Money Won’t Find You. You Have To Meet It Halfway.

Emulate this cat’s investment strategy, if not his look

 

The CYC principals work at home and thus employ the Fox Business Network as much of the soundtrack (and in our male half’s case, the visual stimulus) for our daily lives. While listening and desultorily watching, we hear the same corporations mentioned again and again. Lately it’s been the ones you’d expect: Facebook and its declining stock price, Apple and its historic book value, Nike (about to release an expensive new shoe), Best Buy (just hired a new CEO, the equivalent of the Doña Paz hiring a new captain after crashing into the Vector), etc.

All of them are famous, with much of the companies’ values deriving from their brand names. That’s why they’re featured so prominently in the media; or perhaps vice versa.

Name recognition is, without question, the worst possible criterion for determining the worth of a stock. In our above examples we have:

  • A pop-culture leviathan that’s effectively eliminated all its competition, and an advertising vehicle that millions of people lock their eyeballs onto daily.
  • A iconic company that not only makes elegantly designed and famously reliable gadgets and computers, but one that’s discovered how to sell slightly upgraded versions of said gadgets to the same loyal customers year after year.
  • Another icon with a devoted following (albeit slightly less devoted than Apple’s), and which, like Apple, sells a lifestyle and a state of mind as much as it sells products.
  • A retail chain whose death throes are almost audible. A decade ago, it was a legitimately cool place to buy toys: today, it’s a prehistoric version of Amazon. Or of the Apple Store.

Publicity is important for entertainers and their ilk. For corporations looking to make money in the long term (and their shareholders), being in the public eye could not be less important. Groupon has gotten more headlines than Cardinal Health every single day of the former’s existence, but it’s the latter that turned a $1 billion profit last year. And sold $100 billion worth of product (drugs, mostly). And employs 30,000 people. Cardinal Health held its initial public offering in 1983, back when Groupon’s managers and directors were barely alive. But there’s a larger point here than comparing daily deal sites to stodgy old pharmaceutical firms.

Listen. Investing is not supposed to be fun.

Check that. Investing should be lots of fun. It’s a far less laborious (and multiplicative) way to build wealth than is working for 8 hours a day. Maybe we’re unclear on how to define “fun”.

We’ve told you in the past not to buy a stock just because you happen to be a customer. But we can do better than just giving you subtractive advice, telling you what to avoid.

Embrace boredom. Invest in workable, quietly successful companies that the average mouth-breather traipsing his way down the street wouldn’t think twice about.

You know what publicly traded company has the highest profit margins? That is, among all of them? Apple is tops among the ones we’ve mentioned so far, but it’s only 24th among all public companies.

Devon Energy! You remember Devon Energy, right? Of course you don’t, you were too busy reading about that chick with the jacked-up teeth getting engaged to that Nickelback guy.

Devon Energy is a natural gas/oil producer based out of Oklahoma City. They own pipelines that are mostly in Texas but that stretch all the way to Illinois. Devon has operations as far north as the British Columbia-Northwest Territories border.

And you’ve never heard of them. The stock is trading at around $60, which is barely 10 times annual earnings. Last year each share paid 80¢ worth of dividends. Analysts think it’ll hit $77 a year from now. Both revenue and gross profit have increased 20% annually over the last few years, the kind of sustained growth that most better-publicized companies can only fantasize about.

(Notice we didn’t tell you what Devon Energy stock has done in the past year. That’s irrelevant to people who don’t own the stock, which presumably includes you.)

None of your friends will be impressed if you tell them you bought a standard lot of Devon Energy. Rather, they’ll get bored and want to leave the room. Fine. Let them.

Opportunities don’t go out of their way to get your attention. Never forget this. Facebook stock was never going to bring you untold riches. The newsworthy IPOs that would don’t exist.

What about Google?

Fine, you got us. Also, retroactively picking stocks is cheating. Google was enjoying healthy if not tropospheric profit margins from Day 1, unlike Facebook. Google was a relatively small player back then: its revenue has grown 38-fold since then, its profits 90-fold. (If you want to see how humorously ancient some business news stories from as recently as 2004 read, check this out.)

