Share Strategy Chain
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
By Michael Roberson
The podcast currently has 37 episodes available.
Alex, also known as “The Science of Hitting Investing” on Gurufocus and TSOH_Investing on Twitter, is an investor at an RIA and a prolific investing writer. I’ve really enjoyed his articles, so I was really excited to talk to him. And the conversation didn’t disappoint. During the interview, we talk about structuring a process to maximize your chance of finding good investment candidates, trying to reconstruct management dashboards as a way to understand investments, and the different parts of the value investing spectrum.
Time Stamps
0:01:00 – Introduction to Alex (@TSOH_Investing on Twitter https://twitter.com/TSOH_Investing; https://www.gurufocus.com/news.php?author=The+Science+of+Hitting&u=110170 on GuruFocus)
0:05:05 – The 3 Modalities of long-only value investing: (1) buy companies that are better than everyone thinks they are, (2) buy companies that are less bad than everyone thinks they are, and (3) greater fool theory.
0:06:45 – Alex on the path to value investing as a philosophy (passive-active split)
0:10:35 – Howard Marks on “Winning the Loser’s Game” (not making mistakes)
0:11:30 – Pros and cons of quality vs cheapness in investing (spillover research, ulcers, frictional costs, etc.)
0:15:30 – Alex’s thoughts on quality companies / compounders vs cheap names
0:17:00 – “When to Average Down” by John Hempton
0:21:20 – Risks of screening
0:23:00 – David Kilcullen “rich information” and sunk costs
0:25:30 – My experience with finding Tailored Brands through screening
0:27:00 – Thoughts on fixing my screening process (setting myself up for failure)
0:28:31 – How Alex runs his portfolio (low turnover, high quality, relatively concentrated)
0:37:54 – How to conduct a search to maximize the chances of finding a compounder
0:42:15 – Cumulative knowledge: an advantage of studying high-quality businesses
0:46:31 – Thinking about how to allocate research time with Costco as a case study
0:49:50 – Red flags (compensation, management ownership, shareholder letters, etc.)
1:00:00 – Trying to construct a management key performance indicator (KPI) dashboard
1:02:05 – An issue with financial modeling—everything is based on sales, and sales are hard to predict
1:03:45 – Pat Dorsey: don’t model using percentages (Visa example)
1:05:10 – TSOH investment style in a nutshell: “the return to a historic margin rate is in doubt, and I’m stepping in and saying it’s a short-term problem.”
1:07:00 – Disney analysis: CPI vs Magic Kingdom pricing vs airline pricing
1:09:17 – My observation on “the game:” cigar butts have secure sales but insecure cash flows; compounders have secure margins but insecure sales
1:11:00 – Bruce Greenwald said that long term, things become commodities (everything is a toaster in the long term), but some have disagreed ( https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-myth-of-commoditization/ )
1:24:00 – Thoughts on software
1:28:24 – Thoughts on optimizing industry study time: listen to smart people, observe what you know
1:33:27 – Thoughts on micro-caps and special situations
1:35:20 – Observations on short-form podcasting
1:40:31 – The importance of exploring the investing the world alongside great people
1:41:55 – Closing thoughts
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
This episode is an amazing case study on founder-market fit. As Mr. T says, “I pity the fool” who competes with Max and Patrick at relationship building—they clearly live and breathe the opportunity to form genuine connections with people.
Beyond founder-market fit, Max and Patrick also make a connection to the 8th wonder of the world, which value investing disciples know is compounding. They don’t do any paid marketing, but they can almost predict the amount of inbound referrals they’ll get on any given month, and it’s all because of their focus on white-glove customer service for everyone they meet.
Max and Patrick's Links
On the web:
https://www.maxandpatrick.com/
https://americaonerealestate.com/
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/max_americaone/?hl=en
https://www.instagram.com/patrick_americaone/?hl=en
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9m_VZEMttpIiXjE6RZEpRA/featured
Time Stamps
0:03:15 – A frustrating experience exposed a market opportunity
0:15:15 – Thoughts on the luxury customer experience
0:19:50 – Surprising lessons from operating the business: it’s not reinventing the wheel, it’s getting the job done
0:24:20 – A critical outside observation: where does business come from (organic referral, marketing, salesmen, etc.)
