Links: Buffett’s Three Phases, Kobayashi’s Hot Dogs and How Zuck Crushed Google Plus

Profile and back story of Zuckerberg’s destruction of Google Plus.  I find it highly informative when two heavyweights duel it out in specific product categories.  Another great example is Amazon’s Fire Phone.  Here’s a good summary of that failure.

Buffett’s Three Styles. I thought this was a good summary of how Buffett has changed over time.  A good foundation for understanding how different investments fit into his evolving styles during the various time periods.

Farnam Street with some great thoughts on what he calls Grey Thinking.

Podcast from the past: 2014 Freakonomics episode about hot dog eating (or how Takeru Kobayashi revolutionized the sport of competitive eating).  I will have to write about this separately, but I think the seeds of how to invest better is within this podcast.  It’s a great way to spend 30 minutes.  

Auto buying and loans: A new reality?  This is an area that I think will be interesting to watch.  We will see in real time whether the dynamics of the underlying loans have changed or this is just another example where “this time is not different.”

I wrote about Conn’s almost two years ago and another author I respect took the other side of the debate (I probably agree with almost every other post this author has written, except this one).  The story continues to play out, but it looks like the Wimpy narrative is winning this round.

If you are interested in subscribing to this blog to receive future updates, please use the box in the upper right hand corner.  I look forward to any comments you would like to post below.

More to Explore

Returns for Great vs. Bad Businesses

Munger and The Cattle Rancher

Munger’s ability to find great businesses is directly related to his ability to consistently discard bad businesses. He is excellent at inverting, and discarding the bad businesses as quickly as possible.

The Abominable No-Man and Bad Management

Some investors think a business is good, but know that management is bad.  These investors justify the investment based on the idea that the great price of the business is worth the bad management. This is akin to marrying a supermodel who is going to yell at you all day.  Whatever pleasure your eyes may derive from the marriage, your ears will endure a greater amount of pain in the long run. The pocketbooks of those partnering with bad management are likely to see a similar 50%+ decline in their net worth.

This Post Has One Comment

  1. Matt,

    I recently stumbled across your blog and have since become a big fan of your writing. I hope you’re on vacation or doing something fun because you’ve left me hanging on your thoughts on both the Kobayashi podcast (GREAT podcast btw) and the characteristics of removable vs. permanent business “illnesses”. Looking forward to read those posts.


Leave a Reply


Close Menu