家都热衷于互联网。我觉得互联网很了不起。上网像开会一样，可以与全国、全世界的人交流。我们可以成立个社区。我很想成立这么个投资社区。那位在超市里工作的先生成了我们的第一批成员。我们的目的是吸引聪明的投资者分享投资机会。加入是免费的，但必须分享有价值的投资机会。我们从这件事里得到了一个启发：民间有高手。总之，这个机会实在是好。价格只有现金的一半，还是好生意。低估是因为它的资本结构比较复杂。还有一个投资，我印象很深。这个投资，不是我做过的最差的，但可以说是最惨的。我的一位合伙人，罗伯·高尔森，1989年开始和我合作。他爱开玩笑。他说，要是我们过去15年里给别人打工，我们已经被炒了8次了。做投资，难免犯错。我们得接受这个事实。这笔投资是这样的。我们买了一家被拆分的公司，它旗下的Comdex公司是电脑展会做得最好的。在拆分之前，我们可以通过操作，按每股3美元买入。母公司计划以6美元发行新股，当时还没发布正式公告。但是，我们可以通过买入母公司，并相应做一个做空操作，锁定以3美元买入拆分的公司。讲到这，这笔投资没问题。可是，后来我们爱上了这家公司的生意。Comdex在拉斯维加斯经营展会业务。拉斯维加斯有大量场地，它可以随便租。它租来的场地租金是每平方英尺2美元，再转租出去的价格是每平方英尺62美元。展会空间不够了，它可以再花2美元租来，然后再以62美元租出去。我们特别喜欢这家公司的商业模式。它的股价开始是3美元，后来在6美元增发了一些。后来，股价涨到了12美元。在3美元的时候，我们重仓投资，因为我们有信心可以在6美元的时候卖出去。到了6美元，我们没卖。我们爱上了这家公司。后来涨到12美元。讲到这，还是没问题。再后来，我们就倒霉了。2001年9月9日，这家公司收购了另一家展会公司，借了很多钱。911之后，没人敢去展会了，公司的业务一落千丈，而且所有人都明白了金融杠杆的危害。大家都知道，借钱多不好，借钱是冒险，自己只有1美元，却借了9美元，风险太高。在这笔投资中，我明白了什么是经营杠杆。一家公司，投入2美元，能赚62美元。等销售收入下降的时候，收入少62美元，60美元的利润就没了。净利润一下子就掉下来了。这就是经营杠杆。我得到了教训，明白了什么是经营杠杆。最后，我们在1美元多点清仓了。世事难料，在这笔投资中，我对集中投资、经营杠杆有了更深刻的理解。我学到了很多东西，可以说，我一直在学习，一直在犯错。我努力避免重复犯错。可惜，同样的错误经常改头换面再次出现。错误还是原来的错误，换汤不换药，一不小心就又重犯了。我给各位的建议是：别害怕犯错，谁都难免犯错。霍华德：乔尔刚才说的这一点很重要。希望在座的各位都能明白这个道理。四月份，我写了一篇备忘录“敢于伟大”。一个杰出的投资者必须有胆识。谁都想有成就。总是和别人一样，永远没出头之日。别人怎么想，你也怎么想。别人怎么做，你也怎么做。那肯定和别人一样了。随大流怎么可能有成就？要有成就，必须和别人不一样。要有敢犯错的胆识。哪有从不犯错的人？即使是最优秀的棒球选手，也只能在一场比赛中有40%的安打。有些投资者的成功率比40%高，但没人不犯错。乔尔说了，要是他给别人打工，可能已经被炒了8次了。格林布拉特：我是个心软的老板，不会把自己炒了。霍华德：今天，我和伯克希尔哈撒韦的一位员工吃午饭。我们聊了沃伦为什么能成功。我提到了一点，因为他不怕被炒鱿鱼。可惜，有这个优势的人很少。一般人担心被老板炒掉。我们没老板，但是也担心被客户炒掉。我们还能不怕冒险，坚持自己的想法吗？没什么事是万无一失的。有时候，在知道可能犯错的情况下，我们还能坚持下去吗？我觉得，要坚持，不怕犯错。乔尔，问你最后一个问题。你曾经取得了辉煌的业绩，为什么后来决定把资金返还给客户？只有三个办法可以做到一年赚50%格林布拉特：这个问题比较好回答。1985年，我成立了自己的公司。十年之后，1994年，我们返还了所有外部资金。在这十年里，扣除费用之前，我们的年均收益率是50%。十年后，我们把资金还了回去。只有三个办法可以做到一年赚50%。第一是保持小规模。开业五年后，我们返还了一半的外部资金。十年之后，我们返还了所有外部资金。第二是集中投资。在那十年里，6到8只股票占我们的投资组合的80%。我们的投资非常集中。第三是需要一点好运气。我们的投资特别集中，肯定需要一点好运气。不管你再怎么厉害，水平再怎么高，集中投资6到8只股票，总是会遇到一个问题。每两三年，总会有一两只股票表现不如预期，给我们带来20%到30%的下跌。每两三年，都会遇到这样的情况，从无例外。有时候，是因为当时的市场不喜欢我们看好的股票。遇到这种情况，我们不在意。股票还在我们手里，就是更便宜了。我们明白自己手里的股票，只是它更便宜了，没关系。有时候，是因为我们犯错了。我可以坦然接受错误。我清楚自己手里的股票，有时是我错了，有时是股票更便宜了。我能接受这个现实。我也清楚，跌个20%到30%是正常的，股市投资本来如此。问题是，给别人管钱，我心里就不好受了。我觉得自己是个成熟的人，我清楚自己手里的股票，知道自己在做什么。只是总想着这是别人的钱……我的投资者其实都很好，都是很好的人。问题在我自己。每当遇到大跌时，我总是不由自主地感觉很不好。我想大家能理解，我是个争强好胜的人。我希望把投资做好，亏了别人的钱，很不好受。后来，我们规模大了，即使把资金归还给投资者，我们的公司还是可以运转，我还是可以继续投资。我决定把外部资金还回去。我有两个选择，一个是改变自己，另一个是改变环境。改变环境比改变自己容易。于是，我就这么做了。现在我们做长短仓投资组合，多空两边都有几百只股票。我们表现最差的时候也就是落后20到30个基点。这样一来，我就克服了自己给别人管钱的担心，就又开始接受外部资金了。霍华德：谢谢。听了乔尔的一席话，相信各位已经领会了杰出投资者是如何思考的。非常有逻辑、有智慧，比大多数人都有深度。答案不言自明。和别人看到的东西一样，怎么可能胜过别人？乔尔还讲到了对人性的洞察，对投资者的看法，如何看待错误。另外，我们还看到了乔尔是一个真实的人。感谢乔尔，我们今天收获良多。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":239,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":620180909,"gmtCreate":1669529993303,"gmtModify":1676538205469,"author":{"id":"3584594238720284","authorId":"3584594238720284","name":"蚂蚁移山","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/86dfdfe60a3e550fa61f48cb49ed9bc0","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3584594238720284","idStr":"3584594238720284"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Keep learning","listText":"Keep learning","text":"Keep learning","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/620180909","repostId":"1109716414","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1109716414","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1669433910,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1109716414?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-11-26 11:38","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Howard talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1109716414","media":"投资有道","summary":"霍华德·马克斯1995年与人联合创建橡树资本（Oaktree Capital），他撰写的“投资备忘录”因预言科技股泡沫破裂而成为华尔街必读文件，巴菲特也推崇不已。作为知名投资大师，霍华德·马克斯曾和另","content":"<p><html><head></head><body>Howard Marks co-founded Oaktree Capital in 1995. His \"investment memo\" became a must-read document on Wall Street because he predicted the bursting of the technology stock bubble, and Buffett also praised it.</p><p>As a well-known investment guru, Howard Marks once had a very classic conversation with another guru-Joel Greenblatt (Joel Greenblatt).</p><p>Joel is a visiting professor at Columbia University Business School, founder and partnership manager of GothamCapital.</p><p>In the 20 years from its establishment in 1985 to 2005, Gotan Capital's assets increased from US $7 million to US $830 million, with an average annual return of 40%, which can be called an investment miracle on Wall Street.</p><p>Even after the financial crisis in 2008, the asset management scale of Gotan Capital remained at the level of 900 million US dollars, and the annualized rate of return was still as high as 30%.</p><p>Observing the wonderful dialogue between these two people about value investing, we can see how outstanding investors think, how to outperform others, their insights into human nature, their views on investors, how to treat mistakes, etc., which is very logical and wise.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today we were lucky enough to have Joel talk to us about investing. I met Joel 25 years ago through a friend's introduction.</p><p>In the late 1970s, Wharton had many successful investors. If we have time, we can talk about why this is so.</p><p>Joel is definitely one of the standouts. Joel teaches value investing at Columbia University. Later, he asked me to give a lecture to his students once a year, and I readily agreed. Today, I invited him to Walton. Joel is a real investor. Those of you who are interested in becoming investors, please listen carefully to Joel.</p><p>I wrote a few questions in advance myself and asked Joel to take a look at them. Later, my son Andrew sent me the questions he had to ask. Andrew also graduated from Wharton. I think he asked better questions.</p><p>I suggest we ask Joel to answer Andrew's question first. Joel hadn't read these questions beforehand, so we asked him to answer them on the spot. I think Andrew's question is well written. Joel, if you don't mind, I'll just read it.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Yeah, well.</p><p><b>Look for opportunities in places with few people</b><b>HOWARD:</b>You wrote a book about investing under special circumstances, and you talked about how to profit from splits, restructuring, bankruptcies, mergers and acquisitions, etc.</p><p>Before you, no one has talked about special circumstances investing in such detail. How did you come up with this investment style? You know what you want to focus on, where you can and can't make money. How do you know that?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Excellent question, indeed.</p><p>My first job was at a hedge fund, a firm that did risk arbitrage. The risk arbitrage it does is also called M&A arbitrage, which is to buy a company after seeing the announcement of M&A, hoping to make a profit through the completion of M&A.</p><p>The risks and benefits of this operation are basically as follows: if the merger is successful, you will earn 1 yuan. If the merger fails, you will lose 10 or 15 yuan. Personally, I don't think such a risk-benefit ratio is appropriate.</p><p>So, I began to study other operating methods. Later, I found out that there are some stocks worth watching in M&A. I don't do the kind of M&A arbitrage mentioned earlier. I start to pay attention to the special events of the company, such as restructuring, splitting, etc.<b>What I am looking for is an opportunity to earn 1 yuan, but only lose 10 cents. It can be said that I am looking for opportunities in places with few people.</b></p><p>When I was studying at Wharton, Wharton belonged to the school of efficient market theory, and the class talked about efficient market theory. This theory doesn't resonate with me. During my junior year, I came across an article about Benjamin Graham. After reading this article, I suddenly enlightened and felt that it made too much sense.</p><p>I read everything Graham wrote. My concept of investing has changed completely. I know what to do and what not to do about investing.</p><p><b>In fact, it is to find out how much something is worth, and then buy it at a very low price, leaving enough margin of safety.</b>I put this philosophy into practice in special situation investing.</p><p>I wrote a book, \"You Can Too Become a Stock Market Genius\". The title of this book is really not good. What the title wants to express is that even fools can become a stock market genius. At the time of writing this book, the Motley Fool website was particularly hot. The editor suggested I use the word \"fool\" in the title of the book.</p><p>My dad gave me a suggestion called \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius,\" and then added a subtitle, \"You Can Do It Even If You Are Not Smart.\" I laughed when I heard it. The editor asked me to finalize the title within a day. I used the title my dad gave me. The title of the book is bad.</p><p>I told a story at the beginning of the book about my father-in-law and mother-in-law. They live in Connecticut for several months of the year. They mainly shop for antiques in Connecticut, and often attend various auctions to look for cheap antiques.</p><p>How do they find treasures at auctions? For example, they saw a painting at an auction. At other auctions, they have seen paintings of similar works, similar sizes and similar themes, but the transaction price is two or three times that of the current painting. They'll buy it. They don't have to study whether this painting can be the next Picasso. It's harder to find the next Picasso.</p><p>I said at the beginning of the book that special circumstances investing is similar.<b>We don't have to go to great lengths to find the next Picasso. We'd better look for opportunities in places where there are few people and where others don't pay attention to them.</b></p><p>It may be that the market value is small, it may be that the situation is special, or it is very complicated, and most people will not study it in depth. Sometimes it takes more than 400 pages of announcements to read, and sometimes the stocks that are split out are something people don't want. The business that was split was abandoned by the company, and the people who bought the original stock of the company didn't want it. To invest in stocks whose price is lower than fair value, I personally think it is relatively simple to practice this concept in special circumstances.