0:27:08 – Most important first step: screening for genuine, long-term relationships by emphasizing the personal relationship before entering into a business relationship
0:31:30 – White glove service: using technology and one-on-one attention to help buyers understand the product (3d photorealistic renderings, one-on-one tours through other projects at various levels of completion, everything catered toward fostering a relationship)
0:34:55 – Referral sources (referrals from people they’ve never even met)
0:39:08 – Highlight reel moments: representing the transaction rather than the buyer or seller
0:41:00 – Training and growing a team, consistently reflecting on process and habits
0:46:45 – Helpful resources in the course of running their business: it’s the simplest things that help you be effective (their phones are their CRM).
0:50:15 – The right kind of lazy: the pursuit of having to work less
0:51:52 – Get out and talk to people (even in the tech industry)
0:54:10 – Compounding relationships (the most predictable business is the “unpredictable” business)
1:01:15 – It’s not what they do, it’s who they are: genuine desire to serve
1:08:45 Where to find them:
On the Web:
https://www.maxandpatrick.com/
https://americaonerealestate.com/
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/max_americaone/?hl=en
https://www.instagram.com/patrick_americaone/?hl=en
Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9m_VZEMttpIiXjE6RZEpRA/featured
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
Errors snowball, and compounding is like the Marine Corps—no better friend, and no worse enemy. In this episode, we’ll talk about how Jocko Willink, Mike Krzyzewski, and Bill Ackman use a tactical “reset” to get back on track.
Let’s start with the opposite. Time’s running out, everything is on the line, mistakes are being made, and it looks like the window of opportunity is closing. The position is going from bad to worse, and a vicious cycle is forming: bad position, bad decision, worse position, worse decision. And on, and on. Balls are getting dropped, emotions are running hot, and stress is widespread. Chaos reigns. Corners are being cut since time is in short supply. Confusion, haste, sloppiness, complexity, errors, anxiety, weariness. It’s a nightmare situation.
This description could apply to a crunch period at work, the fourth quarter of a basketball game, or just about any part of life where results matter.
We all know the phrase: “when the going gets tough, the tough get going.” But sometimes even the toughest know it’s time to take a beat.
In this episode, we’ll talk about how Jocko Willink, Mike Krzyzewski, and Bill Ackman use a tactical “reset” to get back on track.
Jocko Willink: “Detachment”
First, let’s talk about resetting through the frame of “detachment.”
Let’s start with the toughest of the tough. If you know Jocko Willink, you know he’s no wimp. Jocko is a huge proponent of what he calls “detaching.” In the show notes, there’s a link to a podcast episode where Jocko dives into this idea and the experience that drove it home for him.
https://fhww.files.wordpress.com/2018/08/107-jocko-willink.pdf
In a nutshell, during a complicated, stressful training mission on an offshore oil rig, Jocko realized that by taking a few steps away from his team’s position, he could re-assess the situation with fresh eyes. When you “detach,” priorities become clear. You can stop spinning your wheels and get back to ticking off your priorities.
If you listen to his podcast—and I highly recommend it—you’ll hear from tons of people who had to reset mid-battle, right in the thick of the fog of war.
Coach K: “We Will Win”
It’s February 12, 2019, and 22,000 Louisville fans have packed the KFC Yum! Center to see their Cardinals beat the Duke Blue Devils. At 9 minutes, 54 seconds remaining in the game, a Louisville player hits a 3-point shot that puts Lousiville ahead 59-36. At that point, Coach K had never seen a Duke team recover from such a dramatic deficit.
Before we discuss what Krzyzewski said during his own timeout, let’s take a timeout of our own. I’ve included a bunch of links in the show notes. The first is the full video highlight reel for the comeback. The second is an incredible article by the NCAA (written in conjunction with ESPN’s data) laying out the highlights of how the game progressed along with a chart showing the statistical probability of victory in a time series graph. At its trough, the win probability was 0.1%, meaning that Duke had a 1 in 1,000 chance of victory. It’s times like these that coaches like Coach K and programs like Duke don’t show up in the numbers.
https://youtu.be/OydPe7ZtdRY
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2019-02-13/improbable-duke-comeback-vs-louisville-explained-coach-k-and
So what happens?