When you’re done reading Devon’s financials (a spirited way to spend a Friday afternoon), check out the public companies with the 2nd– through 5th-highest profit margins:

  • MGM Resorts, owners of half the fanciest hotels on the Las Vegas Strip, several in China and Vietnam, and a few bottom-of-the-market yet still highly profitable toilets in Detroit and on the Redneck Riviera.
  • VISA, the favorite creditor of personal finance bloggers across the country.
  • Corning, who probably made the glass your phone is encased in.
  • Gilead Sciences, makers of antiviral drugs. Tamiflu is their most famous one.

Admit it. You’ve never heard of at least one of those companies, and never gave the others a second thought.

We’re not going to do all the work for you. That’s part of the reward. Go to the general-purpose finance site of your choice (our favorite is Yahoo! Finance). Read the quarterly and annual financials, available to everyone, and take a freaking risk that your 401(k) doesn’t offer.

Columns of numbers. God, that sounds like a party.

Do you have to read interoffice memos? Or employee handbooks? Or TPS reports? What the hell’s the difference? Aside from how reading financial statements can make you money. You like money, right?

I don’t know how to interpret them.

Sure you do. Read this first.

You should all be rich, or at least upwardly mobile. The resources are at your disposal, waiting to be capitalized upon. The research is so easy even that dippy, chunky gal from So Over Debt can do it. (Mmm…dippy and chunky.) Stop reusing your paper towels and do something remunerative with your time. You’re welcome.

The Streisand Effect, Revisited

Maybe she should invest in Revlon

 

To quote one of America’s dippiest celebrities on her investment strategy:

We go to Starbucks every day, so I bought Starbucks stock

Your humble blogger drives a Ford every day, and wouldn’t touch Ford stock with Ms. Streisand’s nose.

This is the stupidest way imaginable to invest. Equating the utility of a company’s products with the strength of the company’s finances is like saying “Brett Myers can throw a 91 mph fastball, therefore I bet he’d make a great husband.”

But back to the mentally deficient celebrity at hand. Ms. Streisand is more fortunate than you in that she can get rich (and did, and does) off active income. She’s one of those extremely rare people in that her talents alone made her a multimillionaire. She didn’t have to leverage her money and time, defer spending, and research investments in order to get rich. Her voice and acting chops did it for her. Furthermore, she can afford to lose millions in the stock market and not flinch. Depending on how big Ms. Streisand’s Starbucks position is, were the stock to tank, there’s a corresponding number of nights she can perform at the MGM Grand Garden Arena that will wipe the losses away.

 

Other companies we patronize daily include Nevada Energy (stock trading at close to a 52-week high) and Nestlé (makers of Friskies cat food, stock in a similar position to Nevada Energy.) Two companies, one a utility, one a multinational leviathan, both of which have something of a ceiling on their short-term growth. We need better reasons for investing in something.

Our investments include the following:

  • Netflix stock. Despite never being a member, and never wanting to. Your humble blogger hates both movies and subscriptions. But tens of millions of other people feel otherwise, and investing is more about considering what those other people are interested in, rather than what the investor is interested in.
  • Altria stock. It’s hard to imagine a stupider activity than smoking, but tell that to the billions of people around the world who see inhaling tobacco fumes as a perfectly normal thing to do. Hell, if it’s good enough for the President of the United States, why not?

If other people are going to behave irrationally (e.g. by smoking, or gambling, or drinking, or incurring credit card debt), and no one’s going to convince them not to, why not profit off them? It’s the responsible thing to do. Until mankind wakes up one morning and collectively decides, “You know something? Maybe actively introducing carcinogens into my respiratory system isn’t a bright idea. Time to stop now,” which it won’t, we’re going to continue to be indirectly responsible for selling them their poison.

  • Houses in lower-middle class areas. Because, as always, the price was right. Is right. “You make your money going in” is one of personal finance’s all-time great truisms. An inexpensive house that requires a minimum of upkeep (no lawn maintenance company to hire, no pool to clean) is easy to rent. The renters make the mortgage payments (and then some), leaving the landlord with a profit that requires just a little paperwork to maintain.

That’s exploitation of the poor.

Sure, if you say so.

