Are we all broke sheep?

[pro-player width=’530′ height=’253′ type=’video’ image=’http://api.ning.com/files/GLRPkozxKqsAOEDs*Rd06n1g0GC8wifx-HvjXsxwOlpn2Skpsbb8pRzsH82CNjTMI47lPVU2MHMBsp*V8xitlm6Ts5H*DgTL/BrokeTheMovie.jpg’]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-4Z7xKq4lU&feature=player_embedded[/pro-player]

This should be an interesting movie [thanks to KC for the link!] … interesting because I’d love to know how they plan to fill up theaters with a documentary on the economy.

Expect it to be filled with wonderfully breathy comments like “Warren Buffett has more in common with a great poker player …” Oooooh! 🙂

A fool’s game …

mordred foolsI’m hoping that after today, you’ll never look at stocks quite the same way again … first we need to go back to when Debbie asked how “the value of a company … translates to the price per share?”

Now this is REALLY key:

IF private companies (from your neighborhood hairdresser to the engineering firm in your local industrial estate) sell for 3 to 5 times their annual net profit (i.e. a P/E of 3 to 5), then

WHY do public companies (those traded on stock exchanges around the world) sell for P/E’s of 15+?

There are a number of reasons, but if you had to pick four they would be:

a) Convenience: you can simply buy/sell as much/little of the company as you like,

b) Regulation: by necessity, these companies are well-regulated by the various government overseeing authorities (e.g. in the USA it’s the SEC, amongst others),

c) Transparency: by law, companies are required to disclose everything about their companies so, in theory, the guy holding one share of the company knows as much about it as the majority shareholders [AJC: enter Martha Stewart!],

d) Liquidity: as Brandon said:

P/E ratios are all about liquidity. I can sell my stock in 30 seconds but good luck selling a business in under 6-12 months.

If I had to boil it down to just one factor, I would say that Brandon is right: it’s all really about allowing people who don’t know what they are doing to get in and out really quickly.

Now, think about this: even though, I have never seen this explained quite this way [AJC: so, perhaps I’m the idiot here?!], to me, it explains why (i) Warren Buffett is the richest man in the world, (ii) the best fund managers around can’t ‘beat the market’, and (iii) why the typical investor averages less than 4% return from the stock market and would be better off just leaving their money in cash:

People pay FOUR TIMES WHAT A COMPANY IS REALLY WORTH just for the privilege of not having to worry about getting in and out!

Read that again … before you buy your next stock 🙂

So, stocks have TWO values:

1. Their ‘intrinsic value’ i.e. what the underlying business is really worth, and

2. Their ‘market value’ i.e. what people are willing to pay for the privilege of throwing them around like casino chips.

Traders and speculators (and, aren’t we all?!) buy on the second … but, true investors (e.g. Warren Buffett) buy on the first.

Warren Buffett, and a relatively few investors like him, don’t care about the advantage of getting out quickly … they deal with that by avoiding selling! Sneaky, huh?

So, ‘value investors’ like Warren Buffett look at what a business is really worth, and buy it when it’s at that price LESS a margin of safety (they usually try and buy when the current stock price values the company at 50% – 80% of the ‘sticker price’ i.e. what their discounted future cashflow analysis tells them the company is really worth).

[Hint: because of some of the other advantages that we mentioned, it’s usually when the P/E is around 8]

So, think about it: Warren buys when the stock is valued at much closer to what he thinks the underlying business would be valued at if it were a private company (like that hairdresser) … then, he sells it – if he sells at all – to all of those other suckers out there when the stock gets up to normal valuations: for ‘normal’ read ‘sucker’ 😉

That’s why Brandon also is right on the money -literally – when he says:

That’s why the holy grail for private equity firms is the IPO. Buy a company at 5-10x earnings and take it public for a valuation of 15-30x.

Now, THAT’S a way to make a quick buck …

… but, hang on: if they are MAKING a quick buck selling at 15x – 30x valuations, what are WE doing when we are BUYING AT THAT PRICE?!

When will you be a millionaire?

Last week, I posed the question: how much should you have saved by now?

With the general consensus being that pre-packaged formulas such as “6.1 times your current salary by age 50” mean a hill o’beans because:

a) the best these ‘common wisdom’ formulas will get you to is just over broke by the time you work to 65 (and, not a day before!), and

b) they fail to take into account that YOU need to have saved enough to ensure that you’ve reached Your Number by Your Date.