Coach K calls a timeout and makes a tactical shift (more on that in a moment), but more importantly, he communicates the message that he believes Duke will earn the win. In the article, he mentions that he wasn’t necessarily being 100% truthful. Tactically, Coach K shifts to an aggressive, attacking form of defense that doesn’t concede any ground to the opposing team as they try to maneuver the ball from under their own basket into their opponents’ half.
The results are unbelievable. Louisville implodes under the pressure, giving up 9 turnovers in the final minutes of the game, and Duke wins by 2. I didn’t see the stats to prove it, but I’m relatively sure that most of the points Duke scored in the comeback were transition opportunities directly resulting from opponents’ turnovers. If you can visualize a steal where two defenders strip the ball from a lone ballhandler steps from his own basket, you know that this is asymmetry at its finest. Oh—and regarding frustration, the tables have completely turned. Two points to Duke, and the Louisville transition starts right back over again. Right back into the jaws of the full-court press.
This is coaching at its purest. (A) don’t panic; we can win (B) let’s re-take the aggressive, proactive stance in this game by rapidly forcing a situation that favors us drastically—a suffocating, flustering, frustrating, exhausting, and in-your-face defense that plays to all of our strengths.
Coach K knows how to reset.
Bill Ackman: “Back to Basics”
We can also frame the tactical “reset” as “back to basics.”
Bill Ackman lays out his basic investment criteria in an interview (and I’ve linked it in the show notes).
Before we move on—because I know I’d be wondering if I were listening—this is what he says he wants.
Businesses that are:
And that have:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sU83fZF6HcU&feature=youtu.be&t=669
Now, if you follow the financial media, you might be wondering why he needs to go “back to basics” at all!
What am I talking about? Bill Ackman has been in the media recently after a windfall profit from what’s been called the “best trade of all time” since he spent $27 million to make $2.6 billion dollars with extremely limited exposure (but I should mention that the total exposure was probably about $700 million on a worst-case basis). So still a 5-bagger.
And he did it by buying credit default swaps or CDS on three credit default swap indices (both high yield and investment grade) as a hedge on the credit markets. Again—for those interested, I’ve linked to the letter where he both describes the position and gives a brief primer on the mechanics behind how CDS works. It’s really awesome reading if you’re into this stuff.
https://assets.pershingsquareholdings.com/2020/03/26222617/Pershing-Square-Capital-Management-L.P.-Releases-Letter-to-Investors-March-26-2020.pdf
And I’ve also linked to an excellent interview he did with Shane Parrish of Farnam Street (although his podcast—which is excellent—is called The Knowledge Project). He talks with Shane about the rationale behind the hedge as well as his thoughts on bouncing back from failure. It’s an excellent listen.
https://fs.blog/knowledge-project/bill-ackman/
Now if you’re not familiar with Ackman, I know you must be asking yourself:
“What on Earth does all this have to do with resetting? Seems like Ackman is doing just fine.”
And I hear you—in his interview with Shane, he also acknowledges that much of what I’m about to describe is firmly under the umbrella of “first world problems.”
But if we re-wind the tape, Bill Ackman had been having an incredibly difficult run from 2015 until about 2019. Let’s go back in time. During its 2015 peak, Pershing Square was running $20 billion in AUM.
Ackman was in the middle of a battle over Herbalife, which he believed was a pyramid scheme. Between 2012 and 2018, Ackman held short positions (first outright short positions in Herbalife stock, and later put options). Ackman ran a very public campaign to out what he considered to be unethical practices (and make money if the share price dropped). Carl Icahn, another billionaire, had built an enormous position on the other side of the trade, aiming to catalyze what he called “the mother of all short squeezes.” This squeeze would basically make the short side submit and unwind the position, causing a big run-up in the share price.
