The stock markets are crashing now. For quite obvious reasons. Tariffs, trade wars, the government shutdown that has no signs of being abated soon. Markets don’t like uncertainty, chaos or unpredictability.
The S&P500 has gone down by 15% since October. Apple has lost 38% of its market capitalization in the same time frame. My phone has repeatedly received notifications on the 52-week lows of the stocks in my portfolio for the past few weeks.
The knives have started falling. Should you stand still and try to catch the falling knives?
Howard argued that it is only when the knives are falling are people terrified and do the bargains show up. If we wait till the dust settles, the bargain will be gone. But when should one start buying to take advantage of the downturn? It’s up to one’s skills. Howard also cautioned that buying during the downturn isn’t enough to guarantee returns. Investors have to be right first and if investors want to outperform the markets and everyone else, they must have insights that no one has or the 2nd layer of thoughts.
If you are interested in investing and business, it is a great interview with a lot of insights. Have a listen while driving or working out or cleaning your place. It’s worth your time.
A friend recommended to me the interview below that featured Russell Brand and Candace Owens. Even though I still have 17 minutes to go, I think I have enough to say a couple of things about it.
From my perspectives, the two people in the clip came from two opposite extreme positions in a variety of topics, whether it was about the role of governments, the entitlement mindset, socialism, capitalism… The issue with coming from an extreme position is that it is too generalizing and often times it is right in a few scenarios. Take socialism. Candace cited multiple times Venezuela as the proof of socialism as a failed social system. On the other hand, Nordic countries have thrived in the past decades because of governments and societies that are more socialist than capitalist. Yet, such cases are conveniently ignored when critics of socialism take a stage and voice their criticisms.
Decentralization vs Centralization
Decentralization has become increasingly popular nowadays whether you talk about governments or cryptocurrency. Fans of decentralization don’t hesitate to criticize governments and centralization. Don’t get me wrong. A lot of governments fail at their jobs and deserve criticisms. Essentially, governments are run by human-beings and we are naturally flawed. We tend to succumb to excessive greed and thirst for power. That’s why we need checks and balance.
Nonetheless, centralization has been there for centuries. And it happened that way for a reason. If it were so bad, why wouldn’t something like centralization happen earlier? We may have the technology in what powers bitcoin or cryptocurrency to actually have a shot at scaled decentralization. When that will happen remains unclear, but I am amazed at the tendency to dismantle completely centralization by some crypto fans.
I believe it is a more efficient way between the two concepts at hand (centralization vs decentralization) to distribute resources and run societies. If there were no banks, how much less efficient would our societies be? If everybody had to keep his or her record and there were no trusted intermediary, how much more time and effort would be wasted to do what we normally do with government agencies and banks.
Additionally, many are concerned about growing influence of big corporations on our societies. Yet, without governments, who would be able to keep those corporations in check?
The interview itself is a refreshing one that features a civilized argument littered with disagreements. A rarity nowadays.
There are points from each side that I agree and disagree with. One of the things I have learned in the past two years is to have strong opinions and loosely held views. Or in layman’s terms, I avoid extreme positions. Particularly, regarding very complex issues such as socialism, centralization vs decentralization and macro-economics, just to name a few, I believe the extreme perspectives are even less accurate or helpful. You can’t tell me a government-led society won’t work when there is Singapore. You can’t tell me socialism won’t work when there are Nordic countries.
Each country is very different. One concept that works for one country is not guaranteed to work in others. Using one particular failure/success to dismiss/over-hype that concept is, in my opinion, not right. What is failing is the execution. Not the concepts. What matters is reality. Whatever works works, regardless of what it is called.
I was listening to this interview with Peter Thiel while in the gym yesterday (Yes, I like to listen to podcasts, interviews and John Oliver while sweating it out! Weirdo me). There are two points that stood out for me.
A bit of context, Peter Thiel was the founder of Paypal and recruited what would be known as the Paypal Mafia, a group of individuals who would found successful startups. Peter is known for being a wildly successful entrepreneur, investor and contrarian thinker who challenges assumptions and established thinking.
He didn’t think Facebook would be that big
Peter was one of the first investors in Facebook when the company was at $5 million valuation. He said in the interview (around minute 7:20) that he didn’t think it would be as big as it eventually became. It would be worth his investment if Facebook just dominated the college student market. We all know how it turned out.
I sometimes beat myself up a little bit for not seeing far ahead in terms of companies that I analyzed or missed. But if the great Warren Buffett missed Amazon, Google and for many years, Apple (he is now one of the biggest shareholders of Apple) and if Peter Thiel couldn’t figure out Facebook’s eventual great future, then I guess it’s OK for any of us to be…human.
First meeting with Mark Zuckerberg
Peter Thiel talked about the first meeting with Mark around minute 4:20. He recalled that Mark went to the meeting with Sean Parker and Sean did most of the talking. Having watched a few of Mark’s interviews and speeches, he doesn’t appear to me as an exceptional salesman. Yet, people often claim that if you don’t have sales skill, you can’t be an entrepreneur. While it may be true in most cases, it’s not definitive. Mark and Facebook still getting the money without doing most of the talking was the proof of that.
Point is that I increasingly believe that every advice is contextual. Most of the time, there is barely one-size-fits-all or hard-and-fast advice. What works for one person may not work for others. One piece of advice is like a tool in your arsenal. One tool cannot do everything. It serves only a specific purpose in a certain set of scenarios. Constant learning gathers many tools at your disposal and learning what tool to use in a scenario is probably what makes a person succeed.