The corollary question is “when will you be a millionaire?”, one which  CNN Money attempts to answer with this neat online calculator:

Picture 1

The problem with this calculator is obvious … but, in case you missed it, I blew up the bottom-right corner of the above image for you:

Picture 2

Your ‘desired nest egg’ – in this calculator – isn’t variable … it’s One Million … that’s it!

My issue is that plenty of people (fortunately, none of them readers of this blog) – with the support of an ‘authority’ such as CNN Money – still think that $1,000,000 is something to aspire to!

If $1 million isn’t just a hurdle along the way to your Number – and, a fairly early and relatively small hurdle at that – then you are destined for a VERY late retirement or an early trip to the ashram to meditate all day and eat rice at every meal … not that there’s anything wrong with aspiring to Asceticism 🙂

Adrian

PS I’m sure there’s plenty of other online calculators that will do the job, although I couldn’t find one that accepts >20% annual return and we know that we need more than that! If you find a good one, please post a link in the comments.

Now, that’s hard to bottle!

Over a couple of posts, I posed the question: is your partner worth $5 mill.?

Through some suspect mathematics, I ‘proved’ that partners aren’t worth the price you have to pay (in lost equity) UNLESS they are the ones with The Big Idea!

I bring this up, because a reader (who shall remain nameless, as business plans are currently in motion!) told me:

One of my clients-turned-friends is doing the coding [for my new site].  This was an idea we’ve tossed back and forth for a couple years… he was one of my first clients.  [I worked on his previous] site for 2 years or so, then helped him find a buyer who paid a couple MILLION for the site.  I got a $5,000 bonus…  then we worked on [another site] for a year or two.  I helped him sell that, but for something in the hundreds of thousands rather than a couple million but he gave no bonus! I was a little peeved! I mean, sure, the bonus wasn’t a requirement but … you know, it was sorta expected.  I couldn’t very well say – where’s my bonus?  A couple weeks later he asked if I was interested in collaborating on the project we’ve been tossing back and forth the ideas for, we worked out some stuff and he’s outlaid all the costs and most of the time to get it going.  [W]e’ll barely see 15% of profits [each] when all is said and done  …

[AJC: I had to ‘square bracket’ a bit to protect the innocent … but, you should be able to get the picture?]

I told this reader that this guy has a track record, and 15% of something that costs our reader nothing could turn out to be something worth while! I said: “I guess that’s his bonus ‘gift’ to you ….”

This is the real value of a partner – besides providing the ‘Big Idea’ – if they are the true entrepreneur and you are more the ‘worker bee’ type, then a partnership MAY be the only way that you’ll get a business up and going …

… you see, this guy – and, this is true of many successful entrepreneurs – can show a track record of:

(a) spotting winners i.e. good potential business opportunities, and

(b) spotting winners i.e. good potential people who can help him make them happen.

The ability to spot winners is all that it can take … BUT, that’s a rare skill that’s very hard to bottle 😉

Some housekeeping ….

Share Your Number - Logo - 7m7yI ummed and aahed about it, but three sites is one too many to maintain. So,I finally DID decide to move the home of the Millionaires … In Training! ‘grand experiment’ to our Share Your Number community site – if you haven’t visited that site, yet (or, recently!) NOW would be a great time to bookmark this page and visit often!

Oh, and feel free to join the community at http://shareyournumber.org/ and you, too, can write your own featured posts and ask and answer member questions … what fun!

So, from now on, I hope to see you HERE and THERE 🙂

Adrian.

I want my share!

What is a stock? What is a share? Are they interchangeable, and who even cares?

Well, Debbie does … asking on the Share Your Number community forum:

I understand why you would need to have a good idea of the value of a company if you plan to buy stock in that company – But I don’t understand (and I’m sure this is stocks 101) how that translates to the price per share.

Even though this blog isn’t about Stocks 101 … there are plenty of other places on the web to find that sort of info … this does open up some interesting questions:

For example, even though I owned some of my businesses 100%, they were structured with lots of shares (usually between 100 and 1000).

Why?