With this long and ultimately unfruitful campaign in the background, he began to have serious problems with an investment in Valeant, a pharmaceutical company. Over the life of Pershing’s investment, Valeant dropped from $190/share to $11/share during a very public activist stake (and I have a really interesting article from the New York Times linked that includes a timeline, for those interested). And for a Murphy’s Law moment, Pershing was sued by Allergan shareholders, who claimed that Pershing bought Allergan shares with insider knowledge of a looming takeover bid from Valeant. All told—per the Wall Street Journal—Valeant cost Pershing $4 billion (there’s a link in the show notes to that too).
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/19/business/valeant-ackman-timeline.html
https://www.wsj.com/articles/william-ackmans-pershing-square-sold-stake-in-valeant-1489439314?mod=article_inline
What a nightmare.
Now let’s skip ahead
So the mid-teens were a rough few years for Ackman and Pershing. But now let’s skip ahead to 2019. Let’s start with a headline from Yahoo! Finance on January 5, 2020. Hedge fund manager Bill Ackman delivers 58.1% for investors in 2019. The article, linked below, was written by Julia La Roche, and I certainly couldn’t sum things up any better:
“Like Buffett, the mission at Pershing Square is to have a permanent capital structure. Ackman said the firm took a step in that direction, launching a publicly-traded fund in 2014 with the long-term plan to have a majority of capital in that vehicle.
After posting a return of 40.4% in 2014, the hedge fund experienced negative performance for each consecutive year—until 2019. At the April conference, Ackman attributed the string of poor performance to a couple of bad investments. Those mistakes led to significant investor redemptions, or what Ackman characterized as a “rough patch.”
Pershing Square Holdings, the public vehicle, is now 80% of the firm’s capital, Ackman said at the time.”
The link to the article is in the show notes.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bill-ackman-pershing-square-2019-performance-130053673.html
So what happened?
In the interview with Shane, Bill mentions that recover is a “slow, plodding, one-step-at-a-time process.” I think there are lots of reasons for the comeback. I’m sure I’ll leave some out, but I think these ones are critical:
For good measure, I’m including one additional fun article on Ackman that the Wall Street Journal ran. The byline: With performance bad and investors fleeing, Mr. Ackman ‘went activist’ on Pershing Square.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/after-suffering-bruising-losses-ackman-pursues-quiet-recovery-11553176760?adobe_mc=MCMID%3D69363972300789071000526555740666532794%7CMCORGID%3DCB68E4BA55144CAA0A4C98A5%2540AdobeOrg%7CTS%3D1597609842
Bottom Line
Compounding is the 8th wonder of the world, and we need to do everything in our power to make sure we aren’t on the wrong side of it. Well-oiled machines shouldn’t constantly require downtime, but in critical moments, it can be an extremely high-yield decision to pause and reset. Errors snowball, and compounding is like the Marine Corps—no better friend, and no worse enemy.
So that does it for this episode. I hope it shows some threads to pull.
If you’re interested in show notes or supporting the podcast, check out strategychainpodcast.com. If you want to get in touch with me, you can find me on social media @strategychain.
So until next time—thank you.
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
In this episode I had the good fortune to talk to Dr. Ivan Pastine. I really enjoyed his refreshingly positive outlook. In our conversation, we talk about common real-life game theory scenarios, avoiding man with a hammer syndrome, the concept of “imperfect but useful,” incentives, trust, marketing, networking, and the importance of showing up. I think his book, Game Theory: A Graphic Guide, is the best introduction to game theory out there. I really enjoyed this conversation, and I think you will too.
0:01:52 – The time Ivan punched a Thai officer while in the Navy
0:04:55 – How he moved from the Navy into economics
0:07:21 – Game theory “games” that happen all the time
0:07:47 – Competition Demystified by Bruce Greenwald
0:08:47 – One of Ivan’s books—Introducing Game Theory: A Graphic Guide
0:12:50 – The economic starting point: how the individual acts in service of his goals
0:16:06 – Avoiding man with a hammer syndrome: what’s the important bit / imperfect, but useful.
