Milu

Yes I am the same. Quality of business and management is the first hurdle a company has to pass before it meets my requirements, earning estimates and price to pay is the very last step so I would have already ruled out the bad businesses (low returns on equity, capital, excessive dilution, excessive leverage, inconsistent margins etc) before they ever get to the stage where I am estimating fair value. Doesn't mean I get it right every time but so far I've mostly avoided value traps. I don't think I have ever bought a business because it was 'cheap'.

That's a good answer and I suppose it depends on the investors approach. I've never quite aligned with the looking out 3-5 years approach. I think it is hard enough to estimate some sort of steady-state earnings number for one year out, that to believe you can do it with any degree of accuracy when looking 3-5 years into the future is not possible (in my opinion). Wars, Oil Shocks, Recessions, Pandemics, Tech Booms etc, how can any logical person look at Apple, Nvidia, Nike for example, and assess with any degree of accuracy what their earnings will be in 2029? Perhaps you will say that these aren't good examples and other firms are more predictable, but I'm not sure. I take a more simple estimation approach, through researching the company, reviewing financial statements history and making adjustments, I come up with a single normalised earnings/free cash flow number that I feel has a reasonable chance of being accurate of being achieved over the next 12 months. I will use this estimate to determine what the stock is currently yielding (earnings/Price), and then lastly I will apply a margin of safety to account for situations where the actual earnings end up being less than my estimate. I don't believe anybody can estimate growth rates with any degree of accuracy (at least I certainly can't) so I try to buy at price where even if their was no growth at all over the coming years I'd still have an acceptable return. Similar to how I believe Alice Schroeder summarised Buffets approach, he like to buy at a 10% pre-tax yield and then just let the growth take care of itself.

Just curious if you use Trailing or Forward multiples when you are assessing the valuation of a stock? Personally I have always used trailing multiples as it feels a bit more conservative, but if you think about it logically then some sort of forward multiple should make more sense as that is the current expected 'yield' of the stock. For example, Meta is currently 32 P/E which gives a earnings yield of 3.1%, forward P/E is roughy 23 which gives earnings yield of 4.3%. Obviously the forward earnings are based on estimates which could be higher or lower than what actually transpires. For fixed income or real estate investors I assume they mostly care about the expected future yields and not necessarily the previous although they would factor these in as part of their general valuation approach. What do you do?

I am trying to build a list of annual letters worth reading from smart CEO's and Investors. Here are some of the typical ones I read but would love some suggestions - Buffett Annual Letter to Shareholders - Jamie Dimon Annual Letter - Amazon Annual Letter (Previously Bezos, now written by Andy Jassy) - Francois Rochon (Giverny Capital) Annual Letter - Mark Leonard (Constellation software), although he doesn't do them anymore

I wouldn't say there is any uniqueness to which companies will do well/badly when markets are flat. I also think defining 2000-2012 period as flat isn't the best framing. It was a period where we had two of the largest stock market crashes in history, along with some pretty good run-ups after. Without looking at the data I would expect that the companies that did well were solid companies from all sectors who consistently grew their earnings, and weren't trading at ridiculous prices (35+ P/E) in 2000.

Yes I was in this boat until 2020. I'd been hearing constantly from a good friend of mine since 2012 about how big bitcoin was going to be and how it was going to change the world. Thought he was talking rubbish and kept pushing back telling him it was a scam. I did hold some gold at the time so I did have some belief in the hard money concepts. I eventually saw sense on April 2020 and decided to take the leap. Have been a believer ever since. Buffett and Munger are still my heroes and are right about the majority of things. They can of course occasionally be wrong and I feel bitcoin is one of those areas. It's such a unique thing that I wouldn't expect them to understand it anyway.

Him and Jim Rogers always at it. Think I have seen this headline or similar from Jim about every year since 2010 https://asia.nikkei.com/Editor-s-Picks/Interview/Jim-Rogers-warns-that-global-good-times-are-nearing-the-end

That's a decent chunk alright, and yes would definitely count MSTR as part of the crypto bucket. My Current high level asset class percentages are; Stocks - 52% Cash* - 31% Crypto - 17% *Mainly USD and EUR short term bonds/bills

For the other investors who hold crypto in the forum, what is the current percent of your net worth you have in the asset class? For me I put about 2.5% of my net worth into bitcoin and ethereum back in Mid-2020, and have just held ever since. As of today this is now close to 17% and is my largest position.

Best bet is just try to ignore the noise. If you are not planning on buying or selling anytime soon based on these movements then it's just pointless checking. Easier said than done of course.

Yes, still very early. If I had to equate with the 90's and tech bubble I would feel we are somewhere around 95/96. Decent chance of a continuous inflating of a bubble over the next 2-3 years, then a drop as people get disillusioned, and then another leg up again once a new base is established. Just a guess though, macro isn't something I or anybody else can really predict.