Rainier

Sorry, I wasn’t really clear. What I was trying to say was that it seems like Munger probably had the same mentality about designing dorms as he did about investing. My point was that someone whose spent their life being at least somewhat contrarian, suspicious of authorities, and willing to stick with or double down on his own convictions, would have no issue with not budging on his stipulations for an unpopular dorm design. And I don’t blame him. If it was my money, I’d do the same thing (i.e. not budge on whatever it was that I wanted to see happen with the money I’d spent a lifetime earning). And to be fair, he may have been right about the design. I probably wouldn’t have minded having a windowless room if it meant it was cheaper or had more space or privacy or whatever. And there are plenty of historical examples of polymaths being right across multiple disciplines (just googling “notable polymaths” brings up Da Vinci, von Neumann, Leibniz, Franklin, Archimedes, Musk, Newton, Galileo, Aristotle…and a lot of these guys had a ton of friction from the established order about their unconventional ideas) So I wonder if Munger’s bet on dorms would have been right and been a big housing/education innovation, which would have given him another notch in his multidisciplinary/polymath belt.

I definitely think this is what was going on with Munger and the dorm designs.

I am of two minds on this. On one hand, I think the multi discipline approach to life is more appealing. But I think that’s just related to me being curious and willing to go pretty deep down rabbit holes of learning/practicing topics and ideas that on the surface don’t seem to be obviously beneficial from a business standpoint. I think this has helped me tremendously from the standpoint of getting good at “learning how to learn” about various topics. I stumbled into an academic decathlon type program in high school based on a teacher recommendation. It was really open ended, in terms of class time and study material, and pushed the students into learning foundational level content of a wide range of topics that weren’t covered in high school (like instead of just geometry or calculus, the math content was fractals and demographic statistics; there was a massive focus on theology and philosophy, the arts/music content was very nuanced compared to other classes, there was college level economic theory instead of just memorizing macro/micro definitions). The idea of this program was completely bananas to me at first and more than a little overwhelming, as my entire family was lower income working class - no discussion of school work at home, much less any talk of high brow ideas or philosophy or economics or anything. That experience was the single biggest advantage I had going into college and the workplace after college. Even though I had a cut and dried major (finance and accounting), that experience helped me in virtually every aspect of college and I got a lot more out of many of my classes because of it. Literally my entire life trajectory was probably altered substantially by that high school program. I wasn’t going to end up in jail or anything, but I think there’s a fairly decent chance that I would have dropped out of college due to being unprepared for the open-endedness and self study needed. Before that program, nothing in public school prepared me for the difficulty level, lack of hand holding, and relative ambiguity of university course work. So, when I read about Munger’s fascination with architecture and psychology, I can relate because I have several things that I’m very interested in and I feel are worthy of a lot of my time and brain power. And I think the concept of mental models/latticework is a great way to describe how I think. I have always struggled greatly with memorization and recalling facts. I need to “start at the beginning” with whatever I’m learning and then I can fairly quickly figure out how a system or business works. Munger’s obsession with incentives is a good example of what I’m talking about. Fully understanding an incentive structure (at the most basic level) can go along way in teaching me how a system works, what the economics of it are, and allows me to extrapolate knowledge about the system way way quicker than if I only read an analyst report or something. So, I’ve figured out that “mental models” (although the term is so overused now, I feel corny using it) are helpful for me in learning the things I want to learn. Learning how people in other fields analyze/problem solve, improves my learning ability - even though I almost never come close to gaining exert level knowledge in most of the topics I read about. On the other hand, there are people like Buffett and quite a few other top tier CEOs/money managers and business people that I’ve personally known, who are really almost myopically focused on the thing they do. Their minds don’t seem to wander all that far astray from the primary thing they practice. They have interests, like golf or fishing or hunting or wine or whatever, but those interests are all sort of recreational or to relax/decompress. Playing golf is not necessarily the same as Munger giving lectures about psychology or trying to corner a university into using his architectural design for windowless dormitories. So, I think either mind frame can work. And I think that, like every other character trait, people are just somewhere on the spectrum and people should just lean into whatever is most effective/enjoyable for them. Anecdotally, a couple of mentors of mine at the same company were good examples of both sides of the coin. Both high level executives, being number 3 and 4 behind CEO in the c-suite pecking order. Both loved what they did and were experts of the company from both in-the-weeds detail to high level capital allocation. But one of them would seem just as happy (if not happier) talking to you about books, military history, safari hunting, theology, etc. The other basically only thought/talked about work, with a sprinkling of conversation about college sports or his kids. Both were great at their jobs and a wealth of knowledge about the company. Just very different people.