0:27:45 – Behavioral economics & the ultimatum game (spite)
0:43:50 – Trust, the marshmallow game, and how games change when players expect to play each other again
0:49:35 –James Heckman, Kindergarten lessons about conflict, and a connection to “Touchy Feely” with Nicky Hinrichsen and Chris Coleman (Episode 029)
0:54:39 – Hawk and Dove Game—attitudes toward conflict
1:04:02 – The pinnacle of game theory: understanding the incentives (a la Charlie Munger)
1:11:55 – Shaping incentives for better outcomes (social norms)
1:21:32 – Trust as it relates to dealing with a person vs an institution
1:26:38 – Communication—lessons from teaching and writing
1:32:18 – The importance of having a good editor & the qualities of a good editor
1:35:07 – Thoughts on marketing, celebrity, and the media
1:47:40 – Connection to Mike Malinconico (Episode 021)
1:49:20 – Networking strategies and tactics
1:54:45 – People are surprisingly generous
1:57:30 – Important beliefs: showing up is really important
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
This series is all about making things easier for ourselves. I’m going to make the non-controversial case that collaborating with others is a great way to do this. Then I’ll talk about some tactics that can help us perform better.
First, let’s take a page out of Charlie Munger’s book and approach the problem backwards. Let’s look at the opposite of working together—isolation. This is particularly relevant during COVID-19.
A quick google search for solitary confinement will show the effects of being alone. Yes—this is a very specific population, and some of the more vivid examples might not be relevant for most of us. But there are some important takeaways. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brain-chemistry/201902/the-effects-solitary-confinement-the-brain In Psychology Today, Elena Blanco Suarez, a biochemistry PhD, reported that “solitary confinement as a punishment is closer to a form of torture, with serious consequences for neurological health.” The brain literally changes, with the zones that contribute to learning, memory, and spatial awareness shrinking and those that contribute to fear and anxiety growing. I’ve even seen a TED talk by Johann Hari (link https://www.ted.com/talks/johann_hari_everything_you_think_you_know_about_addiction_is_wrong/transcript?language=en in the show notes) about how the famous rats on heroin model doesn’t result in overdose when the rats have other rat friends, food, and fun things to do. As the saying goes, no man is an island!
From an economic viewpoint, isolation also hurts us. If Dan can sew and cook better than Tim, Dan can still benefit from trading with Tim because Dan is likely to be “better-er,” so to speak, at one of the two activities. So the opportunity cost drives a collaboration benefit.
This isn’t groundbreaking—the overwhelming majority of people benefit from trade. Virtually no one produces even her own food and shelter. Doing this would require massive downgrades in both. We’re a society of middle-men, and I don’t say that pejoratively—we’re benefitting from comparative advantage, and it’s completely natural and logical. Everyone has a boss, even if it’s ultimately the consumer of our products, even if we live off investment earnings, we’re ultimately beholden to the people who buy our investments’ products and services.
We’re all in this together. So now let’s talk about how we can be together better.
Co-Founders
Paul Graham of Y Combinator notes that startups that work tend to have multiple co-founders. There are tons of reasons why. As Calvin Hawkes mentioned in our interview, a big role of the co-founding team is to be emotionally strong when the other co-founder is struggling. As you increase the number of engines on an airplane, you reduce the likelihood that they all fail. On top of that, there’s a wide spectrum of skills required to nail product development and marketing of products and services, and any one person is unlikely to have an expertise in all the skills. And there’s virtually no chance that there wouldn’t be comparative advantage stemming from opportunity cost (remember—there’s a cost associated with doing what you’re not “better-er” at).
Corporate Boards
Another feature of the startup ecosystem is the board of directors. Mature companies also feature corporate boards, but I’d argue that their impact is relatively muted when compared to the green-ness you’d see in startups and the siloed nature of the co-founders’ experience. The C-Suite exists to manage the day-to-day operations of the company, and the board of directors exists to manage and counsel the company’s managers on behalf of the company’s owners (shareholders).
The best corporate board members provide incisive, experienced, and nuanced takes on complex, critical issues. For up-and-coming companies, board members offer a fresh perspective from a different background that is grounded in years of experience. To me, this sounds a lot like mentorship, and I think many startup co-founders would agree.