</p><p>At the end of the first chapter of the book \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius, Too\", I told a story about repairing plumbing. Your plumbing is broken, call in a plumber to fix it. The plumber knocked on the pipe and then said it would cost 200 yuan to repair the pipe. You said, \"Want 200 yuan? Just knock down the pipe for 200 yuan?\" The plumber said, \"It only costs 5 yuan to knock down the pipe, and it costs 195 yuan to knock down.\"</p><p>This story can illustrate my understanding of investing in special circumstances, and I have to find what I find easier to do.<b>I don't want to go to my best. I want to be lazy. As Buffett said, pick a 30-centimeter-high hurdle. Since you can find a 30-cm-high hurdle, why rush to a 3-meter-high hurdle?</b></p><p>In a word,<b>As long as I find the right place, I don't have to be too smart to do well.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, in a memo I wrote this year, I also told a story.</p><p>There's a guy who wants to be a poker master. He studied how to get good cards, how to make his cards outperform his opponents, and how to see through their opponents' bluffs. His uncle said to him. No matter how much you study, you can't become a poker master. Just find something easier to play?</p><p>Joel, you said you found what you thought was a relatively simple way to invest. We wanted to go together.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Exactly that. I also told a story in the book, which is the same truth.</p><p>Here's the story. I lost a bet with my friend. The loser had to invite the winner to dinner at the most famous restaurant. At that time, the most famous restaurant in new york was Lutece Restaurant. Lutece Restaurant is managed by world-class chef Andre Soltner.</p><p>I called first to make a reservation, but the restaurant told me that it was not possible to make a reservation. I said whatever day, whenever. Still won't order it for me. I don't understand what's going on at first. Later, I learned that I had to make a reservation 30 days in advance. Only available 30 days in advance.</p><p>I kept calling and finally got a reservation. I came to this restaurant with my friends. When ordering, I didn't pay attention to who was standing next to me. I pointed to an appetizer on the menu and casually asked, \"Is this good?\" Chef Andre Soltner looked at me and said, \"It tastes terrible.\"</p><p>In the face of a world-class chef, I actually asked him if the food he cooked was delicious. That's what he meant, I wondered. Every dish on the menu was delicious. This is the best restaurant in the world.</p><p>That's the truth,<b>Pick up at the best place and everything here is good. I just need to pick better from the good things</b>。</p><p><b>Margin of safety can give way to growth</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, you just talked about buying at well below value, which is the margin of safety. Do you think this is at the heart of value investing? Do you think it is necessary to talk about it, or is it enough to remember this? One more question, you just told the story of your father-in-law and mother-in-law, and you think they are right not to look for the next Picasso. Do you think investing in growth stocks is looking for the next Picasso?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>It has this meaning.<b>My definition of value investing is to figure out how much it is worth and then buy at a very low price, which has nothing to do with low price-to-book ratio or low price-to-sales ratio.</b></p><p>Russell, Morningstar and other institutions, as well as many others, think that value investors invest based on the price-to-book ratio and price-to-sales ratio. According to this classification standard, I am not a value investor or a growth investor. Others can't tell what kind of class we are.</p><p>As Buffett said, value and growth are the same thing after all. The long-term growth of a company is part of its investment value. The line between value and growth is not as sharp as institutions such as Russell or Morningstar draw. Perhaps value stocks have lower growth potential, while growth stocks have higher growth potential. Divisions are artificial divisions. I'm just looking for a cheap and good company.</p><p>Ben Graham said, research understands how much it is worth, buy it at a very low price, leave a sufficient margin of safety between the two, and the difference between price and value should be large enough. Warren Buffett was Graham's most distinguished disciple. Buffett improved his teacher's philosophy slightly and later became the richest man in the world. Buffett put it very simply, if you can buy a good company at a cheap price, it will be even better.<b>The goodness of a good company includes its long-term growth.</b></p><p>I gradually gained this understanding. It took me a long time to figure it out in my first 10 years of investing. I am increasingly inclined to invest according to Warren Buffett's method. He is looking for good and cheap companies. Growth is a characteristic of good companies.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>We know that Buffett was not fascinated by good companies in the early days. He started by picking up cigarette butts. At the beginning, he focused not on the texture, but on whether it was cheap enough. His style later shifted.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>right. When I was a graduate student at Wharton, I studied the strategy of buying cheap stocks with several classmates, and wrote a graduation thesis, which was later published in the journal Portfolio Management.</p><p>We looked at NetNet, buying stocks below liquidation value. Our research shows that as long as you buy it cheap enough, you can make a lot of money. Warren Buffett did just that early on.</p><p>But why do we gradually tend to be qualitative?</p><p>For example, we found a stock that is worth 10 yuan and the price is 6 yuan. It's cheap. The problem is, we don't have a controlling stake in this company, and its business is not a good business yet. Over time, our margin of safety may become smaller and smaller. Because there is no way to control the company's assets, the original 10 yuan may become 8 yuan.</p><p>Personally, I think that looking for companies where 10 yuan may become 12 yuan will increase our margin of safety. In what I think<b>With the potential for growth, I can make some concessions on the margin of safety.</b></p><p>Having said that, it is feasible to buy cheap stocks, and you can make money simply by being cheap. I have no objection to this investment method, except that it can't accommodate large funds. At present, the scale of funds managed by Buffett is about $100 billion. He wants to invest 5 billion to buy a stock, and then sell it at a higher price. It is difficult to find such a large counterparty. The scale is too big.</p><p>About 2000, he said \"Give me $1 million and I can make 50% a year\". With a scale of $1 million, there are many opportunities to grasp.<b>The larger the scale of funds, the fewer investment opportunities. Small funds are not restricted in investment, and all companies can choose and buy whatever they want.</b></p><p>Buffett can only choose from 300 large-cap stocks now, and small-scale investments are meaningless to his capital. Everyone here can choose as much as you like in special circumstances investment.</p><p><b>Outperforming the market can be done</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>A lot of my students have asked me a question. For five or six years, people have asked almost every year. My students told me that when you were young, it was easier to invest. They didn't directly say I was old, just when I was young.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Very implicit.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I admit that I am old.</p><p>In short, the students felt that it was better for me to invest at that time. When I entered the industry, there was not so fierce competition as it is now, there were not so many hedge funds, not so many computers involved, and not so many people with high IQ engaged in investment. When I chatted with Howard before, I also said that when I entered the industry to invest, the stock market hadn't risen in the past 13 years. The stock market was unattractive back then.</p><p>My students said that it was easy for you to invest back then, but it must be difficult now. You are still so stupid to write a book about investment, and now others can do it too. I don't think it has much to do with me writing books. In short, the students said that it was more difficult for them to invest, and it was easy for me to invest at that time.</p><p>In answering this question, I talked about two aspects.</p><p>First, some people are good at investing in special circumstances. They invest in places with few people and look for opportunities in liquidation, restructuring and splitting. Many of them are limited by mobility. Warren Buffett made a lot of money investing in this area in his early days, but then he went on a large scale.</p><p>Some people are particularly good at analyzing companies and looking for opportunities in places with fewer people. I asked my students, do you know what happened to these people? Then these people made a lot of money.</p><p>As a result, the scale of their funds has become larger, and they can't invest as before. Therefore, there are always new people who can come in and seize opportunities that can accommodate small funds. There are still unobtrusive small opportunities, but those who have done well in these small opportunities in the past can no longer make this money. There is a lot of room for newcomers to come in.</p><p>On the other hand, we should look at it from the general environment. As we know, efficient market theory is still popular. Efficient market theory warns people that active investment won't work. Didn't even Warren Buffett suggest buying index funds? I think this is true for most people, most people don't know how to value companies.</p><p>I oppose efficient market theory. That's what I told my students.</p><p>Most of my students are young people in their 20s. I said to them, let's go back to when you were about 10 years old. Since then, maybe you have heard a little about the stock market. Let's look at the most watched stock market in the world at that time. Yes, it was the U.S. stock market. Let's look at the most watched stocks in the U.S. stock market. Yes, they are S&P 500 constituent stocks.