I agree regarding fiction. I subscribe to the idea that 99% (or some extremely large percentage) of everything produced by humans is in the range of terrible to mediocre. This goes for just about anything - fiction, nonfiction, movies, medical care, legal advice, corporate leadership, you name it. Very little in the world is truly excellent and worth spending time on. It seems very likely to me that I’d benefit more from reading a top 1% fiction book than I would from reading a bad to mediocre history/business/econ book. Obviously this is on the margins though - since someone who is ignorant of an important topic, say personal finance, would benefit a lot more from reading a mediocre personal finance book than they would from reading Moby Dick. But it’s all subjective. Some people just despise fiction altogether. As an aside, I think Moby Dick is underrated, largely because it gains a bad reputation for being forced down the throats of high school kids who don’t (yet) care about the underlying philosophical stuff. As another aside, if you like Moby Dick and also like sci fi, I always recommend Gene Wolfe’s Book of The New Sun to people. Heavily inspired by Moby Dick and other similar stuff like Borges, Chesterton, Dickens, etc. It is a top 10 all time American work of fiction in my opinion with writing quality on par with something like Moby Dick.

Where do you get your ideas for all of the pharma companies you buy?

I just err on the side of caution and only buy stuff like this in tax advantaged accounts.

Same for me with PETS after management change announcement. I sold my shares but kept a very small exposure in long dated call option.

I don’t venture into this thread often, so I apologize if this has been asked already. Has anyone read or listened to anything in-depth/non-partisan regarding the firing of the head of the BLS? Obviously a quick Google search brings up a million articles and blog posts about how Trump is suppressing the truth (and IDK, maybe he is, or maybe there was really something rotten in the BLS). I’m just curious if anyone has read anything that looks at it objectively. In a former job, I spent a lot of time analyzing BLS and Census data for use in financial models. It always seemed bizarre/suspect to me that there would quite often be such sizable revisions. But I never looked into the collection/revision process at the time. I’m just curious if anyone has seen anything objective/non-partisan about this firing or about the revisions?

Thanks

Does anyone know why KWM is down today?

What is the thought process on PFE? I’ve been looking at it but it’s kind of hard to get excited. I’m contemplating the Jan 2027 leaps.

Agreed, very good show. I subscribe to Netflix for a month once every couple of years and it’s always shocking how little I’m able to find that I like. This show was good though.

I read one of your posts on Cardinal a few months ago and bought the ADR. Up about 53% with nice monthly dividends. Thanks for that!

Curious if anyone has any new ideas in this realm? NVEC recently dropped on earnings. Its yield is back up over 6%.

Thanks for pointing this out last month.

Recently watched (last few months): Gladiator II - Far inferior to the first movie. I was highly disappointed. Middle school level writing. Mission Impossible Final Reckoning: Not quite as good as the last few movies, but that’s a high bar for me as I like them quite a bit. But it is still a pretty good movie and worth seeing, but I think the writing kind of took a backseat a little. Definitely the least complicated plot in the series. As usual, it has a couple of stunning action/stunt sequences. Sort of like a love letter to the prior films. The Accountant 2: I liked the first one and this was about as good. Maybe slightly better. Mickey 17: I didn’t care for this at all. Maybe I’m getting old, but I thought the villain(s) was atrocious. I wish I’d turned it off halfway through like my intuition told me and saved myself an hour I’ll never get back. I feel like Bong Joon Ho is one of those directors that really needs to avoid anything with a political message to it. He is so hamfisted. Great visual director who needs a better writing partner. Cleaner: Dumb action movie reminiscent of Die Hard. It was fine for what it is. The Order (Jude Law): This was pretty good. It’s one of those things that probably would have been better as a mini series. That area of the country at that time is a very interesting slice of America. The movie doesn’t spend much time on the background of the area and just focuses on the crime spree. Mini series would have been more impactful IMO.

Outsiders is such a good book. I wish we could get sequels to it every ten years or so, profiling other great allocators as they come along.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/45539931/buss-family-agrees-sell-lakers-mark-walter-sources-say I don’t follow baseball closely or soccer or F1. Hadn’t really followed what was going on with this group closely. Quite the sports portfolio for TWG/Guggenheim. https://www.twgglobal.com/sports-media-and-entertainment/ And Jeanie Buss goes from being (supposedly) the cash poorest NBA owner to getting a $10B payday.

Do you view SMLR as being in the same category as these others?

Areas from both sides have wanted to secede in recent years. Liberal California, Conservative Texas. There are still groups that talk about making eastern WA/OR into its own state, combining with ID/UT, or seceding. All a bunch of talk with no remote chance of happening. At least not until the world is completely falling apart.

Maybe pick a position size amount say $10K or $100K, whatever makes sense. And then just buy lots of smaller positions opportunistically. I would wager that I’m a lot younger than you and probably not nearly as much experience investing. So, I’m probably saying something really obvious. But I had a similar situation recently. I had a position that I went all in on (for me) which was probably 10-15% of my net worth when I entered it and it grew to be about a 35-40%. I felt it was time to extract myself, so I sold and I’ve been just buying different things at about 0.5% to 1%. I’ve been buying things on dips or buying special situations. Basically sort of build your own fund. Obviously you have to get comfortable with the fact that you can’t know the companies inside and out as well as you did the one that was 100% of your portfolio. But you can get a decent idea with some research and your exposure isn’t high in case you miscalculate something. But I can’t imagine just buying an index and going to sleep. The investment research process is actually fun, so I’m trying to balance capital protection for my family with this activity that I really enjoy doing. For my personal use case, I feel like this will only really work if the positions are held over a long time horizon. So, I’m trying to condition myself to never sell this basket of small positions. However, in my case, I would happily get back into a very large position if the right situation presented itself. Probably didn’t tell you anything you haven’t already thought of.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6404136/2025/06/05/sam-presti-thunder-nba-finals-paul-george/ Article on Presti’s construction of the current team plus their future prospects with the pile of picks he has stashed. Also interesting comments from the coach and how he was basically homegrown by Presti as well. The culture that Presti has built is definitely the #1 talent incubator in pro basketball right now. Basically took the Spurs model and replicated it. It is NY Times, but for whatever reason, it is not behind a paywall.