Why Should You Care?
There’s a possibility that I’m living in a bubble, but I think most people are lucky to have even one lifelong mentor. This is a far cry from accepted best practices in the startup ecosystem, and I think it’s a screaming opportunity for us to improve our internal processes by leaps and bounds.
Each of us is the CEO of our own life. Those in the know recommend building a co-founding team and a strong board of directors. We should follow suit—here’s how:
The questions of the week:
So that does it for this episode. I hope it shows some threads to pull.
If you’re interested in show notes or supporting the podcast, check out strategychainpodcast.com. If you want to get in touch with me, you can find me on social media @strategychain.
So until next time—thank you.
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
Einstein famously described compounding as the 8th wonder of the world. It’s the secret superpower that drives network effects, population growth, and the spread of viruses—clearly it’s a force to be reckoned with.
In a recent conversation, Max De Melo and Patrick Niederdrenk of America One Luxury Real Estate illustrated another hidden example of compounding: reputation.
They mentioned that they could essentially predict inbound referral business despite having absolutely no idea where it would come from on a one-off basis. For any Ozark fans out there, it instantly reminded me of the scene where Marty Byrde talks about casinos. On any individual pull on the slot machine, he couldn’t predict the outcome. But on the aggregate, casino results become probability math—super predictable.
With a nod to “German Efficiency,” Max and Patrick mentioned that they basically don’t conduct outbound marketing. Their business is completely referral driven. And they’ve been growing. Fast.
This means that Max and Patrick have found viral growth, another way to describe compounding. One good experience leads the customer to recommend America One. Rinse, lather, repeat.
For a strange coincidence, I’ve also recently received a ton of inbound opportunities from people I’ve known for years and years. There’s a reason Warren Buffett and Charlie Munger put such a special emphasis on reputation—it’s a natural compounding engine.
And for a final callback to Charlie Munger’s beloved idea of inversion, I think it’s important to examine what happens when you give a customer or a boss—or anyone for that matter—a terrible experience. You create an agent for negative compounding. In the episode with Dylan Lipari, he mentioned a terrible experience with a store owner. Dylan’s a nice guy, and he didn’t talk about it explicitly in the episode, but I bet he’d love to tell you where *not* to get your shoes repaired in LA if you talked to him in confidence.
When you give someone a terrible experience, you create a motivated saboteur. Someone who will write bad reviews, give bad referrals, and basically become an unpaid intern for your competition. I like to call to mind the episode of How I Met Your Mother where Barney’s love life goes to shambles as a former romantic partner spread the news about his misdeeds.
The bottom line: reputation is everything. Do all in your power to guard, enhance, and leverage your own reputation. Don’t do anything that would endanger it—it’s your most powerful asset.
The questions of the week:
So that does it for this episode. I hope it shows some threads to pull.
If you’re interested in show notes or supporting the podcast, check out strategychainpodcast.com. If you want to get in touch with me, you can find me on social media @strategychain.
So until next time—thank you.
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
I’m working hard on developing an important skill: the ability to deconstruct a failure before it happens. I’m trying to move from postmortem to premortem. A postmortem is an after-action review where mistakes and successes are deconstructed. A premortem is the same analysis shifted forward in time and focused on the variables that cause mistakes.
Charlie Munger says that the best type of learning is “vicarious,” meaning that you learn from the example of others. You see your friend burn his hand on the stove, and you decide not to touch it for yourself to see if it’s hot. This type of learning is great, and I think it can prevent a lot of unnecessary suffering.
But I think a lot of learning comes from experience. Howard Marks likes to say that “experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want.” Another phrase I like is “he who suffers remembers.”
In that light—postmortem learning definitely isn’t preferable, but once mistakes become available for you to deconstruct, they can be a great resource. On Twitter, Ian Cassel recently mentioned that a well-constructed active investment strategy needs to be molded and shaped to you as an individual. It’s similar to what people say about Jiu Jitsu having a certain sense of justice—you’ll often find yourself in the positions you need to work on most. Rubbing your face in real-life mistakes through postmortem analysis is a fantastic way to address key flaws and drive inflection points in your learning.