</p><p>Let's look at the situation of these 500 stocks since you were 10 years old. From 1996 to 2000, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2000 to 2002, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2002 to 2007, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2007 to 2009, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2009 to now, the S&P has tripled.</p><p>I'm just saying this to say,<b>Man's madness hasn't changed.</b></p><p>Actually, it's more than that. The S&P 500 is an average index containing 500 constituent stocks. There is a huge differentiation in the S&P 500 index, with some popular stocks becoming popular stocks, and some disliked stocks becoming unpopular stocks.</p><p>The volatility of individual stocks is far more violent than that of indexes. People always have likes and dislikes, and there is a world of difference between sought after and hated stocks. Behind the average of the index, the hustle and bustle never stops.</p><p>That being the case, Ben Graham is not out of fashion. Graham tells us that this is fair value, the market price is like this. Prices fluctuate around fair value.</p><p>We value companies realistically and do investment operations realistically. We can buy when the price is below value, and sometimes we can short when the price is above value.</p><p>Every time in the first class, I always make two assurances to my students.</p><p>The first guarantee, I guarantee, is that if they do a good job in valuation, they will be recognized by the market.</p><p>I just didn't tell them when it would be. Maybe two or three weeks, maybe two or three years. But I guarantee the market will approve of their valuation.</p><p>We can draw a strong inference from this.</p><p>I told the students,<b>As long as their valuation work is done well, in 90% of cases, within two or three years, the market will definitely recognize the value of a stock. If you make a portfolio with several stocks, on average, the market will recognize the valuation faster.</b></p><p>You can see how powerful my reassurances and inferences are. Do the job well and the market will pay us back.</p><p><b>People can't beat the market, not because the market is efficient or close to efficient, not because the market is not affected by emotions, on the contrary, the market is very emotional. Outperforming the market can be done.</b>Why can't people win? It may be that institutions are constrained for many reasons, but it is definitely not because the market price is effective.</p><p>If you don't believe me, let's watch the news, observe what's happening around you, and think about what I just said about the changes in the S&P index since my students were 10 years old. There is no doubt that people's madness has not changed, and investment opportunities are still there.</p><p><b>Only by loving can you invest well</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, go back to when you first graduated from Wharton, what advice would you now give to yourself then? Perhaps you have already talked about it earlier. Is there anything to add? Also, what advice would you give to yourself when you first entered the business?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>First of all, I shouldn't have read law. I went to law school for a year and dropped out. You shouldn't read law.</p><p>I think I'm lucky. Investment requires effort, and investors must figure out what is going on. Many companies can study it, always wondering whether this is logical and whether that is logical. I just love investing. Everything that happens in the world is related to investing.</p><p>I watch the news, learn about a lot of companies, and always learn something new. I have loved making investments since the beginning. I'm really lucky. I do investing because I really like investing.</p><p>Since teaching at Columbia University, I have taught more than 800 students.</p><p>When I first entered the business, the stock market hadn't gone up in the previous 13 years. At that time, many people who invested were not aiming at making a lot of money at all. At that time, people who invested had no idea that they could make a lot of money. The market hasn't gone up in 13 years. After I entered the industry, the market began to rise in a straight line. I'm so lucky. You can not take what I am saying too seriously. After all, when I entered the business, the timing was good.</p><p>I did notice such a phenomenon:<b>As long as you are good at investing, you can really make a lot of money in the stock market.</b>Being good at investing is not that great, but you can really make a lot of money. I also found a phenomenon: among my students,<b>Those who do the best investments are those who really love investing.</b></p><p>Let me give you a piece of advice:<b>Don't invest with the purpose of making money.</b></p><p>You all have high IQs, or you wouldn't be sitting here.<b>There are many meaningful things in the world that are worth doing. You must invest because you like it, not for anything else. Enjoy making investments.</b>I ask my students to promise to invest because they like it. Everyone, I don't think that picking stocks well can make much contribution to society.</p><p>Some people say that because of good investors, the market has sufficient liquidity and the reasonable allocation of capital can be realized. Personally, I think that without us investors, the market will still turn. Where have we achieved a reasonable allocation of capital? Isn't the market still going crazy all the time? Of course, in the long run, we have played a role. This is one of our contributions. I still think it doesn't matter if we lack.</p><p>I told my students,<b>Investing in stocks doesn't create much social value.</b>I ask the students to guarantee that if their investment is done well... Let's put it this way, I personally don't think investment has much social value, but I still teach students to make investments. Isn't it meaningless for me to teach investment?</p><p>So, I asked my students to promise to do something good if they invested well. When their investment is successful, they should do something that they think is meaningful.</p><p>On the other hand, if you really like investing, there is nothing wrong with investing, as long as you really like it, what do you think? Don't do it for money. Everyone here, you can succeed in everything you do. If you choose to invest, you must be because you like it.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, that's so well said.</p><p>Looking back on your investing career, what successful investment has remembered you the most? How did you find this investment? What's your logic?</p><p><b>An outstanding investor must have courage</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>There is an investment that I am very impressed with. It is also because of this investment that I created the Value Investors Club website.</p><p>At that time, we were managing our own funds. We managed external funds, managed them for 10 years, and then returned all external funds. Then, in 2009, I began to accept external funding again. When we discovered this investment opportunity, we didn't manage external funds, just looking for investment opportunities for ourselves.</p><p>We found an opportunity. We have never encountered such a good investment opportunity. The price of this company is only half the cash value, and the business of this company is still good business.</p><p>When determining the proportion of positions, I generally don't consider how much I can earn.<b>When I arranged the largest position, I didn't choose what I thought was the most profitable, but what I thought was impossible to lose money.</b>I can buy a lot of such investment opportunities, and the risk is low. If you are lucky, it may rise sharply. Such an opportunity is perfect.</p><p>The opportunity I'm talking about has a market value of only half the cash value, and the company's business is very good. The capital structure of this company is very complicated. Most people have never seen this kind of capital structure before, so they can't figure it out. If you can figure it out, you will definitely catch it at first glance. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. Of course we bought in a lot.</p><p>We felt smart and felt that we were the only ones who spotted this opportunity.</p><p>One day, my partner discovered that someone on Yahoo's message board actually analyzed the complex capital structure of this company very clearly. I really didn't expect that the gentleman who posted the post worked in the supermarket. He's really smart. Our eyes shine. There are really smart people in the outside world. If only we could bring these people together.</p><p>It was 1999, and everyone was keen on the Internet. I think the internet is amazing. Surfing the Internet is like meeting, and you can communicate with people all over the country and the world. We can start a community. I really want to set up such an investment community.</p><p>The gentleman who worked in the supermarket became our first member. Our aim is to attract smart investors to share investment opportunities. Joining is free, but a valuable investment opportunity must be shared. We got an inspiration from this incident: there are masters among the people.</p><p>In short, this opportunity is really good. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. It is undervalued because its capital structure is relatively complex.</p><p>There is another investment that I am deeply impressed with. This investment is not the worst I have ever made, but it can be said to be the worst.</p><p>One of my partners, Rob Golson, started working with me in 1989. He loves to be joking. He said that if we had worked for others in the past 15 years, we would have been fired eight times. When investing, it is inevitable to make mistakes. We have to accept this fact.</p><p>Here's how this investment goes. We bought a split company, and its Comdex company is the best computer show. Before the split, we can buy at $3 per share by operation. The parent company planned to issue new shares for $6, and there was no official announcement at that time. However, we can lock in the split company at $3 by buying the parent company and doing a short operation accordingly.</p><p>Speaking of which, this investment is fine.</p><p>However, then we fell in love with the business of this company. Comdex operates the show business in Las Vegas. There are plenty of venues in Las Vegas, and it can be rented casually. It rented the venue for $2 per square foot, and sublet it out for $62 per square foot. Running out of space at the show, it can be rented for another $2 and then rented out for another $62. We particularly like the business model of this company.