Well, ‘just in case’ …

… it makes it easy for banks, partners, JV’s, partial sales, etc. to buy in – just transfer them a % of the shares: if you have 1,000 shares (or 100, it doesn’t matter … larger numbers just have more divisors and the ability to make finer and finer ‘cuts’ of the company value) and they are buying 40% of the company, you just give then 400 (or 40) shares.

Simple!

If you want to be sneaky, you create two classes of shares: A (say, 600 of the shares) and B (the rest), with the voting rights going to the A stock, which you – naturally – keep. You get to sell 40% of the company to some sucker and keep 100% of the control (actually, 60% still should give you majority control, so it’s not such a big deal, anyway)!

Unfortunately, for my New Zealand Joint Venture (fancy term for ‘partnership’), where I owned just 40% of the stock, that wasn’t possible … and, for my US JV, where I ‘controlled’ the company with 51% of the stock, there were so many “by unanimous agreement” clauses written into the shareholder’s agreement, I couldn’t blow my nose without seeking my partner’s approval, first 🙂

So, the first lesson we learn about stock is that numbers and/or percentages CAN matter less (or more) than you think … it’s all in the fine print 😉

Public companies are the same, except that they are usually (a) huge, and (b) divided into LOTS of small pieces (1,000,000+) so that people can buy very small chunks of the company, and trade them very easily i.e. for small sums of money.

These shares/stocks are traded on public stock exchanges, which are heavily regulated to make up for the fact that ‘idiots’ like me buy small pieces of businesses without the effort or forethought that they would put into buying the WHOLE business: we take all the risks without any of the business controls.

Stupid!

And, that’s why the stock market is more akin to a casino than to ‘real’ business or investing … we have no control, and only limited understanding of the underlying business that we are – in effect – buying into.

Now, here’s Josh to answer the second part of Debbie’s question (“how that translates to the price per share”):

If you think a company is worth 1 billion and there are 100 million shares outstanding, the price you think the shares are worth are 10 dollars each. Of course you want to wait until you have the opportunity to pay less then this.

So, if you would be willing – that is, if you were Warren Buffett instead of Jane Doe – to buy the whole company for $100,000,000 and it had 1,000,000 shares, then you should be willing to buy one (or each) share for $100. Except, Warren reads the financial reports and calls the shots, while we read Money Magazine and wait patiently (what other choice do we have?!) for our dividend check 😉

This leads to some other key numbers:

In a private company, we have sales and profits.

In a public company (i.e. traded on a stock exchange), we also have sales (or ‘revenue’) and profits (or ‘earnings’), but we can now also divide each of those by the number of shares available to come up with numbers like Revenue per Share and (more importantly) Earnings Per Share.

Also, if we COULD buy the whole company for $100,000,000 and it had a 25% profit margin, then for each $100 share we buy, we would expect $25 in company profits … which means the company is now selling for a Price/Earnings Ratio of 4.

Which leads me to the Grand Mystery of the Stock Market:

If a P/E of 4 is right on the money for a private company (they typically sell for 3 to 5 times annual profit/earnings) why is a P/E of, say, 15 for a publicly traded stock the ‘norm’ and a P/E of 8 to 12 times earnings so damn cheap that even Warren Buffett might buy the stock by the truckloads?!

[AJC: I know the answer … but ‘knowing’ doesn’t make it right 😉 … do you know the answer?]

So, Debbie – in case you’re worried about asking a 101 question – please remember: there’s no such thing as a bad question, only a bad answer 😛

How much should you have saved by now?

datesThis is rapidly appearing to become a blog about your Number … of course, that’s not the case: it’s a blog about money, specifically about how to make $7 million in 7 years, but you can pretty quickly see that having a real financial goal in mind is a powerful focusing tool.

It’s also a ‘comparator’ – a tool to use whenever you are presented with two financial alternatives … for example, Scott who is deciding how many clinics to open: 1, 2, or 3+ [Hint: only one of these is the right answer, and it’s not the obvious one!] … it was ONLY by having a clear understanding of his Number / Date that he came to this conclusion.

Without that understanding, Scott could have made a terrible (OK, far better than terrible … more, non-optimum) decision that would have had the opposite effect to that intended: it would have committed him to working for 10 to 20 more years.

So, now that I have provided the hint, let’s look at today’s conundrum, posed by Money Magazine in March 2008: how much money should you have saved by now?