Now that we’ve got the reactionary simpletons out of the room, let’s resume. Renting out comfortable shelter to people is the opposite of exploiting them. It’s providing for them – meeting the most basic of their requirements, no less. For a fair price, one made even more fair by the fact that these renters can’t afford to buy a house. We advocate home ownership on this site, multiple home ownership if you can do it, but not everyone’s in a position to buy. And we might as well make money off some of those otherwise disenfranchised people. Because someone is going to. So why not us?

It’s the same principle as that advocated by buying Altria stock. Say we were to wrap ourselves in righteous indignation and decide, “This is a travesty. Smoking kills 135,000 Americans every year – an entire Topeka or New Haven – and we won’t be a party to the wholesale genocide any longer.”

That position isn’t going to save a single life. And even if it did, why should we care? Altria customers gladly sign their own death warrants, in exchange for rich and mild satisfaction. On a far smaller and more benign scale, the same goes for Netflix customers. If they want to pay big markups for a service that we have no interest in, why should that be our concern? It might not be our business, but we’re making it our business. To the tune of increased returns (and in Altria’s case, years of ever-increasing dividends.)

Umbrage never made anybody rich. It’s a childish emotion…actually, that’s not fair. It’s an adult emotion. But it doesn’t matter. It’s an emotion. Any of which – anger, joy, trepidation – gets in the way of the subject at hand, which is earning enough money via our financial acumen that we can escape our unfulfilling jobs and subservience to The Man.

“Cold” is never intended as a compliment when attributed to a human, and “rational” isn’t regarded much better. But coldness and rationality are critical if you want to grow your money. If you’re going to get excited about a stock, do so because it’s grossly undervalued and no one else seems to notice. Not because its IPO is coming up and you think it’ll be fun to invest in it. Otherwise, have no emotions whatsoever.

Another company we have a big position in is Tesco, a name unfamiliar to most people on our continent. It’s the UK’s largest retailer, their answer to Walmart, with a smattering of stores around Asia and the rest of Europe. We’d say we’ve never patronized Tesco, only looked at the company’s financial statements, but it turns out that indeed we have given them our business.

Tesco also operates a few grocery stores under a different name in the United States: Fresh & Easy. If you’ve never been to one, and if you don’t live in the Southwest you probably haven’t, Fresh & Easy is one of the most self-righteous and condescending places we’ve ever patronized. When you shop there you make a statement, something along the lines of “Slap the word ‘organic’ on a package and I’ll nod my head in brainless approval. Plus I don’t have the budget for Whole Foods.” (If you’re wondering, the statement we made was “We’re stuck in Phoenix, we need milk, and this is the closest supermarket.”)

The parking spaces closest to the door are reserved for…well, here’s a picture:

 

 

(Aside: That’s not a handicap sign. It carries zero legal weight. Yes, we parked our 18 mpg SUV there and didn’t flinch. Besides, if management really cares about ecology, they’d let us park as close to the door as possible instead of forcing us to burn fossil fuels looking for a space somewhere else in the lot. A point we never got to share with the scrawny, disdainful man in the Nissan Leaf who gave us his approximation of a death stare when we disembarked and entered the store. A, You don’t know what’s under the hood, Slugger. B, No, we’re not going to pop it for you. Take it up with management. Guy looked at us as if we were ordering napalm strikes on the Amazon rainforest.)

The point is that this Tesco subsidiary is the kind of place we’d only spend money at under rare circumstances, and would rather make fun of. But the money rolls in, and as an investment, we love it. Tesco carries minimal debt, continues to build tons of market share, and has a history of dividends (even though its American operations are struggling – the company’s recently closed over a dozen stores.)

Smarmy environmentalism isn’t our thing, but again, this isn’t about us. It’s about the market. What other consumers want to buy. What producers, in this case Tesco management, want to offer. And that’s a far more sound investment strategy than “We visit ESPN.com every day, so we bought Walt Disney stock”, any day of the week.

IPOs for Beginners

 

You mean a site where people give their opinions about restaurants is worth billions? Sure, sounds good to me.

This article appears in drastically different form on Investopedia.  