Completely agree on Steph. I have no criticism of him and he’s top 10 all time for me and up there as one of the most fun players to watch. Also seems really likable off the court. Not saying he’s dirty or ever has been. However…you likely have to go back to the Bad Boy Pistons to find a dirtier combination of Zaza, Bogut, and Draymond. As people look back on those teams (before Durant got there), the focus is likely going to be only on Steph and Klay and the revolutionary three point shooting and spacing. But they also had a top 3 defense and a lot of the reason was because of those three guys being maniacs. A few examples: Zaza was known for trying to injure guys and he literally altered the course of history for the NBA in two ways through one of his dirty plays. By intentionally injuring Kawhi by forcing Kawhi to land on Zaza’s foot, he probably cut Kawhi’s career down by 40-50%. At his peak, Kawhi was arguably the best player in the league (the best defender and a top 3 scorer). The parallel universe in which he doesn’t get injured is interesting to think about. Steph, Klay, KD, Harden, Lebron, Giannis…all of these guys likely have at least slightly different legacies if an uninjured Kawhi-led Spurs is on the table. The second aspect is that we have the Zaza rule now where you can’t intentionally try to maim guys by putting your foot under their jumpshot. So, one of the Golden State players literally has a dirty play rule named after him. Draymond got the nickname “The Penis Hunter” for constantly punching guys in the groin. A core component of Bogut’s game (and a big reason for why the Splash Brothers system worked early on) was Bogut’s linebacker-like screens. He would try to injure guys by setting illegal and malicious screens constantly. The beauty of this, for the warriors, is that it manufactures space for the perimeter shooters because there’s a defender laying on the floor seeing stars instead of fighting around a screen to contest the three point attempt. He’s even admitted this: “One thing that was crazy about that run was the s*** that I used to get away with screening, man it was all time.I knew if I was in Milwaukee and I set that I’d foul out in the first quarter, but playing in Golden State, when they started to become that underdog team that was building up, I knew once Steph or Klay got hot, the refs would be in the moment as well.I could literally clothesline someone off the next pindown, I know Klay just hit 3 in a row, the crowd’s on their feet as he’s getting his 4th and I could punch somebody in the face on a screen, knock em out and they wouldn’t call it. Klay would get his 4th 3, and even the refs would go ‘Wow’ (and ignore it), it was crazy.Then I get traded to Dallas to set those same screens and I’d get 3 fouls in the first quarter, It was just crazy with the stuff I used to get away with there.”

I don’t know if it’s that or not. Apparently it was actually from a song by A Tribe Called Quest. “I’m a big A Tribe Called Quest fan. There is a line that basically says, ‘Scared money don’t make none.’ And I think that’s the case. We wouldn’t have traded for Paul George if we didn’t believe in our community, our organizational values, our ownership. If you expect Paul George or any player to have any confidence in you as an organization, you have to demonstrate it yourself. Scared money don’t make none,” That trade took some serious fortitude, because Paul George, being a dodo, had spent a lot of time making it known to the media that he only wanted to play for the Lakers and in the process completely tanked his trade value for the Pacers. So, there was no guarantee that he would be more than a one year rental for whoever traded for him (unless it was the Lakers who traded for him). But Presti comes in. Scoops him up for what seemed like pennies on the dollar, knowing that he would play his best possible basketball because it was a contract year (regardless of whether he re-signed with OKC or went to the lakers, he still needed to maximize his contract value that year). And after he got him there, he convinced him to sign the extension with OKC that he wouldn’t sign with Indiana (and for less money than he would have got in Indiana). Then Kawhi and Paul George collude to put OKC and the Clippers over a barrel in order to force a trade of PG to the Clippers. But Presti plays hard ball (knowing that Balmer and the clippers have no choice if they want Kawhi), and extract 100 pounds of flesh in exchange for PG. Absolute mastermind. I couldn’t find the clip of him talking, but it’s quoted here: https://www.basketballnetwork.net/old-school/sam-presti-referenced-tribe-called-quest-lyric-regarding-paul-georges-acquisition

Also on Presti, I went down a a rabbit hole watching interviews and stuff regarding the Paul George to the clippers trade (literally up there with other all time fleecings in sports history - Nets giving Boston Tatum/Brown and picks, Herschel Walker, Luka to the lakers, etc). Anyway, I was watching a clip of Presti talking and he mentioned some rap song lyric that always stuck with him: “Scared money don’t make none.” I don’t know what song or artist it is, but that’s pretty good investing advice. Especially for those of us who might tend to be overly cautious when investing (like me).