Well, given the current market the chances are that what you have saved has halved, but what you should have saved hasn’t … bummer 🙂

But, here’s what Money Magazine advises; to see how much you should have saved by now:

If you are age 45 multiply your current salary by 4.1
If you are age 50 multiply your current salary by 6.1
If you are age 55 multiply your current salary by 8.5
If you are age 60 multiply your current salary by 11.4

So, if I said my current salary was $250k (well, that’s what I most recently paid myself before I retired), then I should have saved $1.525 million by now …

Can you see the obvious problem?

Well, it assumes that I am going to want to keep working for another 15+ years!

Why? Simple: $1.525m can only support a ‘safe’ 5% annual withdrawal rate of $76,250 (before tax) … so, unless I want to take a HUGE pay-cut, I’m going to have to keep working until I’ve saved at least $5 million … lucky that’s exactly what I did 😉

So, here’s how you should calculate how much you should have saved by now:

1. Calculate your Number,

2. Decide your Date,

3. Subtract your Current Net Worth from 1.

4. Subtract today’s date from the Date

5. Divide 4. into 3.

That’s how much you need to have saved each year between now and your Date, if you want to reach your Number.

Now, you can get fancy and use an online compounding calculator to do the year-upon-year calculations, but this is a good place to start.

Diversification [does NOT equal] Bankroll Management!

Even though guys like Tom Dwan (a.k.a. Durrrr) can run up a $200 starting bankroll to over $10 million in 3 or 4 years playing poker online, I don’t recommend this as a serious ‘investment’ strategy!

Nor, do I recommend simply dumping your entire portfolio (401k included) into just one stock pick, as Josh has done ….

… even though both Tom and Josh are both ‘big winners’ … so far 😉

That’s why I recommended – for those amongst my readers who insist on traversing the high-wire of their financial life (there ARE rich prizes at the other side, IF they make it, so who am I to say “don’t!”???) – a simple three-part strategy to protecting their finances, by taking:

1/3 of any ‘windfall gains’ for spending (presuming that the speculation activity is their primary source of income);

1/3 of any ‘windfall gains’ to fuel a parallel ‘passive income’ investment strategy; and,

1/3 of any ‘windfall gains’ for their trading activity (this could be trading stocks/options; developing or flipping real-estate with little money down; etc.; etc).

If the person has another (reliable) source of income, then any ‘windfall gains’ can simply be split 50/50 between ‘speculation’ and ‘passive investments’.

Of course, this will slow down growth, which is why Josh still wants to:

Go 100% 401k and 200% brokerage … [because] sometimes the opportunity is so obvious and risk so low

Spoken like a true Most Probably Will Go Broke Someday Trader!

This strategy is just there to protect the Josh’s of this world in the unlikely event that they should miscalculate ever so slightly 😉

Look, I’m not going to attempt to teach anybody anything about trading, but it’s always good to remember: it takes just ONE bad piece of news on a ‘volatile stock’ (bad ceo, drug that doesn’t get FDA approval or shows unexpected adverse side-effects, law suit) to override the fundamentals.

It’s the equivalent to a ‘bad beat‘ in poker (a.k.a. ‘variance’) … they are inevitable in poker – and, I would argue, also in trading – and you survive them by good bankroll management …

… after all, there are still Enrons out there that people are trading up every day 🙂

On the other hand, Jeff throws a curve ball:

Looks like you have changed your stance a little on diversification. [http://7million7years.com/2008/12/19/the-allure-of-diversification/, where you don’t recommend diversification due loss specialized knowledge and consigning yourself to average returns]

I’m interested why you made the shift…

As I said to Jeff, this may appear to be a shift, but it’s not …

Diversification ≠Bankroll Management!

… for example:

– if Josh said that he was going to invest 100% in buy/hold cashflow-positive real-estate, I would say “go for it”

– if Josh said that he was going to invest 100% in an existing profitable business, I would say “go for it”

– if Josh said he was going to invest 100% in 4 or 5 stocks that he felt were undervalued and was prepared to hold for the long-term, I would say “go for it”

… but, I would say that if the future income stream is in any doubt (e.g. if it is a royalty, or speculation, or short-term investment) to divert some of the cashflow produced from profits (capital gains and/or operating profits i.e. one of the ‘thirds’ that I mention above) and use those to start creating your own Perpetual Money Machine: that’s VERY different from the standard type of diversification that most financial advisers talk about.

