Author Topic: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'  (Read 10762 times)

Munger_Disciple

  • Lifetime Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 454
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #20 on: February 19, 2019, 08:58:18 PM »
I am very impressed by what the guy achieved especially given where he started from. He is an inspiration to any aspiring young entrepreneur. I also agree that the most impressive thing about his investing is how long he held investments.  Plus he seems like a very generous fellow and I admire this quality about him.

A major portion of the Forbes article is about his stock market investments. For instance, there was a discussion on how he took on some margin debt to buy dividend stocks and strategies he used to take tax losses, in addition to success in finding and investing very early in Heiko. I did the math just for my own understanding of the underlying returns and not to take anything away from his accomplishments. I then decided to share what I found because I thought it was interesting. I am frankly surprised by some of the reaction to my post and find it bizarre. It is normal that people can have differing opinions of the same article. However we can agree to disagree respectfully.

Anyhow this will be my last post on this topic.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2019, 10:48:11 PM by Munger_Disciple »


stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2772
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #21 on: February 20, 2019, 06:52:24 AM »
For one, I'm pretty sure Sanj was just kidding around by calling us "jackasses."  He had his grin there and I shot back with a wink so I think it was all in good fun.


Liberty,

His overall story is quite impressive. I don't see anyone doubting that. However, his investment returns are not (which is what the article is trying to convince us of). We're not "creating math" to show otherwise. That's certainly looks to be the cased on what we can tell. The story is trying to convince us that he's a great investor. We have no evidence to believe that he is. Do you have any?

Why get so offended by someone challenging an article?
Paul

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11067
  • twitter.com/libertyRPF
    • twitter.com/libertyRPF
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #22 on: February 20, 2019, 07:00:07 AM »
For one, I'm pretty sure Sanj was just kidding around by calling us "jackasses."  He had his grin there and I shot back with a wink so I think it was all in good fun.


Liberty,

His overall story is quite impressive. I don't see anyone doubting that. However, his investment returns are not (which is what the article is trying to convince us of). We're not "creating math" to show otherwise. That's certainly looks to be the cased on what we can tell. The story is trying to convince us that he's a great investor. We have no evidence to believe that he is. Do you have any?

Why get so offended by someone challenging an article?

Your assumptions are made up. You don't know his expenses and how much he added per year, and whether the article just cites peak earning figures (as these things tend to do -- journalists love to just use the biggest number they can find).

Fact is, someone who holds onto a 5m investment and turns it into 800m and someone who holds onto millions of Apple and MSFT  from IPO is a great investor, especially since he did it by doing technical research and identifying these companies when they were basically unknown microcaps. 99.999% of other investors couldn't have done this, as is proven by them not being able to hold on a double or a triple for more than a couple years.
"Most haystacks don't even have a needle." |  I'm on Twitter  | This podcast episode is a must-listen

mjm

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 33
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #23 on: February 20, 2019, 07:09:18 AM »
member this guy. pretty impressive for janitor and gas attendant

https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2015/02/12/after-life-of-frugality-vermont-janitor-bestows-6-million-to-local-hospital-library

see another remembers him and also the irs lady who bequeathed I believe $28M to a woman's college.  she tracked what well off people did on their returns.  could not find any thing on her.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2019, 07:12:58 AM by mjm »

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2772
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #24 on: February 20, 2019, 07:16:05 AM »
For one, I'm pretty sure Sanj was just kidding around by calling us "jackasses."  He had his grin there and I shot back with a wink so I think it was all in good fun.


Liberty,

His overall story is quite impressive. I don't see anyone doubting that. However, his investment returns are not (which is what the article is trying to convince us of). We're not "creating math" to show otherwise. That's certainly looks to be the cased on what we can tell. The story is trying to convince us that he's a great investor. We have no evidence to believe that he is. Do you have any?

Why get so offended by someone challenging an article?

Your assumptions are made up. You don't know his expenses and how much he added per year, and whether the article just cites peak earning figures (as these things tend to do -- journalists love to just use the biggest number they can find).

Fact is, someone who holds onto a 5m investment and turns it into 800m and someone who holds onto millions of Apple and MSFT  from IPO is a great investor, especially since he did it by doing technical research and identifying these companies when they were basically unknown microcaps. 99.999% of other investors couldn't have done this, as is proven by them not being able to hold on a double or a triple for more than a couple years.