</p><p>Its share price started at $3, and later issued some additional issues at $6. Later, the stock price rose to $12. At $3, we invested heavily because we were confident that we could sell at $6. Getting to $6, we didn't sell it. We fell in love with this company. It later went up to $12.</p><p>Speaking of which, it's still fine.</p><p>Then, we were out of luck. On September 9, 2001, this company acquired another show company and borrowed a lot of money. After 9/11, no one dared to go to the show, the company's business plummeted, and everyone understood the dangers of financial leverage. As we all know, it's not good to borrow more money. Borrowing money is a risk. I only have $1, but I borrow $9. The risk is too high.</p><p>In this investment, I understood what operating leverage is. A company, putting in $2, can make $62. When the sales revenue declines, the revenue is $62 less, and the profit of $60 is gone. The net profit suddenly dropped. This is operating leverage. I learned my lesson and understood what operating leverage is.</p><p>Finally, we cleared at just over $1.</p><p>Things are unpredictable. In this investment, I have a deeper understanding of concentrated investment and operating leverage.</p><p>I've learned a lot, so to speak,<b>I've been learning and I've been making mistakes. I try to avoid repeating mistakes. Unfortunately, the same mistakes often appear again.</b>The mistake is still the original mistake, changing the soup without changing the medicine, and accidentally repeating it.</p><p><b>My advice to you is: Don't be afraid to make mistakes, everyone will inevitably make mistakes.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>This point Joel just said is important. I hope everyone here can understand this truth. In April, I wrote a memo \"Dare to be Great\".</p><p><b>A brilliant investor must have guts. Everyone wants to achieve something. Always just like everyone else, never getting ahead.</b>What others think, so do you. What others do, so do you. That must be the same as someone else. How can you achieve anything by following the crowd? To be successful, you must be different from others. Have the courage to make mistakes. How can there be people who never make mistakes?</p><p>Even the best baseball players can only hit 40% of their hits in a game. Some investors have a higher success rate than 40%, but no one does not make mistakes. Joel said that if he worked for someone else, he might have been fired eight times.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I'm a soft-hearted boss and wouldn't fire myself.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today, I had lunch with a Berkshire Hathaway employee. We talked about why Warren succeeded. I mentioned a bit because he's not afraid of getting fired. Unfortunately, few people have this advantage. Most people are worried about being fired by their bosses.</p><p>We don't have a boss, but we are also worried about being fired by customers. Can we still not be afraid to take risks and stick to our ideas? Nothing is foolproof. Sometimes, can we keep going knowing we might make a mistake? I think, we should persist and not be afraid of making mistakes.</p><p>Joel, one last question. You once achieved brilliant results. Why did you decide to return the funds to your customers later?</p><p><b>There are only three ways to earn 50% a year</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>This question is easier to answer.</p><p>In 1985, I set up my own company. Ten years later, in 1994, we returned all external funds. Our average annual rate of return, before expenses, was 50% during this decade. Ten years later, we returned the funds.</p><p><b>There are only three ways to make 50% a year. The first is to keep it small.</b>Five years after opening, we returned half of our external funds. Ten years later, we returned all external funds.<b>The second is concentrated investment.</b>In that decade, six to eight stocks made up 80% of our portfolio. Our investments are very concentrated.<b>The third is that a little good luck is needed.</b>Our investment is particularly concentrated, and we definitely need a little good luck.</p><p>No matter how powerful or high your level is, if you concentrate on investing in 6 to 8 stocks, you will always encounter a problem. Every two or three years, there's always one or two stocks that don't perform as well as expected, giving us a 20% to 30% decline. Every two or three years, we will encounter such a situation, without exception.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because the market at that time doesn't like the stocks we are bullish on. In this case, we don't care. The stock is still in our hands, but it is cheaper. We understand the stock in our hands, but it's cheaper, and it doesn't matter.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because we make mistakes. I can accept mistakes calmly.</p><p>I know the stocks I have, sometimes I am wrong, and sometimes the stocks are cheaper.</p><p>I can accept this reality. I also know that it is normal to fall by 20% to 30%, and this is the case for stock market investment.</p><p>The problem is, it makes me feel bad to manage money for others.</p><p>I feel like a mature person. I know the stocks in my hand and what I am doing. I just always think that this is someone else's money... My investors are actually very good, and they are all very good people.</p><p>The problem is with myself. Whenever I encounter a big drop, I always feel bad involuntarily. I think everyone can understand that I am a competitive person. I hope to do a good job in my investment, but it's very uncomfortable to lose other people's money.</p><p>Later, we grew large, and even if the funds were returned to investors, our company could still operate, and I could still continue to invest. I decided to return the external funds. I have two choices, one is to change myself and the other is to change the environment.<b>It is easier to change the environment than to change yourself.</b>So, that's what I did.</p><p>Now we do a long and short portfolio, with hundreds of stocks on both sides of the long and short. Our worst performance was 20 to 30 basis points behind. In this way, I overcame my worry of managing money for others, and began to accept external funds again.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Thank you. After listening to Joel's words, I believe you have understood how outstanding investors think. Very logical, intelligent, and deeper than most. Answer speaks for itself.</p><p>The same thing as others see, how can it be better than others? Joel also talked about insights into human nature, investors' views, and how to treat mistakes. Plus, we get to see that Joel is a real person.</p><p>Thanks to Joel, we had a lot today.</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"lsy1646967994584","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Howard talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHoward talks to Greenblatt: There are only three ways to earn 50% a year\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">投资有道</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-11-26 11:38</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><head></head><body>Howard Marks co-founded Oaktree Capital in 1995. His \"investment memo\" became a must-read document on Wall Street because he predicted the bursting of the technology stock bubble, and Buffett also praised it.</p><p>As a well-known investment guru, Howard Marks once had a very classic conversation with another guru-Joel Greenblatt (Joel Greenblatt).</p><p>Joel is a visiting professor at Columbia University Business School, founder and partnership manager of GothamCapital.</p><p>In the 20 years from its establishment in 1985 to 2005, Gotan Capital's assets increased from US $7 million to US $830 million, with an average annual return of 40%, which can be called an investment miracle on Wall Street.</p><p>Even after the financial crisis in 2008, the asset management scale of Gotan Capital remained at the level of 900 million US dollars, and the annualized rate of return was still as high as 30%.</p><p>Observing the wonderful dialogue between these two people about value investing, we can see how outstanding investors think, how to outperform others, their insights into human nature, their views on investors, how to treat mistakes, etc., which is very logical and wise.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today we were lucky enough to have Joel talk to us about investing. I met Joel 25 years ago through a friend's introduction.</p><p>In the late 1970s, Wharton had many successful investors. If we have time, we can talk about why this is so.</p><p>Joel is definitely one of the standouts. Joel teaches value investing at Columbia University. Later, he asked me to give a lecture to his students once a year, and I readily agreed. Today, I invited him to Walton. Joel is a real investor. Those of you who are interested in becoming investors, please listen carefully to Joel.</p><p>I wrote a few questions in advance myself and asked Joel to take a look at them. Later, my son Andrew sent me the questions he had to ask. Andrew also graduated from Wharton. I think he asked better questions.</p><p>I suggest we ask Joel to answer Andrew's question first. Joel hadn't read these questions beforehand, so we asked him to answer them on the spot. I think Andrew's question is well written. Joel, if you don't mind, I'll just read it.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Yeah, well.</p><p><b>Look for opportunities in places with few people</b><b>HOWARD:</b>You wrote a book about investing under special circumstances, and you talked about how to profit from splits, restructuring, bankruptcies, mergers and acquisitions, etc.</p><p>Before you, no one has talked about special circumstances investing in such detail. How did you come up with this investment style? You know what you want to focus on, where you can and can't make money. How do you know that?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Excellent question, indeed.</p><p>My first job was at a hedge fund, a firm that did risk arbitrage. The risk arbitrage it does is also called M&A arbitrage, which is to buy a company after seeing the announcement of M&A, hoping to make a profit through the completion of M&A.