Filosofia de Inversión de Tim McAleenan

“If you find a thriving business while it is in its prime, it is stunningly foolish to sell it because it gets a bit overvalued or it goes through a rough period. I suspect the shareholders of Colgate-Palmolive and Nike right now will find themselves in a position in the 2040s that Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway shareholders currently enjoy with Coca-Cola.”

“I think this staggering results of a long-term Coca-Cola investment in terms of dividend income alone is important to keep in mind if you are tempted to sell your stake in a business that presently appears to be moderately overvalued. If you have chosen the business well, a small bit of compression is still worth the trade-off in order to achieve an end-game like Buffett has with Coke.”

Dividend Investing Is A Slow Shift From Being A Worker To Being An Owner

“This, by the way, is why I advocate dividend investing with surplus capital: it allows you to become a part-owner of a company and frees you from having to answer to an employer. The CEO of Coca-Cola isn’t going to take your 100 shares of Coca-Cola and say, “You’re fired because you don’t fit in with company culture” because he works for you the shareholder.”

Sobre el error de Endeudarse para Consumir, por ejemplo un vehiculo caro, y el resultado que generaría ese dinero ahorrado e invertido, como riqueza a futuro para la familia.

50 acciones Seleccionadas desde 1.971.
Resultado de las mismas hasta nuestros días.

Filososfía de Inversión a Largo Plazo.

Los tres Componentes de la Inversión a Largo Plazo.
Alta Calidad.
Dividendos entrantes ( income cash flow)

How to construct a dividend portfolio.

Master list of Stocks.

En opinión por supuesto de Tim Mcaleenan.
Deberíamos variar / incorporar grnades empresas europeas, al observar en 2017 que el Per U.s.a. está alto, salvo las oportunidades que el mercado dé a pers más bajos, en diversos sectores.

Six Investing Principles From Warren Buffett’s 2013 Shareholder Letter

3 Me gusta

Warren Buffett On Diversification

3 Me gusta

Warren Buffett’s First and Best Investing Lesson

Buffett’s lesson (granted, he was barely a teenager) that he later recounted was that there was value in “letting winners run” rather than taking a small profit as soon as the opportunity presented itself. Real multi-generational wealth doesn’t come from capturing 10% and 20% capital gains here and there, but rather, by letting an investment like Coca-Cola grow from x to 52x as it has done over the past 35 years.

De 2013.
Menciones a Clx Nestle Colgate, Kraft que ha dado el susto en 2019, etc…

La filosofía de TimMc me ayudó mucho a comprar Todos los Consumer Staples que se han acercado hacia el 3,8 - 4% div, sobre todo en sus caidas sectoriales de 2018.

4 Me gusta

Tim McAleenan sobre FEDEX: (26.05.2019)

I am finishing my reading of the book “Changing How The World Does Business: FedEx’s Incredible Journey to Success - The Inside Story” that chronicles how FedEx rose to the top of the courier delivery market under the hand of its founder Fred Smith who had turned a $4 million inheritance (along with a $91 raise in venture capital) into a business that has been one of the best publicly traded stocks that the investor community has ever encountered in the past half century.

Specifically, FedEx traded at a little over $1.07 per share (adjusted for splits) in 1979 and now, counting dividends, has created more than $257 in value for each $1.47 share purchased in 1979. The increase has been a rise in value of 23,918% over the past forty years, for an annual compounding rate of 14.69% over the past four decades.

When I studied FedEx’s record, I wanted to analyze the obvious question: What has this company gotten right to elevate to the status of a super-compounder in the investing world?

The first thing I noticed is that FedEx’s origins related to solving a problem that was very important to customers–super fast delivery. In 1978, a year before its IPO, it rolled out the slogan: “When It Absolutely, Positively Has To Be There Overnight.” It may have been clunky, but my gosh, the point of the business was clear. If you needed something shipped quickly, FedEx was the company for you.

That came with two important implications. First, the company was creating a brand for itself in an area where it is difficult to differentiate itself. Aren’t all package delivery services the same? The temptation could have been to try and compete on price, dooming itself for perpetually low margins. Instead, it created a brand name that meant speedy delivery, giving it a clear market niche for business customers as well as individuals that needed a document overnight.

There is an old business saying: “The greater the problem, the greater the compensation for fixing the problem.” If someone’s “problem” is that they need to get package from Location A to Location B within two weeks, well, the compensation is not going to be great because there is no particular time limitation that makes the problem great. But if you need to get to Location B within 12 hours, you now have a problem that you are willing to pay much more to solve.

By rolling out distribution networks across 25 cities in the 1970s, FedEx was able to charge premium pricing for fast delivery. This meant higher retained profits that could be used to roll out even more locations and deliver faster and faster, increasing delivery speeds in locations beyond America’s largest cities and into America’s secondary cities (population-wise) where the same strategy could be re-executed.

Next, FedEx actually cared about customer satisfaction. Who is the person or entity most likely to need overnight shipping? The answer: The person or entity who recently used your service for overnight shipping.

Fred Smith measured the right things, having FedEx focused on the value of a customer’s loyalty score over the course of a lifetime. With prime business customers, a loyal relationship could mean $15,000 per year in revenues for 18 years as an expected life. If that customer was dissatisfied over a transaction, FedEx management wasn’t trained to see it as $280 walking out the door, but rather, $280,000 walking out the door. When you think about what a recurring customer represents over the course of decades, rather than the specific transaction in front of you, you will treat them better and further “build the brand” because it actually stands for value.

When FedEx polled its business customers in order to learn what was disappointing its customers, it learned that business customers wanted to know exactly where its packages were located throughout the shipment process. Although FedEx wasn’t the first to roll out shipment tracking technology, it was the first company to use it as a standard feature that it is now common in the courier industry.