I’m just finished a postmortem of a miserable experience I had investing in Tailored Brands (which, as of July 8th, looks to be on the verge of bankruptcy after a missed bond interest payment). You’ll be able to see that analysis online at www.strategychainpodcast.com/postmortems.
The analysis centers on analytical fundamentals, execution methodology, and psychology & behavior. I summarize the experience, look at what went right, and discuss in detail what I did wrong.
The question of the week is short: how can I shift the distribution away from postmortem and toward premortem?
So that does it for this episode. I hope it unearths some threads to pull.
If you’re interested in show notes or supporting the podcast, check out strategychainpodcast.com. If you want to get in touch with me, you can find me on Twitter @strategychain.
So until next time—thank you.
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
I’m a huge fan of Howard Marks. He often references the concept of “winning the loser’s game” by avoiding errors rather than looking for huge wins. In tennis, professionals win with unreturnable shots and amateurs win by keeping the ball in play. Charlie Munger uses a similar framework: inversion. He focuses on not going where he will die.
In physical training, Christian Thibaudeau promotes a similar idea for “natural” lifters (as opposed to those using performance-enhancing drugs). Cortisol—the stress/readiness hormone is the enemy of the natural lifter because it can promote a variety of counterproductive sequences in the body. So the goal is to structure a program that sidesteps the problems from high stress levels in order to perform at peak levels.
I believe that the body and the mind are one. Physical realities can change our mental state, and our thinking can change our physiology. To perform at our best, we need to use all our tools. Similar to what Thibaudeau says about sidestepping cortisol for physical performance, I think we can use a similar strategy to make life easy so that we can perform our best.
We can do that by embracing simple joys and avoiding suffering.
But I want to take a quick moment to explain what I’m NOT saying. There’s a reason Navy SEALs essentially torture their incoming pipeline of prospects. The ability to endure hardship is critical. I’m not saying that we should all sit on the couch chasing fleeting pleasure at the expense of critical day-to-day tasks and long-term strategic pursuits.
I’m saying that there are cheap, untapped resources all around us that can help us recover so that we can operate at the highest levels. I’m talking about simple joys, the natural ways that we can soothe and rejuvenate ourselves—recharging for our next push forward.
The problem is that many physical pleasures can be traps—pathways to pile on physical debt by trading misery tomorrow for euphoria today. This includes everything addictive—drugs, alcohol, sugar, technology, and the list goes on. Things that are expensive, things that downgrade your decision-making, and things that otherwise erode your future goals. These aren’t what I’m talking about. We should mostly avoid things in this category. If you can handle moderation, I think the phrase “everything in moderation—including moderation” makes sense.
But there’s also a huge list of simple, cheap, sustainable physical pleasures that don’t hurt us in the future.
Sunlight, exposure to the blue sky, the mild post-workout euphoria, a cold or warm shower (depending on the season), a nap, a full night’s sleep, a moment of mental rest from meditation, a simple stretch, a short walk, a moment of laughter from stand-up comedy.
These are all examples of nearly costless ways to fight stress and its depleting, destructive, gradual erosion.
So the question of the week is simple: what can I do for 5 minutes to enjoy a simple, natural pleasure and unplug from the world of worry and stress?
So that does it for this episode. I hope it unearths some threads to pull.
If you’re interested in show notes or supporting the podcast, check out strategychainpodcast.com. If you want to get in touch with me, you can find me on social media @strategychain.
So until next time—thank you.
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
Today, I had the pleasure of talking to Nicky Hinrichsen and Chris Coleman, who went to Stanford Business School and started a venture-backed company called Carlypso in 2013. Working on building the “Amazon for used cars,” the two founders went through Y Combinator in 2014, raised $10 million in venture capital by 2015, and successfully sold the business to Carvana in 2017.
Like true entrepreneurs, Chris and Nicky are now working on their next venture called WithClutch. The co-founders discovered that auto loan rates are all over the map, and they built a refinance calculator that allows car owners to reduce their monthly payments and save thousands in just minutes.