Nasty Mr Inflation – Part II

Nasty_ManLast time, we looked at dealing with inflation before we retire (a.k.a. Life After Work), to see that $40k a year of current needs means that you need to be able to generate somewhere between $100k and $125k per year, IF you want to retire in 30 years.

Even if we manage to build up the $2.8 million nest egg that Pinyo talks about (or the $1.8 million one that the following reader talks about), we have a problem, illustrated by the comment by Elaine on Pinyo’s post:

I don’t see interest included in the calculations here. Even at 4%, *just the annual interest* on 1.8 million will cover your annual needs. Not that that’s a bad thing, you’ll still have 1.8 mil left when you die. If you plan to use up all your money in retirement the necessary amount would be quite a bit lower.

Elaine has ‘forgotten’ about inflation; this doesn’t stop just because you retire!

You earn 4% on your money and before you get to spend any of it, Mr Inflation ’spends’ 3.5% for you … I asked Elaine if she can live off just 0.5% of $1.8 Million?

When you retire, if you have your money just sitting in the bank, inflation will simply kill you, financially-speaking.

On the other hand, if Elaine buys a $1.8 mill. rental property (paying 100% cash, forgetting closing costs) the property will increase in value WITH inflation, as will the rents … an inflation-proof retirement (or, she can buy TIPS, inflation-protected government bonds … etc., etc.)

Finally Revealed! The MOST important Making Money 101 lesson of them all …

old lightI was just rereading last week’s post where I said that I believed delayed gratification to be the most important Making Money 101 tool of them all.

And, as I said, I truly believed this to be the secret of my financial success …

… until this very morning!

Let me backtrack a little: we delayed gratification (MM101), built up our business income (MM201) and socked money away in passive investments (to prepare for MM301) and we finally made it.

We then started to really live our ‘new life’ as multi-millionaires: we acquired the houses, the cars, the paintings, the vacations, the technology …

[AJC: feel sorry for us, yet? 😉 ]

… but, today we did something just as important (since we are stripping and renovating entirely the new house, which is actually an old house, built in the 1940’s and last renovated some 20 years ago):

We sold some second hand light-fittings for almost $200!

No, you didn’t misread: the new multi-millionaires didn’t just say to the builders “it’s a soon-to-be $6 mill house, so throw the junk away … or, take what you want” … they sold some stuff for $200 😛

Just in case you still don’t see the irony, here was the process:

1. We went to the house and decided what we wanted to sell: a few light fittings; some old built-in shelving (total hoped-for sales price circa $700)

2. We photographed everything that we wanted to sell

3. My wife and son listed each item on eBay (about 5 or 6 separate auctions)

4. My wife dealt with the two ‘winners’ (only two of the items actually sold first time around: both were light fittings)

5. I met the winners separately at the house and helped them remove the light fittings

6. I ‘upsold’ both: one with a heated-towel rail and extra light fitting for an additional $9, and the other for an additional $50 of lights

7. My wife and son are busy relisting the shelving and unsold lights as I am writing this … Round 2. Ding!

So, I spent a whole morning – plus all of the lead-up work – ‘earning’ exactly $140 …

in some circles (millionaire circles, that is) that would be regarded as sick 😉

But, that’s when it hit me: it was not delayed gratification that set the grounds for our later financial success …

… that’s a result, not a cause.

And, it wasn’t saving 15% – 50% of our income, or putting money into a 401k, and so on … they are all results, not causes.

It was the respect that we had and still have for money as a tool to help us live our Life’s Purpose that caused us to do all of these things …

… read that again, carefully: I didn’t say ‘love’ or ‘need’ or ‘desire’ or ‘greed’ … I said respect.

If we want the money to live our Life’s Purpose, we have to respect money as one of the tools (just one, not even the most important) to help us achieve that. Just as a hunting nomad would respect his hunting weapons, a farmer his plot of land, a charter pilot his aircraft, and so on: we respect the money that feeds us and fuels our needs.

This means that we don’t squander it needlessly, we save it when necessary, and we spend it when it doesn’t make sense not to … that’s Making Money 101, and it just hit me like a sledgehammer between the eyes: delayed gratification is the tool, but gaining a healthy respect for money is the lesson that we all need to learn.

I won’t forget this lesson … will you?