You're right I don't know his expenses or how much he added to it. I even said that. The assumption I made was that he didn't invest any of his $10 million a year (which he did according to the article). I'm assuming no new contributions so my calucation actually makes him look like a better investor than he probably was.

Apple and Micosoft were "microcaps" at their IPO?  ???

According to what I see, "Investors got their first taste of Microsoft back in March 1986 when the company, already a powerhouse in the tech world, raised $61 million in an IPO under the leadership of 30-year-old founder Bill Gates. IPO"

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/day-market-history-microsoft-ipo-145918947.html

$61 million in 1986 was hardly a microcap.

Or Apple:

https://www.cultofmac.com/457878/tiah-apple-goes-public/


But let's give him credit for his "microcap" investing skills. He has 3 home runs and still under performed the market. How is this good? It looks far more likely a case of luck vs skill. If anything the article shows that even if you're smart, most folks are still better off indexing.
Paul

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11067
  • twitter.com/libertyRPF
    • twitter.com/libertyRPF
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #25 on: February 20, 2019, 07:25:32 AM »
I was thinking of Heico.

But you're right, he's a terrible investor, he probably only has a 7.4% CAGR or worse, that's why every entrepreneur who made a few millions a year is a twice-billionaire in their 70s with multiple hundred-bagger stakes in their portfolios, whatever.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2019, 07:28:34 AM by Liberty »
"Most haystacks don't even have a needle." |  I'm on Twitter  | This podcast episode is a must-listen

Cardboard

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3004
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #26 on: February 20, 2019, 07:28:31 AM »
Surprised Liberty keeps defending this guy:

“We’re going to move to a hydrogen economy.”

I was pretty much called an idiot when I made a statement that hydrogen held a lot of promise. LOL!

Cardboard

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11067
  • twitter.com/libertyRPF
    • twitter.com/libertyRPF
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #27 on: February 20, 2019, 07:30:12 AM »
Surprised Liberty keeps defending this guy:

“We’re going to move to a hydrogen economy.”

I was pretty much called an idiot when I made a statement that hydrogen held a lot of promise. LOL!

Cardboard

I'm not surprised you're surprised.
"Most haystacks don't even have a needle." |  I'm on Twitter  | This podcast episode is a must-listen

stahleyp

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2772
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #28 on: February 20, 2019, 07:30:45 AM »
I was thinking of Heico.

But you're right, he's a terrible investor, he probably only has a 7.4% CAGR or worse, that's why every entrepreneur who made a few millions a year is a twice-billionaire in their 70s, whatever.

I didn't say terrible investor either.  :-X
 
His wealth came from compounding the $50 million in a bull market. The $50 million in his early 40s in 1981 no less is quite impressive. Under performing a simple index fund (while taking on more risk) does not make one an impressive investor.
Paul

Liberty

  • Lifetime Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11067
  • twitter.com/libertyRPF
    • twitter.com/libertyRPF
Re: 'An Optometrist Who Beat The Odds To Become A Billionaire'
« Reply #29 on: February 20, 2019, 07:41:49 AM »
I was thinking of Heico.

But you're right, he's a terrible investor, he probably only has a 7.4% CAGR or worse, that's why every entrepreneur who made a few millions a year is a twice-billionaire in their 70s, whatever.

I didn't say terrible investor either.  :-X
 
His wealth came from compounding the $50 million in a bull market. The $50 million in his early 40s in 1981 no less is quite impressive. Under performing a simple index fund (while taking on more risk) does not make one an impressive investor.

I'll repeat: You don't know. You don't know how much cash he holds, how many bonds he has, how much in real estate. What his expenses are, what his donations are, how much he's reinvested in his companies or private investments. The article mentions a 100m donation, but I doubt that's the only one. When big withdrawals were made also matters (if you take out 100m back when the whole porfolio was worth 200m, that makes a bigger difference than if you take it out when it's worth 2bn). For all we know, the public equity portion of his portfolio has a 20% CAGR. We don't know.

What we know is starting point and outcome, as well as process, and that's a pretty rare combo that is worth some admiration.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2019, 07:44:18 AM by Liberty »
"Most haystacks don't even have a needle." |  I'm on Twitter  | This podcast episode is a must-listen