作者stasis (流雨风雪)
看板Trading
标题How to Minimize Investment Returns
时间Sun Apr 8 20:02:41 2007
By Warren Buffett
It’s been an easy matter for Berkshire and other owners of American equities
to prosper over the years. Between December 31, 1899 and December 31, 1999,
to give a really long-term example, the Dow rose from 66 to 11,497. (Guess
what annual growth rate is required to produce this result; the surprising
answer is at the end of this section.) This huge rise came about for a simple
reason: Over the century American businesses did extraordinarily well and
investors rode the wave of their prosperity. Businesses continue to do well.
But now shareholders, through a series of self-inflicted wounds, are in a
major way cutting the returns they will realize from their investments.
The explanation of how this is happening begins with a fundamental truth:
With unimportant exceptions, such as bankruptcies in which some of a company’
s losses are borne by creditors, the most that owners in aggregate can earn
between now and Judgment Day is what their businesses in aggregate earn.
True, by buying and selling that is clever or lucky, investor A may take more
than his share of the pie at the expense of investor B. And, yes, all
investors feel richer when stocks soar. But an owner can exit only by having
someone take his place. If one investor sells high, another must buy high.
For owners as a whole, there is simply no magic – no shower of money from
outer space – that will enable them to extract wealth from their companies
beyond that created by the companies themselves. Indeed, owners must earn
less than their businesses earn because of “frictional” costs. And that’s
my point: These costs are now being incurred in amounts that will cause
shareholders to earn far less than they historically have.
To understand how this toll has ballooned, imagine for a moment that all
American corporations are, and always will be, owned by a single family. We’
ll call them the Gotrocks. After paying taxes on dividends, this family –
generation after generation – becomes richer by the aggregate amount earned
by its companies. Today that amount is about $700 billion annually.
Naturally, the family spends some of these dollars. But the portion it saves
steadily compounds for its benefit. In the Gotrocks household everyone grows
wealthier at the same pace, and all is harmonious.
But let’s now assume that a few fast-talking Helpers approach the family and
persuade each of its members to try to outsmart his relatives by buying
certain of their holdings and selling them certain others. The Helpers – for
a fee, of course – obligingly agree to handle these transactions. The
Gotrocks still own all of corporate America; the trades just rearrange who
owns what. So the family’s annual gain in wealth diminishes, equaling the
earnings of American business minus commissions paid. The more that family
members trade, the smaller their share of the pie and the larger the slice
received by the Helpers. This fact is not lost upon these broker-Helpers:
Activity is their friend and, in a wide variety of ways, they urge it on.
After a while, most of the family members realize that they are not doing so
well at this new “beat my- brother” game. Enter another set of Helpers.
These newcomers explain to each member of the Gotrocks clan that by himself he
’ll never outsmart the rest of the family. The suggested cure: “Hire a
manager – yes, us – and get the job done professionally.” These
manager-Helpers continue to use the broker-Helpers to execute trades; the
managers may even increase their activity so as to permit the brokers to
prosper still more. Overall, a bigger slice of the pie now goes to the two
classes of Helpers. The family’s disappointment grows. Each of its members
is now employing professionals. Yet overall, the group’s finances have taken
a turn for the worse. The solution? More help, of course. It arrives in the
form of financial planners and institutional consultants, who weigh in to
advise the Gotrocks on selecting manager-Helpers. The befuddled family
welcomes this assistance. By now its members know they can pick neither the
right stocks nor the right stock-pickers. Why, one might ask, should they
expect success in picking the right consultant? But this question does not
occur to the Gotrocks, and the consultant-Helpers certainly don’t suggest it
to them.
The Gotrocks, now supporting three classes of expensive Helpers, find that
their results get worse, and they sink into despair. But just as hope seems
lost, a fourth group – we’ll call them the hyper-Helpers – appears. These
friendly folk explain to the Gotrocks that their unsatisfactory results are
occurring because the existing Helpers – brokers, managers, consultants –
are not sufficiently motivated and are simply going through the motions. “
What,” the new Helpers ask, “can you expect from such a bunch of zombies?”
The new arrivals offer a breathtakingly simple solution: Pay more money.
Brimming with self-confidence, the hyper-Helpers assert that huge contingent
payments – in addition to stiff fixed fees – are what each family member
must fork over in order to really outmaneuver his relatives.
The more observant members of the family see that some of the hyper-Helpers
are really just manager-Helpers wearing new uniforms, bearing sewn-on sexy
names like HEDGE FUND or PRIVATE EQUITY. The new Helpers, however, assure the
Gotrocks that this change of clothing is all-important, bestowing on its
wearers magical powers similar to those acquired by mild-mannered Clark Kent
when he changed into his Superman costume. Calmed by this explanation, the
family decides to pay up.
And that’s where we are today: A record portion of the earnings that would
go in their entirety to owners – if they all just stayed in their rocking
chairs – is now going to a swelling army of Helpers. Particularly expensive
is the recent pandemic of profit arrangements under which Helpers receive
large portions of the winnings when they are smart or lucky, and leave family
members with all of the losses – and large fixed fees to boot – when the
Helpers are dumb or unlucky (or occasionally crooked).
A sufficient number of arrangements like this – heads, the Helper takes much
of the winnings; tails, the Gotrocks lose and pay dearly for the privilege of
doing so – may make it more accurate to call the family the Hadrocks. Today,
in fact, the family’s frictional costs of all sorts may well amount to 20%
of the earnings of American business. In other words, the burden of paying
Helpers may cause American equity investors, overall, to earn only 80% or so
of what they would earn if they just sat still and listened to no one.
Long ago, Sir Isaac Newton gave us three laws of motion, which were the work
of genius. But Sir Isaac’s talents didn’t extend to investing: He lost a
bundle in the South Sea Bubble, explaining later, “I can calculate the
movement of the stars, but not the madness of men.” If he had not been
traumatized by this loss, Sir Isaac might well have gone on to discover the
Fourth Law of Motion: For investors as a whole, returns decrease as motion
increases.
* * * * * * * * * * *
Here’s the answer to the question posed at the beginning of this section: To
get very specific, the Dow increased from 65.73 to 11,497.12 in the 20th
century, and that amounts to a gain of 5.3% compounded annually. (Investors
would also have received dividends, of course.) To achieve an equal rate of
gain in the 21st century, the Dow will have to rise by December 31, 2099 to –
brace yourself – precisely 2,011,011.23. But I’m willing to settle for
2,000,000; six years into this century, the Dow has gained not at all.
--
波段单王道:多头做多、空头做空、盘整少做、赚钱加码、赔钱停损
小弟在永丰金证券,来开户就不定期提供个人观察潜力股名单
以及操作建议,股票期权手续费都有优惠唷,意者请mail ^^
http://blog.pixnet.net/stasis
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 59.117.65.150
2F:推 ujj:好物 感恩^^ 04/09 23:02