</p><p>The risks and benefits of this operation are basically as follows: if the merger is successful, you will earn 1 yuan. If the merger fails, you will lose 10 or 15 yuan. Personally, I don't think such a risk-benefit ratio is appropriate.</p><p>So, I began to study other operating methods. Later, I found out that there are some stocks worth watching in M&A. I don't do the kind of M&A arbitrage mentioned earlier. I start to pay attention to the special events of the company, such as restructuring, splitting, etc.<b>What I am looking for is an opportunity to earn 1 yuan, but only lose 10 cents. It can be said that I am looking for opportunities in places with few people.</b></p><p>When I was studying at Wharton, Wharton belonged to the school of efficient market theory, and the class talked about efficient market theory. This theory doesn't resonate with me. During my junior year, I came across an article about Benjamin Graham. After reading this article, I suddenly enlightened and felt that it made too much sense.</p><p>I read everything Graham wrote. My concept of investing has changed completely. I know what to do and what not to do about investing.</p><p><b>In fact, it is to find out how much something is worth, and then buy it at a very low price, leaving enough margin of safety.</b>I put this philosophy into practice in special situation investing.</p><p>I wrote a book, \"You Can Too Become a Stock Market Genius\". The title of this book is really not good. What the title wants to express is that even fools can become a stock market genius. At the time of writing this book, the Motley Fool website was particularly hot. The editor suggested I use the word \"fool\" in the title of the book.</p><p>My dad gave me a suggestion called \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius,\" and then added a subtitle, \"You Can Do It Even If You Are Not Smart.\" I laughed when I heard it. The editor asked me to finalize the title within a day. I used the title my dad gave me. The title of the book is bad.</p><p>I told a story at the beginning of the book about my father-in-law and mother-in-law. They live in Connecticut for several months of the year. They mainly shop for antiques in Connecticut, and often attend various auctions to look for cheap antiques.</p><p>How do they find treasures at auctions? For example, they saw a painting at an auction. At other auctions, they have seen paintings of similar works, similar sizes and similar themes, but the transaction price is two or three times that of the current painting. They'll buy it. They don't have to study whether this painting can be the next Picasso. It's harder to find the next Picasso.</p><p>I said at the beginning of the book that special circumstances investing is similar.<b>We don't have to go to great lengths to find the next Picasso. We'd better look for opportunities in places where there are few people and where others don't pay attention to them.</b></p><p>It may be that the market value is small, it may be that the situation is special, or it is very complicated, and most people will not study it in depth. Sometimes it takes more than 400 pages of announcements to read, and sometimes the stocks that are split out are something people don't want. The business that was split was abandoned by the company, and the people who bought the original stock of the company didn't want it. To invest in stocks whose price is lower than fair value, I personally think it is relatively simple to practice this concept in special circumstances.</p><p>At the end of the first chapter of the book \"You Can Be a Stock Market Genius, Too\", I told a story about repairing plumbing. Your plumbing is broken, call in a plumber to fix it. The plumber knocked on the pipe and then said it would cost 200 yuan to repair the pipe. You said, \"Want 200 yuan? Just knock down the pipe for 200 yuan?\" The plumber said, \"It only costs 5 yuan to knock down the pipe, and it costs 195 yuan to knock down.\"</p><p>This story can illustrate my understanding of investing in special circumstances, and I have to find what I find easier to do.<b>I don't want to go to my best. I want to be lazy. As Buffett said, pick a 30-centimeter-high hurdle. Since you can find a 30-cm-high hurdle, why rush to a 3-meter-high hurdle?</b></p><p>In a word,<b>As long as I find the right place, I don't have to be too smart to do well.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, in a memo I wrote this year, I also told a story.</p><p>There's a guy who wants to be a poker master. He studied how to get good cards, how to make his cards outperform his opponents, and how to see through their opponents' bluffs. His uncle said to him. No matter how much you study, you can't become a poker master. Just find something easier to play?</p><p>Joel, you said you found what you thought was a relatively simple way to invest. We wanted to go together.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>Exactly that. I also told a story in the book, which is the same truth.</p><p>Here's the story. I lost a bet with my friend. The loser had to invite the winner to dinner at the most famous restaurant. At that time, the most famous restaurant in new york was Lutece Restaurant. Lutece Restaurant is managed by world-class chef Andre Soltner.</p><p>I called first to make a reservation, but the restaurant told me that it was not possible to make a reservation. I said whatever day, whenever. Still won't order it for me. I don't understand what's going on at first. Later, I learned that I had to make a reservation 30 days in advance. Only available 30 days in advance.</p><p>I kept calling and finally got a reservation. I came to this restaurant with my friends. When ordering, I didn't pay attention to who was standing next to me. I pointed to an appetizer on the menu and casually asked, \"Is this good?\" Chef Andre Soltner looked at me and said, \"It tastes terrible.\"</p><p>In the face of a world-class chef, I actually asked him if the food he cooked was delicious. That's what he meant, I wondered. Every dish on the menu was delicious. This is the best restaurant in the world.</p><p>That's the truth,<b>Pick up at the best place and everything here is good. I just need to pick better from the good things</b>。</p><p><b>Margin of safety can give way to growth</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, you just talked about buying at well below value, which is the margin of safety. Do you think this is at the heart of value investing? Do you think it is necessary to talk about it, or is it enough to remember this? One more question, you just told the story of your father-in-law and mother-in-law, and you think they are right not to look for the next Picasso. Do you think investing in growth stocks is looking for the next Picasso?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>It has this meaning.<b>My definition of value investing is to figure out how much it is worth and then buy at a very low price, which has nothing to do with low price-to-book ratio or low price-to-sales ratio.</b></p><p>Russell, Morningstar and other institutions, as well as many others, think that value investors invest based on the price-to-book ratio and price-to-sales ratio. According to this classification standard, I am not a value investor or a growth investor. Others can't tell what kind of class we are.</p><p>As Buffett said, value and growth are the same thing after all. The long-term growth of a company is part of its investment value. The line between value and growth is not as sharp as institutions such as Russell or Morningstar draw. Perhaps value stocks have lower growth potential, while growth stocks have higher growth potential. Divisions are artificial divisions. I'm just looking for a cheap and good company.</p><p>Ben Graham said, research understands how much it is worth, buy it at a very low price, leave a sufficient margin of safety between the two, and the difference between price and value should be large enough. Warren Buffett was Graham's most distinguished disciple. Buffett improved his teacher's philosophy slightly and later became the richest man in the world. Buffett put it very simply, if you can buy a good company at a cheap price, it will be even better.<b>The goodness of a good company includes its long-term growth.</b></p><p>I gradually gained this understanding. It took me a long time to figure it out in my first 10 years of investing. I am increasingly inclined to invest according to Warren Buffett's method. He is looking for good and cheap companies. Growth is a characteristic of good companies.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>We know that Buffett was not fascinated by good companies in the early days. He started by picking up cigarette butts. At the beginning, he focused not on the texture, but on whether it was cheap enough. His style later shifted.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>right. When I was a graduate student at Wharton, I studied the strategy of buying cheap stocks with several classmates, and wrote a graduation thesis, which was later published in the journal Portfolio Management.</p><p>We looked at NetNet, buying stocks below liquidation value. Our research shows that as long as you buy it cheap enough, you can make a lot of money. Warren Buffett did just that early on.</p><p>But why do we gradually tend to be qualitative?</p><p>For example, we found a stock that is worth 10 yuan and the price is 6 yuan. It's cheap. The problem is, we don't have a controlling stake in this company, and its business is not a good business yet. Over time, our margin of safety may become smaller and smaller. Because there is no way to control the company's assets, the original 10 yuan may become 8 yuan.</p><p>Personally, I think that looking for companies where 10 yuan may become 12 yuan will increase our margin of safety. In what I think<b>With the potential for growth, I can make some concessions on the margin of safety.</b></p><p>Having said that, it is feasible to buy cheap stocks, and you can make money simply by being cheap. I have no objection to this investment method, except that it can't accommodate large funds. At present, the scale of funds managed by Buffett is about $100 billion. He wants to invest 5 billion to buy a stock, and then sell it at a higher price. It is difficult to find such a large counterparty. The scale is too big.</p><p>About 2000, he said \"Give me $1 million and I can make 50% a year\". With a scale of $1 million, there are many opportunities to grasp.