Time Stamps
0:06:28 – Nicky & Chris’ meeting
0:11:57 – Two stages of a startup: (1) finding value (2) scaling
0:15:37 – Nicky & Chris’ experience at Y Combinator
0:22:42 – What it was like to build the technology as semi-technical co-founders
0:27:17 – Evaluating technical talent outside of your comfort zone
0:39:56 – Things that don’t scale: chasing a stolen car down the highway
0:45:47 – Developing the hustler mentality and structuring processes that worked for them psychologically
0:50:11 – Lessons on hiring, firing, and job inertia
0:57:30 – The Co-Founder relationship: what Nicky and Chris got right
1:03:48 – Nicky’s confrontation with a copycat
1:06:28 – Creating a culture of candor
1:08:26 – “Touchy Feely” at Stanford GSB
1:11:06 – Things they’d whisper in their own ears: some lessons are best hard-learned, it’s important to take time off, it’s good to form an informal advisory board, be easier on yourself when you miss high bars
1:13:30 – Books: ( www.strategychainpodcast.com/support ) Never Split the Difference by Chris Voss (and an example), High Output Management by Andy Grove
1:18:00 – Where to connect with Nicky and Chris: LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicholas-hinrichsen-7b33874a/ ; https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopher-coleman-a316696/
Strategy Chain Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
Today’s episode explores how we can take the “easy” road by broadening our view.
Let’s start with the problem
We see the world through a flawed lens. There are a million terms for this idea: “target fixation,” “missing the forest for the trees,” “anchoring,” “framing.” The list goes on.
The point is—we get so used to “the rules of the game” that we miss it when the game changes.
David Kilcullen explores this idea in fascinating detail in The Dragons and the Snakes. If you’re into geopolitics, check out Episode 023 with David. The TL;DR version of the book is that success can breed failure. Since the West dominated the traditional battlefield, its enemies found new ways to fight. China embraced a much wider view of war, including economic, legal, and technological avenues to fight the West. David called this tactic conceptual envelopment. Similarly, the Russians have sidestepped traditional battlefield confrontations by “surfing the edge,” as David would say, of confrontation. The Russians blur the lines and exploit the slow reaction times of Western powers.
The takeaway: don’t get mired in the old way of fighting.
In my recent episode with Brian DeChesare, a similar concept comes up at the very end. He mentions that very driven people tend to confine themselves to options (a, b, c) when there are many more that exist. We get sucked into optimizing for the wrong thing, and we grind away for trivial gains while leaving the critical variables unexamined.
Hollywood gives an awesome false frame example in the Dark Knight. Batman’s butler, Alfred, tells the story of his search for a jewel thief in Burma. Alfred and his team search the villages and black markets for the stolen jewels—all to no avail. Until they find a child playing with a huge ruby. They realized that the “thief” wasn’t a thief at all. He was throwing the stones away because he just wanted to cause chaos. Once they realized that the problem was different, they could pivot and make real progress. Their false assumption caused a lot of wasted effort.
For a more real-life example, there’s a funny Harvard Business Review article by Peter Bregman where a “sibling fighting problem” is reframed as a “morning crankiness problem.” The link is in the show notes https://hbr.org/2015/12/are-you-solving-the-wrong-problem. It turned out that the solution was orange juice rather than a lecture on the golden rule.
If we find ourselves grinding away without making progress, it can be a good time to try to rethink our assumptions. But this is way easier said than done.
So what’s the solution?
If it’s possible that our assumptions are wrong, we need to take a moment to consider what we might think is goofy. If convention isn’t working, it’s time to start breaking the rules—if only as a thought experiment.
So here are some questions to ask and threads to pull:
Hopefully these questions help explore new avenues and wider perspectives on the challenges at hand.
Until next week—thanks for listening.
Support Links
Rate and review the podcast at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/strategy-chain/id1492935567
Find Amazon affiliate links at http://strategychainpodcast.com/support
Send me questions at http://strategychainpodcast.com/contact
Sign up for the email list at http://strategychainpodcast.com/
Social Media @strategychain (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Medium)
The podcast currently has 37 episodes available.