_finance_Some Lessons From Warren Buffett's Annual Letter_27139_ by wendang


More Info
									finance article No.27139
Some Lessons From Warren Buffett's Annual Letter
[Some words in this document
Warren letter shareholders find book value gain 2005 Class years present management took grown 59 377 rate
compounded annually Buffett opens announcing per-share change my Holdings reporting income within bottom sub
reports line requires total components displayed prominence financial constitute full despite statement comprehensive
Alternatively company Income course think Isn net number isn useful figure looking financials single Remember earnings
created destroyed Berkshire simply using writes during 2006 stock really earned billion return prefers doubts letters
numbers past found three 13 vs explain prominently instead owner never sufficient business position deteriorated either
stronger delighting customers products strength businesses basis consequences assessment money fact question
losses future gains opportunity costs incurred makes sense evaluate was returns units included twenty painfully aware
same losing ten particular outdated Buffalo operations weighed possible operating improving owners very difficult
answered Auto grew market auto insurance share-point sales quantifiable believe acquired 31 Last wait spend puts Pet
Obviously PETS rarely won time switch lessons Sir Isaac genius extend investing South traumatized gone Motion
decrease increases ]

    Warren Buffett's annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders was
released over the weekend. Readers will find plenty of investing lessons among
the twenty-three pages. Warren began this letter as he begins each letter, by
stating Berkshire's change in per-share book value:

   "Our gain in net worth during 2005 was $5.6 billion, which increased the per-
share book value of both our Class A and Class B stock by 6.4%. Over the last
41 years, (that is, since present management took over) book value has grown
from $19 to $59,377, a rate of 21.5% compounded annually."

   Some may wonder why Buffett opens by announcing the change in per-share
book value rather than the earnings per share number. Over long periods of
time, the change in per-share book value should nicely approximate the returns
to owners. You may remember that, in my analysis of Energizer Holdings, I
applauded the company for reporting comprehensive income within the income
statement. Although a company's net income is often referred to as its bottom
line, net income is, in fact, a (sub)component of comprehensive income.
Energizer Holdings (ENR) literally reports comprehensive income as its bottom

   FASB merely requires that "an enterprise shall display total comprehensive
income and its components in a financial statement that is displayed with the
same prominence as other financial statements that constitute a full set of
financial statements". Unfortunately, despite the lack of attention paid to it by
investors, the statement of changes in stockholders' equity is considered "a
financial statement that constitutes a full set of financial statements".

   Therefore, comprehensive income can be reported in a statement many
investors either do not review or do not understand. Alternatively, a company
may choose to report comprehensive income in a separate Statement of
Comprehensive Income. This, of course, baffles many investors, who think they
are reading a second copy of the income statement. After all, what is
comprehensive income? Isn't the net income number reported in a (traditional)
income statement a comprehensive number?

   No. The widely reported earnings per share number is not comprehensive.
That isn't to say the EPS number isn't important. It is very important. In fact, for
certain businesses, it may be the most useful figure for evaluating a going
concern. This is especially true if the investor is only looking at the financials for
a single year. A single year's comprehensive income may actually be less
representative of a business' performance than a single year's EPS number
(both can be pretty unrepresentative).Remember, the earnings per share
number does not tell you how much wealth was actually created (or destroyed).
You need to look to the comprehensive income number to find that information.

  Essentially, Buffett is reporting Berkshire's earnings in that opening line. He is
simply using a more comprehensive income figure. He's saying here's how
much wealth we created, and here's how much capital it took to create that
wealth. When he writes "Our gain in net worth during 2006 was $5.6 billion,
which increased the per-share book value of both our Class A and Class B stock
by 6.4%" he's really saying Berkshire earned $5.6 billion and a 6.4% return on
equity. He prefers using comprehensive income rather than net income,
because comprehensive income includes non-operating earnings such as
changes in the market value of available for sale securities.

   If you still have doubts about the idea that Buffett is essentially reporting
Berkshire's comprehensive income in that formulaic opening line of his annual
letters, compare the change in net worth numbers Buffett has reported in past
years to the comprehensive income numbers found in Berkshire's annual
reports. For the past three years, Berkshire's reported "gain in net worth" and
Berkshire's reported "comprehensive income" were $5.6 billion vs. $5.5 billion,
$8.3 billion vs. $8.2 billion, and $13.6 billion vs. $13.4 billion. I hope this helps
explain why I like it when public companies prominently report comprehensive
income instead of presenting net income as if it were the Holy Grail of investing.

   Of course, there is no such Grail. Neither net income nor comprehensive
income captures the true economic changes to an owner's share of the
business. There is no truly comprehensive income number - and there never will
be. A review of the financial statements alone is not sufficient to determine how
a business' competitive position has improved (or deteriorated) over the course
of the year.

   "Every day, in countless ways, the competitive position of each of our
businesses grows either weaker or stronger. If we are delighting customers,
eliminating unnecessary costs and improving our products and services, we gain
strength. But if we treat customers with indifference or tolerate bloat, our
businesses will wither. On a daily basis, the effects of our actions are
imperceptible; cumulatively, though, their consequences are enormous."