<b>The larger the scale of funds, the fewer investment opportunities. Small funds are not restricted in investment, and all companies can choose and buy whatever they want.</b></p><p>Buffett can only choose from 300 large-cap stocks now, and small-scale investments are meaningless to his capital. Everyone here can choose as much as you like in special circumstances investment.</p><p><b>Outperforming the market can be done</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>A lot of my students have asked me a question. For five or six years, people have asked almost every year. My students told me that when you were young, it was easier to invest. They didn't directly say I was old, just when I was young.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Very implicit.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I admit that I am old.</p><p>In short, the students felt that it was better for me to invest at that time. When I entered the industry, there was not so fierce competition as it is now, there were not so many hedge funds, not so many computers involved, and not so many people with high IQ engaged in investment. When I chatted with Howard before, I also said that when I entered the industry to invest, the stock market hadn't risen in the past 13 years. The stock market was unattractive back then.</p><p>My students said that it was easy for you to invest back then, but it must be difficult now. You are still so stupid to write a book about investment, and now others can do it too. I don't think it has much to do with me writing books. In short, the students said that it was more difficult for them to invest, and it was easy for me to invest at that time.</p><p>In answering this question, I talked about two aspects.</p><p>First, some people are good at investing in special circumstances. They invest in places with few people and look for opportunities in liquidation, restructuring and splitting. Many of them are limited by mobility. Warren Buffett made a lot of money investing in this area in his early days, but then he went on a large scale.</p><p>Some people are particularly good at analyzing companies and looking for opportunities in places with fewer people. I asked my students, do you know what happened to these people? Then these people made a lot of money.</p><p>As a result, the scale of their funds has become larger, and they can't invest as before. Therefore, there are always new people who can come in and seize opportunities that can accommodate small funds. There are still unobtrusive small opportunities, but those who have done well in these small opportunities in the past can no longer make this money. There is a lot of room for newcomers to come in.</p><p>On the other hand, we should look at it from the general environment. As we know, efficient market theory is still popular. Efficient market theory warns people that active investment won't work. Didn't even Warren Buffett suggest buying index funds? I think this is true for most people, most people don't know how to value companies.</p><p>I oppose efficient market theory. That's what I told my students.</p><p>Most of my students are young people in their 20s. I said to them, let's go back to when you were about 10 years old. Since then, maybe you have heard a little about the stock market. Let's look at the most watched stock market in the world at that time. Yes, it was the U.S. stock market. Let's look at the most watched stocks in the U.S. stock market. Yes, they are S&P 500 constituent stocks.</p><p>Let's look at the situation of these 500 stocks since you were 10 years old. From 1996 to 2000, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2000 to 2002, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2002 to 2007, the S&P 500 doubled. From 2007 to 2009, the S&P 500 was cut in half. From 2009 to now, the S&P has tripled.</p><p>I'm just saying this to say,<b>Man's madness hasn't changed.</b></p><p>Actually, it's more than that. The S&P 500 is an average index containing 500 constituent stocks. There is a huge differentiation in the S&P 500 index, with some popular stocks becoming popular stocks, and some disliked stocks becoming unpopular stocks.</p><p>The volatility of individual stocks is far more violent than that of indexes. People always have likes and dislikes, and there is a world of difference between sought after and hated stocks. Behind the average of the index, the hustle and bustle never stops.</p><p>That being the case, Ben Graham is not out of fashion. Graham tells us that this is fair value, the market price is like this. Prices fluctuate around fair value.</p><p>We value companies realistically and do investment operations realistically. We can buy when the price is below value, and sometimes we can short when the price is above value.</p><p>Every time in the first class, I always make two assurances to my students.</p><p>The first guarantee, I guarantee, is that if they do a good job in valuation, they will be recognized by the market.</p><p>I just didn't tell them when it would be. Maybe two or three weeks, maybe two or three years. But I guarantee the market will approve of their valuation.</p><p>We can draw a strong inference from this.</p><p>I told the students,<b>As long as their valuation work is done well, in 90% of cases, within two or three years, the market will definitely recognize the value of a stock. If you make a portfolio with several stocks, on average, the market will recognize the valuation faster.</b></p><p>You can see how powerful my reassurances and inferences are. Do the job well and the market will pay us back.</p><p><b>People can't beat the market, not because the market is efficient or close to efficient, not because the market is not affected by emotions, on the contrary, the market is very emotional. Outperforming the market can be done.</b>Why can't people win? It may be that institutions are constrained for many reasons, but it is definitely not because the market price is effective.</p><p>If you don't believe me, let's watch the news, observe what's happening around you, and think about what I just said about the changes in the S&P index since my students were 10 years old. There is no doubt that people's madness has not changed, and investment opportunities are still there.</p><p><b>Only by loving can you invest well</b><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, go back to when you first graduated from Wharton, what advice would you now give to yourself then? Perhaps you have already talked about it earlier. Is there anything to add? Also, what advice would you give to yourself when you first entered the business?</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>First of all, I shouldn't have read law. I went to law school for a year and dropped out. You shouldn't read law.</p><p>I think I'm lucky. Investment requires effort, and investors must figure out what is going on. Many companies can study it, always wondering whether this is logical and whether that is logical. I just love investing. Everything that happens in the world is related to investing.</p><p>I watch the news, learn about a lot of companies, and always learn something new. I have loved making investments since the beginning. I'm really lucky. I do investing because I really like investing.</p><p>Since teaching at Columbia University, I have taught more than 800 students.</p><p>When I first entered the business, the stock market hadn't gone up in the previous 13 years. At that time, many people who invested were not aiming at making a lot of money at all. At that time, people who invested had no idea that they could make a lot of money. The market hasn't gone up in 13 years. After I entered the industry, the market began to rise in a straight line. I'm so lucky. You can not take what I am saying too seriously. After all, when I entered the business, the timing was good.</p><p>I did notice such a phenomenon:<b>As long as you are good at investing, you can really make a lot of money in the stock market.</b>Being good at investing is not that great, but you can really make a lot of money. I also found a phenomenon: among my students,<b>Those who do the best investments are those who really love investing.</b></p><p>Let me give you a piece of advice:<b>Don't invest with the purpose of making money.</b></p><p>You all have high IQs, or you wouldn't be sitting here.<b>There are many meaningful things in the world that are worth doing. You must invest because you like it, not for anything else. Enjoy making investments.</b>I ask my students to promise to invest because they like it. Everyone, I don't think that picking stocks well can make much contribution to society.</p><p>Some people say that because of good investors, the market has sufficient liquidity and the reasonable allocation of capital can be realized. Personally, I think that without us investors, the market will still turn. Where have we achieved a reasonable allocation of capital? Isn't the market still going crazy all the time? Of course, in the long run, we have played a role. This is one of our contributions. I still think it doesn't matter if we lack.</p><p>I told my students,<b>Investing in stocks doesn't create much social value.</b>I ask the students to guarantee that if their investment is done well... Let's put it this way, I personally don't think investment has much social value, but I still teach students to make investments. Isn't it meaningless for me to teach investment?</p><p>So, I asked my students to promise to do something good if they invested well. When their investment is successful, they should do something that they think is meaningful.</p><p>On the other hand, if you really like investing, there is nothing wrong with investing, as long as you really like it, what do you think? Don't do it for money. Everyone here, you can succeed in everything you do. If you choose to invest, you must be because you like it.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Joel, that's so well said.</p><p>Looking back on your investing career, what successful investment has remembered you the most? How did you find this investment? What's your logic?</p><p><b>An outstanding investor must have courage</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>There is an investment that I am very impressed with. It is also because of this investment that I created the Value Investors Club website.</p><p>At that time, we were managing our own funds. We managed external funds, managed them for 10 years, and then returned all external funds. Then, in 2009, I began to accept external funding again. When we discovered this investment opportunity, we didn't manage external funds, just looking for investment opportunities for ourselves.