You know what else is worth paying attention to? People always act like they missed the boat with these investments. They think, “Yeah, it’s nice that this incredible growth happened forty years ago; that doesn’t do me any good today.” Guess what? I could have easily written this article a decade ago, and the factual analysis hasn’t changed. Over the past ten years, FedEx has continued to deliver goods faster and faster while still charging a premium price to do so.

The earnings per share were $3.76 in 2009. Today, they are $15.45 per share. The profits per share are rolling forward, year after year, as FedEx continues to invest $4 billion per year in distribution facilities so it can get packages to customers faster, faster, faster. The premise for what made FedEx an incredible business has not changed. And now the stock trades at 10x earnings. Technically, this is the lowest valuation for the stock on a P/E ratio basis in the past twenty years, including the Great Recession.

And the business is growing at 8.5% and paying out a 1.6% dividend. In other words, earnings per share and dividends will give investors 10% returns, plus there is a fair chance of P/E ratio expansion to 15x earnings, which suggests a reasonable possibility of 12-14% returns over the coming ten years.

Just last year, the investor community was willing to pay $274 per share for the stock. They were willing to value the business at 18x earnings, which was in line with its historical rate. Now, earnings per share growth falls to the mid-single digit rate, and suddenly, the stock goes on sale.

It would cost a competitor $100 billion to roll out infrastructure that could compete with FedEx, and even then, it would co-exist with FedEx rather than wipe it out because logistics is not a winner-take-all business.

I think FedEx at 10x earnings is one of the quietest deals available among mega-caps today. The profits are growing at a high single digit rate, the P/E is as low as it has ever been in the past twenty years by at least 25%, and the company is rolling out new distribution facilities. It is executing the same strategy that has delivered 14% annual returns over the past forty years, and hardly anyone has noticed. It is quintessential “great company at a moderate price” territory that is responsible for nearly all of the super-compounding that investors are able to receive from a single investment decision over time.

3 Me gusta

Sobre el cortoplacismo (Junio 2019)

2 Me gusta

Como siempre, un artículo muy interesante/cabal, donde destacaría sobre todo:

While online stock trading existed in 2009, the next recession will be the first time investors can receive app alerts showing you red losses in the thousands or tens of thousands of dollars on a bad day. You can literally be in the bathroom, pull up your app, and sell your ownership position at a short-term low. The opportunity for mischief is too darn easy.

Traducción en oculto.

Si bien el comercio de acciones en línea existió en 2009, la próxima recesión será la primera vez que los inversores puedan recibir alertas de aplicaciones que le muestren pérdidas de miles o decenas de miles de dólares en un día malo. Literalmente puede estar en el baño, abrir su aplicación y vender su posición de propietario a un mínimo a corto plazo. La oportunidad de hacer travesuras es demasiado fácil.

Puede que esta nueva variante haga que las bajadas sean mayores, quizá también ampliadas por la indexación, para lo malo y lo bueno: Más rojo en mi cartera; más baratas las empresas a comprar.

Conectado con la cita, también me resulta muy llamativa la “democratización” de las “inversiones”. En otros países, en otros ambientes, es lo más normal del mundo, pero no en el mío. Bueno, qué demonios, yo mismo soy un ejemplo de esa ampliación de mercado.

Por no hablar de las ubicuas criptomonedas, hace unas semanas un compañero me explicó cómo obtiene más dinero en el Forex que con su trabajo habitual: sacó el móvil, lo puso sobre la mesa y me empezó a enseñar cómo ponía las órdenes. Me quedé fascinado por el dinero que estaba ganando y, si no fuese yo tan miedoso, le hubiera pedido que me ayudara a conseguir ese maná. Le hice más preguntas y la fascinación pasó a “pero qué cojones me estás contando”-ción: no conocía lo que es el apalancamiento, no sabía en qué se basan los indicadores que utiliza… Ante todas mis dudas y mis reparos, dijo una frase cierta a la que no pude reponer nada:
-onsowu, no tengo ni idea, pero soy yo el que está ganando dinero.
Y, con lo que le marcaba la aplicación de su móvil, tiene toda la razón. :confused:

6 Me gusta

Hasta que deje de hacerlo.

2 Me gusta

Yo tengo un conocido que también se dedica al tema del trading con forex. Me explicó que tiene alquilados unos servidores del copón en Frankfurt porque ser unas milésimas más rápido que los demás en este ámbito es la clave para ganar más dinero. Le dedica unas cinco horas diarias al tema cuando sale del trabajo y para el horario que no cubre ha “contratado” a un par de indios que trabajan a comisión sobre los beneficios. Al parecer en Interactive Brokers puedes crear perfiles para ayudantes dentro de tu cuenta. Tengo pendiente sentarme una tarde con él para que me desvele todos los entresijos porque de momento lo poco que me cuenta me suena a marcianada. Casi lo mismo que cuando yo le hablo de mi estrategia DGI ;-)))

5 Me gusta

Suena a la anti-IF

4 Me gusta

Si alguien tiene interés que busque la historia de Simmons y sus FI, Medallion. Quant, matemática y ordenadores. Es una lectura apasionante para un Domingo Friki.
Se le opone a WBuffet que ese si le conocéis :grinning::grinning::grinning::grinning:

El problema del forex es el apalancamiento… Y los flash crash, que habrá millones de máquinas mejores y más rápidas que la tuya operando.
Se pueden poner todos los stops que quieras pero si no hay contrapartida y van apalancados… Game Over.

Como el gestor que invierte en chicharrillos de 6000acciones al día de volumen. El día que tenga que salir.
No cabe por la puerta.

7 Me gusta