25 Pages of the Best Value Investing Quotes (PAGE WILL LOAD SLOWLY)

Updated on

business in

Bemidjiand master the art. That is an attainable objective, given enough discipline. And people who could never win a chess tournament or stand in center court in a respectable tennis tournament can rise quite high in life by slowly developing a circle of competence—which results partly from what they were born with and partly from what they slowly develop through work.”   http://ycombinator.com/munger.html
Just as a man working with his tools should know its limitations, a man working with his cognitive apparatus must know its limitationshttp://www.feedblitz.com/f/f.fbz?PreviewFeed=7799

“When I run into a paradox I think either I’m a total horse’s ass to have gotten to this point, or I’m fruitfully near the edge of my discipline. It adds excitement to life to wonder which it is.” http://www.cs.purdue.edu/news/images/STolopka.pdf#search=%22%22Charlie%20munger%22%20and%20quotations%22


“You know the cliché that opposites attract? “Well, opposites don’t attract. Everybody engaged in complicated work needs colleagues.  Just the discipline of having to put your thoughts in order with somebody else is a very useful thing.” http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/32/04712447/0471244732-1.pdf#search=%22munger%20you%20know%20the%20cliche%20that%20opposites%20attract%22


Being controlling owners is key – it would be hard for a committee to make these kinds of decisions. http://www.tilsonfunds.com/brkmtg04notes.doc


“ [Sarcastically]: I think we’ve demonstrated our expertise in commodities, if you look at our activities in silver. [Laughter]  …We didn’t get where we are by owning non-interest-bearing commodities.” http://www.designs.valueinvestorinsight.com/bonus/bonuscontent/docs/Tilson_2006_BRK_Meeting_Notes.pdf#search=%22Charlie%20munger%20and%20foundation%20and%20croupier%22

“… we’ve missed the biggest commodity boom in history – and we’ll continue to miss things like this! ” http://www.designs.valueinvestorinsight.com/bonus/bonuscontent/docs/Tilson_2006_BRK_Meeting_Notes.pdf#search=%22Charlie%20munger%20and%20foundation%20and%20croupier%22
Common Sense 

“Organized common (or uncommon) sense — very basic knowledge — is an enormously powerful tool. There are huge dangers with computers. People calculate too much and think too little.”  http://www.fool.com/news/foth/2002/foth020515.htm

“Part of [having uncommon sense] is being able to tune out folly, as opposed to recognizing wisdom.  If you bat away many things, you don’t clutter yourself.” http://www.tilsonfunds.com/brkmtg04notes.doc

“In the corporate world, if you have analysts, due diligence, and no horse sense you’ve just described hell.” http://www.tilsonfunds.com/


“It isn’t enough to buy the right business. You’ve also have to have compensationsystem that’s satisfactory to the people running them. At Berkshire Hathaway, we haveno [single] system; we have different systems. They’re very simple and we don’t tend torevisit them very often. It’s amazing how well it’s worked. We wrote a one-page dealwith Chuck Huggins when we bought See’s and it’s never been touched. We have neverhired a compensation consultant.”  http://www.tilsonfunds.com/wscmtg05notes.pdf

I’d rather throw a viper down my shirt front than hire a compensation consultant. http://www.tilsonfunds.com/brkmtg04notes.doc

Carnegie was always proud that he took very little salary. Rockefeller, Vanderbilt were the same. It was a common culture in a different era. All of these people thought of themselves as the founder. I was delighted to get rid of the pressure of getting fees based on performance. If you are highly conscientious and you hate to disappoint, you will feel the pressure to live up to your incentive fee. There was an enormous advantage [to switching away from taking a percentage of the profits to managing

Berkshire, in which their interests as shareholders are exactly aligned with other shareholders]. http://www.tilsonfunds.com/

“CEOs have a duty…to dampen envy and resentment by behaving way more nobly than other people, and way more generously. People should take way less than they are worthy when they are favored by life. People are willing to pay tens of millions of dollars to be U.S. senators. Most of these people would pay to be CEOs….There is a lot to be said for backing off and taking less than their worth.”  http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2006/06/26/the-wit-and-wisdom-of-charlie-munger/ “ Everywhere there is a large commission, there is a high probability of a ripoff.” http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2006/commentary06062914.htm It is easy to have fair compensation systems, but about half of companies have grossly unfair systems in which the top people get paid too much. http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2006/commentary06052706.htm


“We may well have a competitive advantage buying decent businesses at decent prices. But they won’t be fabulous businesses and fabulous prices. There’s too much competition and money out there, with many buyout specialists.” http://www.tilsonfunds.com/

“Many markets get down to two or three big competitors—or five or six. And in some of those markets, nobody makes any money to speak of. But in others, everybody does very well.  Over the years, we’ve tried to figure out why the competition in some markets gets sort of rational from the investor’s point of view so that the shareholders do well, and in other markets, there’s destructive competition that destroys shareholder wealth.  If it’s a pure commodity like airline seats, you can understand why no one makes any money. As we sit here, just think of what airlines have given to the world—safe travel, greater experience, time with your loved ones, you name it. Yet, the net amount of money that’s been made by the shareholders of airlines since Kitty Hawk, is now a negative figure—a substantial negative figure. Competition was so intense that, once it was unleashed by deregulation, it ravaged shareholder wealth in the airline business.  Yet, in other fields—like cereals, for example—almost all the big boys make out. If you’re some kind of a medium grade cereal maker, you might make 15% on your capital. And if you’re really good, you might make 40%. But why are cereals so profitable—despite the fact that it looks to me like they’re competing like crazy with promotions, coupons and everything else? I don’t fully understand it.  Obviously, there’s a brand identity factor in cereals that doesn’t exist in airlines. That must be the main factor that accounts for it.
And maybe the cereal makers by and large have learned to be less crazy about fighting for market share—because if you get even one person who’s hell-bent on gaining market share…. For example, if I were Kellogg and I decided that I had to have 60% of the market, I think I could take most of the profit out of cereals. I’d ruin Kellogg in the process. But I think I could do it.  http://ycombinator.com/munger.html

“Even bright people are going to have limited, really valuable insights

Leave a Comment

Signup to ValueWalk!

Get the latest posts on what's happening in the hedge fund and investing world sent straight to your inbox! 
This is information you won't get anywhere else!