</p><p>We found an opportunity. We have never encountered such a good investment opportunity. The price of this company is only half the cash value, and the business of this company is still good business.</p><p>When determining the proportion of positions, I generally don't consider how much I can earn.<b>When I arranged the largest position, I didn't choose what I thought was the most profitable, but what I thought was impossible to lose money.</b>I can buy a lot of such investment opportunities, and the risk is low. If you are lucky, it may rise sharply. Such an opportunity is perfect.</p><p>The opportunity I'm talking about has a market value of only half the cash value, and the company's business is very good. The capital structure of this company is very complicated. Most people have never seen this kind of capital structure before, so they can't figure it out. If you can figure it out, you will definitely catch it at first glance. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. Of course we bought in a lot.</p><p>We felt smart and felt that we were the only ones who spotted this opportunity.</p><p>One day, my partner discovered that someone on Yahoo's message board actually analyzed the complex capital structure of this company very clearly. I really didn't expect that the gentleman who posted the post worked in the supermarket. He's really smart. Our eyes shine. There are really smart people in the outside world. If only we could bring these people together.</p><p>It was 1999, and everyone was keen on the Internet. I think the internet is amazing. Surfing the Internet is like meeting, and you can communicate with people all over the country and the world. We can start a community. I really want to set up such an investment community.</p><p>The gentleman who worked in the supermarket became our first member. Our aim is to attract smart investors to share investment opportunities. Joining is free, but a valuable investment opportunity must be shared. We got an inspiration from this incident: there are masters among the people.</p><p>In short, this opportunity is really good. The price is only half the cash price, and it's still good business. It is undervalued because its capital structure is relatively complex.</p><p>There is another investment that I am deeply impressed with. This investment is not the worst I have ever made, but it can be said to be the worst.</p><p>One of my partners, Rob Golson, started working with me in 1989. He loves to be joking. He said that if we had worked for others in the past 15 years, we would have been fired eight times. When investing, it is inevitable to make mistakes. We have to accept this fact.</p><p>Here's how this investment goes. We bought a split company, and its Comdex company is the best computer show. Before the split, we can buy at $3 per share by operation. The parent company planned to issue new shares for $6, and there was no official announcement at that time. However, we can lock in the split company at $3 by buying the parent company and doing a short operation accordingly.</p><p>Speaking of which, this investment is fine.</p><p>However, then we fell in love with the business of this company. Comdex operates the show business in Las Vegas. There are plenty of venues in Las Vegas, and it can be rented casually. It rented the venue for $2 per square foot, and sublet it out for $62 per square foot. Running out of space at the show, it can be rented for another $2 and then rented out for another $62. We particularly like the business model of this company.</p><p>Its share price started at $3, and later issued some additional issues at $6. Later, the stock price rose to $12. At $3, we invested heavily because we were confident that we could sell at $6. Getting to $6, we didn't sell it. We fell in love with this company. It later went up to $12.</p><p>Speaking of which, it's still fine.</p><p>Then, we were out of luck. On September 9, 2001, this company acquired another show company and borrowed a lot of money. After 9/11, no one dared to go to the show, the company's business plummeted, and everyone understood the dangers of financial leverage. As we all know, it's not good to borrow more money. Borrowing money is a risk. I only have $1, but I borrow $9. The risk is too high.</p><p>In this investment, I understood what operating leverage is. A company, putting in $2, can make $62. When the sales revenue declines, the revenue is $62 less, and the profit of $60 is gone. The net profit suddenly dropped. This is operating leverage. I learned my lesson and understood what operating leverage is.</p><p>Finally, we cleared at just over $1.</p><p>Things are unpredictable. In this investment, I have a deeper understanding of concentrated investment and operating leverage.</p><p>I've learned a lot, so to speak,<b>I've been learning and I've been making mistakes. I try to avoid repeating mistakes. Unfortunately, the same mistakes often appear again.</b>The mistake is still the original mistake, changing the soup without changing the medicine, and accidentally repeating it.</p><p><b>My advice to you is: Don't be afraid to make mistakes, everyone will inevitably make mistakes.</b></p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>This point Joel just said is important. I hope everyone here can understand this truth. In April, I wrote a memo \"Dare to be Great\".</p><p><b>A brilliant investor must have guts. Everyone wants to achieve something. Always just like everyone else, never getting ahead.</b>What others think, so do you. What others do, so do you. That must be the same as someone else. How can you achieve anything by following the crowd? To be successful, you must be different from others. Have the courage to make mistakes. How can there be people who never make mistakes?</p><p>Even the best baseball players can only hit 40% of their hits in a game. Some investors have a higher success rate than 40%, but no one does not make mistakes. Joel said that if he worked for someone else, he might have been fired eight times.</p><p><b>Greenblatt:</b>I'm a soft-hearted boss and wouldn't fire myself.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Today, I had lunch with a Berkshire Hathaway employee. We talked about why Warren succeeded. I mentioned a bit because he's not afraid of getting fired. Unfortunately, few people have this advantage. Most people are worried about being fired by their bosses.</p><p>We don't have a boss, but we are also worried about being fired by customers. Can we still not be afraid to take risks and stick to our ideas? Nothing is foolproof. Sometimes, can we keep going knowing we might make a mistake? I think, we should persist and not be afraid of making mistakes.</p><p>Joel, one last question. You once achieved brilliant results. Why did you decide to return the funds to your customers later?</p><p><b>There are only three ways to earn 50% a year</b><b>Greenblatt:</b>This question is easier to answer.</p><p>In 1985, I set up my own company. Ten years later, in 1994, we returned all external funds. Our average annual rate of return, before expenses, was 50% during this decade. Ten years later, we returned the funds.</p><p><b>There are only three ways to make 50% a year. The first is to keep it small.</b>Five years after opening, we returned half of our external funds. Ten years later, we returned all external funds.<b>The second is concentrated investment.</b>In that decade, six to eight stocks made up 80% of our portfolio. Our investments are very concentrated.<b>The third is that a little good luck is needed.</b>Our investment is particularly concentrated, and we definitely need a little good luck.</p><p>No matter how powerful or high your level is, if you concentrate on investing in 6 to 8 stocks, you will always encounter a problem. Every two or three years, there's always one or two stocks that don't perform as well as expected, giving us a 20% to 30% decline. Every two or three years, we will encounter such a situation, without exception.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because the market at that time doesn't like the stocks we are bullish on. In this case, we don't care. The stock is still in our hands, but it is cheaper. We understand the stock in our hands, but it's cheaper, and it doesn't matter.</p><p>Sometimes, it's because we make mistakes. I can accept mistakes calmly.</p><p>I know the stocks I have, sometimes I am wrong, and sometimes the stocks are cheaper.</p><p>I can accept this reality. I also know that it is normal to fall by 20% to 30%, and this is the case for stock market investment.</p><p>The problem is, it makes me feel bad to manage money for others.</p><p>I feel like a mature person. I know the stocks in my hand and what I am doing. I just always think that this is someone else's money... My investors are actually very good, and they are all very good people.</p><p>The problem is with myself. Whenever I encounter a big drop, I always feel bad involuntarily. I think everyone can understand that I am a competitive person. I hope to do a good job in my investment, but it's very uncomfortable to lose other people's money.</p><p>Later, we grew large, and even if the funds were returned to investors, our company could still operate, and I could still continue to invest. I decided to return the external funds. I have two choices, one is to change myself and the other is to change the environment.<b>It is easier to change the environment than to change yourself.</b>So, that's what I did.</p><p>Now we do a long and short portfolio, with hundreds of stocks on both sides of the long and short. Our worst performance was 20 to 30 basis points behind. In this way, I overcame my worry of managing money for others, and began to accept external funds again.</p><p><b>HOWARD:</b>Thank you. After listening to Joel's words, I believe you have understood how outstanding investors think. Very logical, intelligent, and deeper than most. Answer speaks for itself.</p><p>The same thing as others see, how can it be better than others? Joel also talked about insights into human nature, investors' views, and how to treat mistakes. Plus, we get to see that Joel is a real person.</p><p>Thanks to Joel, we had a lot today.