“IPOs for beginners”. As a concept, that’s similar to “International Space Station repair for beginners.” No less an authority than Benjamin Graham, author of the definitive investing guide The Intelligent Investor and mentor of Warren Buffett, believed that initial public offerings were way beyond the neophyte investor’s level. He was largely right, but why?

Who wouldn’t want to be among the first to enjoy a promising new stock, one that no one else at the cocktail party had the privilege of investing in as early as you did? IPOs are tempting, if you’re the kind of person who loves shiny new toys and the general feeling of exclusivity that accompanies them. But at least you can physically show off your iPad 3 or PlayStation Vita and receive tangible oohs and aahs. That’s considerably different than telling everyone you meet that you hopped aboard the Groupon bandwagon when the rest of the world was still showing their IDs at the ticket counter. There’s little that’s conspicuous about a particular new entry in an online brokerage account.

Graham thought IPOs were only for seasoned investors for several reasons, one of them being that the previous private owners are often looking to cash out much of their holdings. The underwriters set the price of the typical IPO at a premium specifically to take advantage of a seller’s market. With limited supply, and highly publicized if not unlimited demand, what would you expect to happen to the price of a stock when it’s first offered to the public? (It’s a rhetorical question, and if you really need the answer, you shouldn’t even be considering investing in an IPO.)

Graham died a quarter-century before the original dot-com bust, and everything that’s happened since would only reinforce his position regarding who should invest in an IPO. Almost by definition, most initial public offerings are of companies that haven’t been around a long time. Lately, the companies haven’t even needed healthy records of revenue growth and profit, either. But with a proliferation of aggressive venture capital firms looking to back winners, and the financial media having ever more reach among amateurs looking for an exciting place to put their money, one thing is certain: the next Pets.com or eToys won’t be hurting for investors on its opening trading day.

Last November, Groupon “finally” went public after endless rumors. (“Finally” is in quotes because while most of Groupon’s existence as a private company was spent anticipating the IPO, that existence was only three years. The company was founded in November of 2008.) The company was on top of the collective consciousness as the hottest of all possible IPOs, at least until the day that Facebook goes public. Groupon acknowledged in SEC documents that it was on pace to lose half a billion dollars a year, and investors still kept coming. Once the institutional investors got paid, and GRPN finally became available to the ordinary public, the stock had fallen from its introductory price. A scant 4 months later, Groupon stock has lost almost a third of its value, which is fairly impressive seeing as earnings are about a negative dollar per share. Groupon’s never reached its IPO level after a couple of weeks of trading, and might never again.

Of course, all IPOs aren’t Groupon. VISA went public after decades of renown and profit, but even its IPO wasn’t available to anyone but institutional investors at the start. The same will go for Facebook. The company’s primary stockholders will profit the most – the very day it goes public, in fact. The initial lenders will get on their knees and thank the God of their parents’ choice. After a few more iterations, the most anticipated stock in recent history will trickle down to average investors at a price that could be a bargain, or could be a local maximum. There are more prudent ways to invest.

Take an example of a company whose stock is about as far removed from an IPO as possible – United Technologies. The Hartford-based aircraft engine and elevator conglomerate has been a component of the Dow since before World War II, and probably hasn’t been above the fold in any story in The Wall Street Journal since then. Most people have never heard of United Technologies, and the company brass prefers it that way, thank you very much. Nothing, not even a fire alarm, will clear out a room faster than telling people you recently went long on UTX stock. But an interesting thing about United Technologies’ performance is that you can examine its price movement over almost any arbitrary period,  and the graph will consistently move up and to the right.

Investing should have one solitary, overarching objective – to make money. Getting excited about an IPO for its own sake isn’t investing so much as it is flamboyance. The people who got in on Google’s ground floor, you can count on both hands. It’s tempting to think that you could have been one of them, or that you could be in a similar position when the next IPO comes available, but building wealth doesn’t have to be that capricious. Find an established, undervalued, temporarily wounded stock, and you’re far more likely to turn a long-term profit than someone starry-eyed over the latest company to be listed publicly.

This article is featured in:

**The Carnival of Personal Finance-Invest in Yourself Edition (Editor’s pick)**

**Totally Money Blog Carnival #60**