</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/sRsLs6mhDVRDTpa64oE3jg\">投资有道</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bc9f709d20edb2be754c018c636412d3","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/sRsLs6mhDVRDTpa64oE3jg","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1109716414","content_text":"霍华德·马克斯1995年与人联合创建橡树资本（Oaktree Capital），他撰写的“投资备忘录”因预言科技股泡沫破裂而成为华尔街必读文件，巴菲特也推崇不已。作为知名投资大师，霍华德·马克斯曾和另一位大师——乔尔·格林布拉特（Joel Greenblatt）有过一场非常经典的对话，乔尔是哥伦比亚大学商学院客座教授，戈坦资本（GothamCapital）创始人和合伙经理人。戈坦资本在1985年成立至2005年的二十年间，资产规模从700万美元增到8.3亿美元，年均回报率高达40%，堪称华尔街的一项投资奇迹。即便是经历了2008年的金融危机，戈坦资本的资产管理规模依然维持在9亿美元的水平，年化收益率仍高达30%。观察这两人关于价值投资的精彩对话，可以看到杰出投资者是如何思考的，怎么胜过别人，对人性的洞察，对投资者的看法，如何看待错误等等，非常有逻辑与智慧。霍华德：今天我们有幸请到了乔尔和我们聊投资。25年前，通过朋友介绍，我认识了乔尔。70年代末，沃顿商学院出了不少成功的投资者。有时间的话，我们可以聊聊为何如此。乔尔绝对是其中出类拔萃的一位。乔尔在哥伦比亚大学教授价值投资，后来他请我每年去给他的学生讲一次课，我欣然应允。今天，我把他请到了沃顿。乔尔是一位真正的投资者。有志成为投资者的各位，请认真听乔尔讲。我自己提前写好了几个问题，还请乔尔看了一下。后来，我儿子安德鲁把他要问的问题发给了我。安德鲁也是沃顿毕业的。我觉得他问的问题更好。我建议我们先请乔尔回答安德鲁的问题。这些问题乔尔事先没看过，我们请他现场回答。我觉得安德鲁的问题写得不错。乔尔，不介意的话，我就照着读了。格林布拉特：好。在人少的地方找机会霍华德：你写了一本关于特殊情况投资的书，分门别类的讲了如何从拆分、重组、破产、并购等事件中获利。在你之前，没人这么详细地讲过特殊情况投资。请问你是怎么研究出来这种投资风格的？你知道自己要关注什么，哪能赚钱，哪不能赚钱。你怎么知道的呢？格林布拉特：确实，很好的问题。我的第一份工作是在一家对冲基金，是一家做风险套利的公司。它做的风险套利也叫并购套利，就是在看到并购公告后买入一家公司，希望通过并购完成来获利。这么操作的风险和收益基本是这样的：并购成功，赚1块钱。并购失败，亏10或15块钱。我个人认为这样的风险收益比不合适。于是，我开始研究其他操作方法。后来，我发现并购中会出现一些值得关注的股票。我不做前面说的那种并购套利，我开始关注公司的特殊事件，例如，重组、拆分等等，我要找的是赚可以赚1块钱，但亏就只亏1毛钱的机会。可以说，我是在人少的地方找机会。当年，我在沃顿读书的时候，沃顿属于有效市场理论学派，课堂上讲的是有效市场理论。这套理论无法让我产生共鸣。大三那年，我偶然读到了一篇关于本杰明·格雷厄姆的文章。读了这篇文章，我豁然开朗，觉得太有道理了。我把格雷厄姆写的所有东西都找来读了。我的投资观念发生了彻底的改变。我知道投资该怎么做，不该怎么做了。其实就是要弄清楚一个东西值多少钱，然后花很低的价格买下来，留足安全边际。我把这个理念在特殊情况投资中付诸实践。我写了本书，《你也可以成为股市天才》，这书名起的实在不咋地，书名想表达的意思是傻子都能成为股市天才。写这本书的时候，Motley Fool网站特别火。编辑建议我在书名中用上“傻瓜”这个词。我老爸给我提了个建议，叫《你也可以成为股市天才》，然后再加个副标题，《就算你不聪明也能行》。我一听就笑了。编辑让我一天之内把书名定下来。我就用了老爸起的书名。这个书名起得不好。我在书的开头讲了一个故事，是关于我岳父岳母的。他们一年里有几个月住在康州。他们在康州主要是淘古玩，经常参加各种拍卖会，物色便宜的古董。他们在拍卖会上是怎么淘宝贝的呢？比如说，他们在拍卖会上看到了一幅画。在其他拍卖会上，他们看过相似作品、相似尺寸、相似题材的画作，但成交价是现在这幅画的两三倍。他们就会出手买下来。他们用不着研究这幅画能不能成为下一个毕加索作品。要找下一个毕加索可难多了。我在书的开头说，特殊情况投资也类似。我们用不着费尽心机寻找下一个毕加索。我们最好在人少的地方找机会，去别人不关注的地方找机会。可能是市值小，可能是情况特殊，或者很复杂，一般人不会深入研究。有时要读400多页的公告，有时被拆分出去的股票是人们不想要的。被拆分出去的业务是公司抛弃的，买公司原来的股票的人不想要。投资要找到价格低于公允价值的股票，我个人觉得在特殊情况中实践这个理念比较简单。在《你也可以成为股市天才》这本书的第一章末尾，我讲了一个修水管的故事。你家的水管坏了，找来水管工修理。水管工敲了一下水管，然后说修这个水管要200块。你说:\"要200块？你就敲下水管就200块啊？\"水管工说：\"敲下水管只要5块，知道敲哪要195块。\"这个故事可以说明我对特殊情况投资的理解，要找自己觉得比较容易的事做。我不愿费尽心机，我想偷点懒，像巴菲特说的，挑30厘米高的跨栏。既然找得到30厘米高的跨栏，何必非往3米高的跨栏上冲？一句话，只要我地方找对了，用不着太聪明，就能做得好。霍华德：乔尔，在今年我写的一篇备忘录中，我也讲了一个故事。有个人，一心想成为扑克高手。他钻研如何得到好牌，如何让自己的牌胜过对手，如何识破对手的虚张声势。他叔叔对他说。你再怎么研究都成不了扑克高手，找个更容易玩的不就得了？乔尔，你说你找到了自己觉得比较简单的投资方式。我们想到一块去了。格林布拉特：正是如此。我在书里还讲了一个故事，说的也是这个道理。故事是这样的。我和朋友打赌输了。输的人要请赢的人去最有名的饭店吃饭，那时纽约最有名的饭店是Lutece餐厅。Lutece餐厅由全球一流的大厨Andre Soltner主理。我先打电话订位，餐厅告诉我无法预订。我说不管哪天，什么时候都行。还是不给我订。我开始还不明白怎么回事。后来才知道，要提前30天订位。只有提前30天才订得到。我一直打电话，后来总算订到了。我和朋友来到了这家餐厅。点餐的时候，我也没注意旁边站的是谁。我就指着菜单上的一道开胃菜，随口就问道：“这个好吃吗？”大厨Andre Soltner看着我，说：“难吃的要命。”面对世界一流大厨，我竟然问他烹饪的美食好不好吃。我琢磨，他的话是这个意思，菜单上的每道菜都好吃。这可是全世界最顶级的餐厅。就是这个道理，在最好的地方选购，这里的所有东西都是好的。我只需要从好东西里选出更好的就行了。安全边际可以为成长性让步霍华德：乔尔，你刚才讲到了以远远低于价值的价格买入，这是安全边际。你认为这是价值投资的核心吗？你觉得是否有必要展开讲讲，还是记住这些就够了？再补充一个问题，你刚才讲到了你岳父岳母的故事，你认为他们不寻找下一个毕加索是对的。你觉得投资成长股是寻找下一个毕加索吗？格林布拉特：有这层意思。我对价值投资的定义是弄清楚值多少钱，然后在很低的价格买入，与低市净率无关、与低市销率无关。罗素、晨星等机构，还有很多人，觉得价值投资者就是看市净率、市销率投资的。按这样的划分标准，我不算价值投资者，也不算成长投资者。别人说不好我们算是哪一类。正如巴菲特所说，价值和成长说到底是一回事。公司的长期成长性是其投资价值中的一部分。价值和成长的界限并不像罗素或晨星等机构划分的那样泾渭分明。或许价值股成长性较低，成长股成长性较高。划分是人为的划分。我就是找便宜的好公司。本·格雷厄姆说了，研究明白值多少钱，在很低的价格买下来，在二者之间留足安全边际，价格和价值要相差足够大。沃伦·巴菲特是格雷厄姆最杰出的弟子。巴菲特对老师的理念稍加改进，后来成了全球首富。巴菲特说得很简单，要是在便宜的价格能买到好公司，那就更好了。好公司的好包括它的长期成长性。我是逐渐获得这个认识的。在我投资的第一个10年里，我花了很长时间才明白。我越来越倾向于按沃伦·巴菲特的方法投资，他找的是又好、又便宜的公司，成长性是好公司的一个特征。霍华德：我们知道，巴菲特早期不是对好公司很着迷。他是从捡烟头开始的，他初期关注的不是质地，只看重是否够便宜。他的风格后来发生了转变。格林布拉特：没错。在沃顿读研究生时，我和几个同学一起研究了买入廉价股的策略，写成了一篇毕业论文，后来在《Portfolio Management》期刊上发表了。我们研究的是NetNet，买入低于清算价值的股票。我们的研究表明，只要买的够便宜，能很赚钱。沃伦·巴菲特早期就是这么做的。可是我们为什么逐渐倾向于定性呢？举个例子，我们找到了一只股票，值10块钱，价格是6块钱。很便宜。问题是，我们没有这家公司的控股权，它的生意还不是好生意。时间长了，我们的安全边际可能越来越小。因为没办法控制公司的资产，原来的10块钱可能变成8块钱。我个人认为，要寻找10块钱可能变成12块钱的公司，让我们的安全边际随之增加。在我认为具备成长性的情况下，我可以在安全边际上做些让步。话说回来，买廉价股是行得通的，单纯是便宜就能赚钱。我毫不反对这种投资方法，只是它容纳不了大资金。现在巴菲特管理的资金规模大概是1000亿美元左右。他想投资50亿买一只股票，然后转手以更高的价格卖出去，很难找到这么大体量的交易对手。规模太大了。大概2000年的时候，他说“给我100万美元，我每年能赚50%”。100万美元的规模，有很多机会可以抓。资金规模越大，投资机会越少。小资金在投资中不受限制，所有公司可以随便挑、随便买。巴菲特现在只能从300只大盘股里挑选，小规模的投资对他的资金量没意义。在座的各位在特殊情况投资中可以尽情选择。跑赢市场是能做到的格林布拉特：我的很多学生都问过我一个问题。五六年来，几乎每年都有人问。我的学生和我说，你年轻的时候，做投资比较容易。他们没直接说我已经老了，只是说我年轻的时候。霍华德：很含蓄。格林布拉特：我承认自己老了。总之，学生们觉得我那时候投资更好做。我入行的那个年代，没有现在这么激烈的竞争，没这么多对冲基金、没这么多计算机的参与、没这么多高智商的人从事投资。我以前和霍华德聊天的时候也说过，我入行做投资时，股市在过去的13年都没涨。那时候股市不吸引人。我的学生说，你当年做投资容易，现在肯定难了。你还那么傻，竟然写书讲投资，现在别人也都会了。我觉得和我写书关系不大。总之，学生们说他们做投资更难了，我那时候投资好做。在回答这个问题时，我讲了两个方面。第一，有些人擅长做特殊情况投资，他们在人少的地方投资，在清算、重组、拆分中寻找机会。他们中有很多人受流动性的限制。沃伦·巴菲特早期的时候做这方面的投资赚了很多钱，但是后来他规模大了。有些人特别擅长分析公司，在人少的地方找机会。我问我的学生，你们知道这些人后来怎么样了吗？后来这些人赚了很多钱。结果他们的资金规模变大了，没办法像以前一样投资了。所以说，总有新人可以进来，捕捉可以容纳小资金的机会。不引人注目的小机会还是有，但从前在这些小机会中做得好的人，已经赚不了这个钱了。新人进来则有很大空间。另一个方面要从大环境来看。我们知道，有效市场理论还是大行其道。有效市场理论告诫人们主动投资行不通。不是连沃伦·巴菲特也建议买指数基金吗？我认为，这对大多数人来说是对的，大多数人不知道怎么给公司估值。我反对有效市场理论。我是这么和我的学生说的。我的学生大多数是20多岁的年轻人。我对他们说，咱们回到你们10岁左右的时候，从那时起，可能你们就对股市略有耳闻了。我们看看那时全世界最受关注的股市，没错，是美国股市。我们再看美国股市中最受关注的股票，没错，是标普500成分股。我们看看，从你们10岁起，这500只股票的情况。从1996年到2000年，标普500翻倍。从2000年到2002年，标普500腰斩。从2002年到2007年，标普500翻倍。从2007年到2009年，标普500腰斩。从2009年到现在，标普涨了三倍。我说这些，就是想说，人的疯狂没有改变。其实还不止如此。标普500是包含500只成分股的平均指数。标普500指数中存在巨大分化，有些受人们追捧的成为热门股，有些被人嫌弃的成为冷门股。个股的波动远比指数剧烈。人们总是有喜好和厌恶，被人们追捧和遭人厌恶的股票有天壤之别。在指数的平均值背后，喧嚣从未停止。既然如此，本·格雷厄姆没有过时。格雷厄姆告诉我们，这是公允价值，市场价格是这样的。价格围绕公允价值波动。我们实事求是地给公司估值，实事求是地做投资操作，可以在价格低于价值时买入，有时还可以在价格高于价值时做空。每次在第一堂课上，我总是向我的学生做两个保证。第一个保证，我保证，如果他们把估值工作做好，一定会得到市场的认同。我就是没告诉他们会是什么时候。可能两三个星期，也可能两三年。但是我保证市场会认可他们的估值。我们由此可以得出一个强有力的推论。我告诉学生们，只要他们估值工作做好了，在90%的情况下，在两三年时间内，市场一定会认识到一只股票的价值。要是做一个包含若干股票的投资组合，平均下来，市场认可估值的时间会更快。各位能明白，我的保证和推论有多大的威力。把工作做好，市场会给我们回报。人们跑不赢市场，不是因为市场有效或接近有效，不是因为市场不受情绪影响，恰恰相反，市场非常情绪化。跑赢市场是能做到的。人们为什么跑不赢呢？可能是机构受到种种束缚，原因很多，但绝对不是因为市场价格有效。不信我们看看新闻，观察一下周围发生的事情，再想想我刚才说的，从我的学生们10岁时起，标普指数的变化。毫无疑问，人们的疯狂没变，投资的机会仍在。热爱才能做好投资霍华德：乔尔，回到你刚从沃顿毕业时，现在的你会给那时的自己什么建议？或许你在前面已经讲过了，有没有什么补充的？另外，你会给刚入行时的自己什么建议呢？格林布拉特：首先，不应该读法律，我去法学院读了一年的书就退学了。不应该读法律。我觉得自己运气很好。投资要付出努力，投资者必须弄清楚是怎么回事，很多公司都可以研究，总要琢磨这样是否符合逻辑，那样是否符合逻辑。我就是喜欢投资。世界上发生的一切都与投资相关。我看新闻，了解很多公司的情况，总是能学到新东西。我从一开始就喜欢做投资。我真是运气很好。我做投资这件事，是因为我真心喜欢投资。在哥伦比亚大学任教以来，我教过800多个学生。我刚入行的时候，在之前的13年里，股市都没涨。那时候很多去做投资的人根本不是冲着赚大钱去的。那时候去做投资的人根本想不到能赚大钱。市场13年都没涨。我入行以后，市场就开始直线上涨。我真是运气好。各位可以不把我讲的太当真。毕竟，我入行的时候，时机很好。我倒是确实注意到这样一个现象：只要是善于做投资的人，真的能在股市赚大钱。善于做投资没那么了不起，但确实能赚很多钱。我还发现一个现象：在我的学生里，投资做得最好的，是那些真正热爱投资的。我给各位一个忠告：别带着赚钱的目的来做投资。你们的智商都很高，要不也不会坐在这。世界上有很多有意义的事，值得你们去做。一定要因为自己喜欢才做投资，别为了别的。做投资要乐在其中。我要求我的学生保证，要因为喜欢而做投资。各位，我不觉得挑股票挑得好能对社会做多大贡献。有人说，因为有好的投资者，市场才有充分的流动性，才能实现资本的合理分配。我个人认为，缺了我们这些投资者，市场照样转。我们哪里实现了资本的合理分配？市场不是还经常发疯吗？当然，长期来看，我们发挥了一定的作用。这算是我们的一个贡献。我还是觉得缺了我们也无所谓。我告诉我的学生，投资股票创造不了多少社会价值。我要求学生们保证，要是他们投资做好了……这么说吧，我本人觉得投资没多大社会价值，但是我还教学生们做投资，我教投资这件事不也是没意义的吗？所以，我让我的学生保证，要是他们投资做好了，要做些好事。等他们投资做成功了，要做一些自己觉得有意义的事。话说回来，你要是真喜欢投资，做投资没什么不对，只要是真喜欢，你们说呢？别为了钱。在座的各位，你们做什么都能成功，要是选择做投资，一定要因为是自己喜欢。霍华德：乔尔，说得太好了。回顾你的投资生涯，有哪笔成功的投资是你印象最深的？你是怎么找到这笔投资的？你的逻辑是什么？一个杰出的投资者必须有胆识格林布拉特：有一个投资，我印象很深。也是因为这个投资，我创建了Value Investors Club网站。那时，我们在管理自己的资金。我们管理外部资金，管了10年，然后把所有外部资金都还回去了。后来，到2009年，我才开始又接受外部资金。发现这个投资机会时，我们没管理外部资金，只是在为自己寻找投资机会。我们发现了一个机会，我们从没遇到过这么好的投资机会。这家公司的价格只有现金价值的一半，而且这家公司的生意还是好生意。在确定仓位占比的时候，我考虑的一般不是能赚多少。我在安排最大仓位的时候，选的不是我觉得能最赚钱的，而是我觉得不可能亏钱的。这样的投资机会，我可以买很多，风险低。运气好的话，可能大涨。这样的机会太完美了。我讲的这个机会，市值只有现金价值的一半，而且公司的生意很好。这家公司的资本结构很复杂，一般人以前没见过这种资本结构，所以搞不清楚。要是你能搞清楚的话，肯定会一眼就看上它。价格可只有现金的一半，还是好生意。我们当然大量买入了。我们觉得自己很聪明，觉得只有我们发现了这个机会。有一天，我的合伙人发现，在雅虎留言板上，有个人竟然把这家公司复杂的资本结构分析得很清楚。真是没想到，那位发帖子的先生，在超市里上班。他真是聪明啊。我们眼前一亮，外面的世界里还真有聪明人啊。我们要是能把这些人聚到一起该多好。那时是1999年，大家都热衷于互联网。我觉得互联网很了不起。上网像开会一样，可以与全国、全世界的人交流。我们可以成立个社区。我很想成立这么个投资社区。那位在超市里工作的先生成了我们的第一批成员。我们的目的是吸引聪明的投资者分享投资机会。加入是免费的，但必须分享有价值的投资机会。我们从这件事里得到了一个启发：民间有高手。总之，这个机会实在是好。价格只有现金的一半，还是好生意。低估是因为它的资本结构比较复杂。还有一个投资，我印象很深。这个投资，不是我做过的最差的，但可以说是最惨的。我的一位合伙人，罗伯·高尔森，1989年开始和我合作。他爱开玩笑。他说，要是我们过去15年里给别人打工，我们已经被炒了8次了。做投资，难免犯错。我们得接受这个事实。这笔投资是这样的。我们买了一家被拆分的公司，它旗下的Comdex公司是电脑展会做得最好的。在拆分之前，我们可以通过操作，按每股3美元买入。母公司计划以6美元发行新股，当时还没发布正式公告。但是，我们可以通过买入母公司，并相应做一个做空操作，锁定以3美元买入拆分的公司。讲到这，这笔投资没问题。可是，后来我们爱上了这家公司的生意。Comdex在拉斯维加斯经营展会业务。拉斯维加斯有大量场地，它可以随便租。它租来的场地租金是每平方英尺2美元，再转租出去的价格是每平方英尺62美元。展会空间不够了，它可以再花2美元租来，然后再以62美元租出去。我们特别喜欢这家公司的商业模式。它的股价开始是3美元，后来在6美元增发了一些。后来，股价涨到了12美元。在3美元的时候，我们重仓投资，因为我们有信心可以在6美元的时候卖出去。到了6美元，我们没卖。我们爱上了这家公司。后来涨到12美元。讲到这，还是没问题。再后来，我们就倒霉了。2001年9月9日，这家公司收购了另一家展会公司，借了很多钱。911之后，没人敢去展会了，公司的业务一落千丈，而且所有人都明白了金融杠杆的危害。大家都知道，借钱多不好，借钱是冒险，自己只有1美元，却借了9美元，风险太高。在这笔投资中，我明白了什么是经营杠杆。一家公司，投入2美元，能赚62美元。等销售收入下降的时候，收入少62美元，60美元的利润就没了。净利润一下子就掉下来了。这就是经营杠杆。我得到了教训，明白了什么是经营杠杆。最后，我们在1美元多点清仓了。世事难料，在这笔投资中，我对集中投资、经营杠杆有了更深刻的理解。我学到了很多东西，可以说，我一直在学习，一直在犯错。我努力避免重复犯错。可惜，同样的错误经常改头换面再次出现。错误还是原来的错误，换汤不换药，一不小心就又重犯了。我给各位的建议是：别害怕犯错，谁都难免犯错。霍华德：乔尔刚才说的这一点很重要。希望在座的各位都能明白这个道理。四月份，我写了一篇备忘录“敢于伟大”。一个杰出的投资者必须有胆识。谁都想有成就。总是和别人一样，永远没出头之日。别人怎么想，你也怎么想。别人怎么做，你也怎么做。那肯定和别人一样了。随大流怎么可能有成就？要有成就，必须和别人不一样。要有敢犯错的胆识。哪有从不犯错的人？即使是最优秀的棒球选手，也只能在一场比赛中有40%的安打。有些投资者的成功率比40%高，但没人不犯错。乔尔说了，要是他给别人打工，可能已经被炒了8次了。格林布拉特：我是个心软的老板，不会把自己炒了。霍华德：今天，我和伯克希尔哈撒韦的一位员工吃午饭。我们聊了沃伦为什么能成功。我提到了一点，因为他不怕被炒鱿鱼。可惜，有这个优势的人很少。一般人担心被老板炒掉。我们没老板，但是也担心被客户炒掉。我们还能不怕冒险，坚持自己的想法吗？没什么事是万无一失的。有时候，在知道可能犯错的情况下，我们还能坚持下去吗？我觉得，要坚持，不怕犯错。乔尔，问你最后一个问题。你曾经取得了辉煌的业绩，为什么后来决定把资金返还给客户？只有三个办法可以做到一年赚50%格林布拉特：这个问题比较好回答。1985年，我成立了自己的公司。十年之后，1994年，我们返还了所有外部资金。在这十年里，扣除费用之前，我们的年均收益率是50%。十年后，我们把资金还了回去。只有三个办法可以做到一年赚50%。第一是保持小规模。开业五年后，我们返还了一半的外部资金。十年之后，我们返还了所有外部资金。第二是集中投资。在那十年里，6到8只股票占我们的投资组合的80%。我们的投资非常集中。第三是需要一点好运气。我们的投资特别集中，肯定需要一点好运气。不管你再怎么厉害，水平再怎么高，集中投资6到8只股票，总是会遇到一个问题。每两三年，总会有一两只股票表现不如预期，给我们带来20%到30%的下跌。每两三年，都会遇到这样的情况，从无例外。有时候，是因为当时的市场不喜欢我们看好的股票。遇到这种情况，我们不在意。股票还在我们手里，就是更便宜了。我们明白自己手里的股票，只是它更便宜了，没关系。有时候，是因为我们犯错了。我可以坦然接受错误。我清楚自己手里的股票，有时是我错了，有时是股票更便宜了。我能接受这个现实。我也清楚，跌个20%到30%是正常的，股市投资本来如此。问题是，给别人管钱，我心里就不好受了。我觉得自己是个成熟的人，我清楚自己手里的股票，知道自己在做什么。只是总想着这是别人的钱……我的投资者其实都很好，都是很好的人。问题在我自己。每当遇到大跌时，我总是不由自主地感觉很不好。我想大家能理解，我是个争强好胜的人。我希望把投资做好，亏了别人的钱，很不好受。后来，我们规模大了，即使把资金归还给投资者，我们的公司还是可以运转，我还是可以继续投资。我决定把外部资金还回去。我有两个选择，一个是改变自己，另一个是改变环境。改变环境比改变自己容易。于是，我就这么做了。现在我们做长短仓投资组合，多空两边都有几百只股票。我们表现最差的时候也就是落后20到30个基点。这样一来，我就克服了自己给别人管钱的担心，就又开始接受外部资金了。霍华德：谢谢。听了乔尔的一席话，相信各位已经领会了杰出投资者是如何思考的。非常有逻辑、有智慧，比大多数人都有深度。答案不言自明。和别人看到的东西一样，怎么可能胜过别人？乔尔还讲到了对人性的洞察，对投资者的看法，如何看待错误。另外，我们还看到了乔尔是一个真实的人。感谢乔尔，我们今天收获良多。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":239,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":687596940,"gmtCreate":1661146488784,"gmtModify":1676536759770,"author":{"id":"3584594238720284","authorId":"3584594238720284","name":"蚂蚁移山","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/86dfdfe60a3e550fa61f48cb49ed9bc0","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3584594238720284","idStr":"3584594238720284"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"FYI","listText":"FYI","text":"FYI","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/687596940","repostId":"20220801081857440","repostType":13,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":251,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