   It is to these actions and their effects that an investor must look when he is
forming his qualitative assessment of a business. After all, a company may lose
money and yet improve its competitive position. In fact, that is exactly what a
great many young businesses do. The question, of course, is whether those
present losses will be more than offset by future gains after accounting for the
opportunity costs incurred.

  All costs are opportunity costs. It makes no sense to evaluate a year's losses
as if the alternative was to stop time. The available returns on the lost capital
must be considered as well. That is why when one of Berkshire's units has
consumed capital, the loss has weighed heavily on Buffett.

   Over Berkshire's history, the cost of any losses also included the over twenty
percent compound annual gain that was foregone. Buffett has always been
painfully aware of the fact that, for Berkshire, losing $1,000 today would be
much the same as losing over $7,000 ten years from today or over $125,000
twenty-five years from today. Berkshire will no longer grow its per-share book
value at over 20% a year. So, these particular figures are outdated. However, if
you refer to Buffett's thoughts at the time when the Buffalo News was losing
money (and when Berkshire's textile operations were losing money), you will see
just how heavily these opportunity costs weighed on him.

  Still, it is possible that a business operating at a loss is actually improving its
competitive position and creating wealth for its owners. One very difficult
question that must be answered is exactly what the assets (often the intangible
assets) that have been gained at great expense are actually worth. In some very
special businesses, huge expenses are fully justified.

   "Auto policies in force grew by 12.1% at GEICO, a gain increasing its market
share of (the) U.S. private passenger auto business from about 5.6% to about
6.1%. Auto insurance is a big business: Each share-point equates to $1.6 billion
in sales."

   "While our brand strength is not quantifiable, I believe it also grew
significantly. When Berkshire acquired control of GEICO in 1996, its annual
advertising expenditures were $31 million. Last year we were up to $502 million.
And I can't wait to spend more."

  This excerpt helps explain why I think all the money PetMed Express (PETS)
puts into cable TV ads is money well spent. Pet medications, like auto
insurance, is a highly fragmented business. Sales volume is important.
Obviously, name recognition is as well. PETS can spend a lot on cable
advertising and still spend less per sale than its competitors. It's also important
to remember that pet medications are rarely the sort of thing a customer buys
once (just like auto insurance). While you won't be able to retain all your
customers, you will have a much easier time getting a current customer to stick
with you than you will getting a new customer to switch from a competitor.

    I'll end this post with one of Buffett's best lessons:

   "Long ago, Sir Isaac Newton gave us three laws of motion, which were the
work of genius. But Sir Isaac's talents didn't extend to investing: He lost a bundle
in the South Sea Bubble, explaining later, "I can calculate the movement of the
stars, but not the madness of men." If he had not been traumatized by this loss,
Sir Isaac might well have gone on to discover the Fourth Law of Motion: For
investors as a whole, returns decrease as motion increases."

This document is made by wendang from a free article
Please see its Term Of Use
Article Source: www.ArticlesBase.com
The link of the article:http://www.articlesbase.com/finance-articles/some-lessons-
All Documents-Documents in This Collection-Most Viewed Documents-Documents about Loan-Love
[all 474 words in this document]
- 000 1 12 125 13 19 1996 20 2005 2006 21 31 377 4 41 502 59 8 a able about accounting acquired actions actually ads
advertising after ago alone also alternative alternatively although always among an analysis and announcing annual
annually answered any applauded approximate are as assessment assets attention auto available aware baffles basis
be because been began begins believe berkshire best big billion bloat book both bottom brand bubble buffalo buffett
bundle business businesses but buys by cable calculate can capital captures certain change changes choose class
companies company compare competitive competitor competitors component components compound compounded
comprehensive concern consequences considered constitute constitutes consumed control copy cost costs countless
course create created creating cumulatively current customer customers daily day decrease delighting despite destroyed
deteriorated determine didn difficult discover display displayed do does doubts during each earned earnings easier
economic effects either eliminating end energizer enormous enr enterprise eps equates equity especially essentially
evaluate evaluating every exactly excerpt expenditures expense expenses explain explaining express extend fact fasb
figure figures financial financials find for force foregone forming formulaic found fourth fragmented from full fully future
gain gained gains gave geico genius getting going grail great grew grow grown grows had has hathaway have heavily
helps here highly him his history holdings holy hope how however huge idea imperceptible important improve improved
improving included includes income increased increases increasing incurred indifference information instead insurance
intangible into investing investor investors isaac isn its just justified lack last later law laws lessons letter letters like line
literally long longer look looking lose losing loss losses lost lot madness makes management many market may
medications merely might million money more most motion movement much must my name need neither net never new
news newton nicely non-operating not number numbers obviously of offset often only opening opens operations
opportunity other outdated owner owners pages paid painfully particular passenger past per-share percent performance
periods petmed pets plenty policies position possible post prefers present presenting pretty private products prominence
prominently public puts qualitative quantifiable question rarely rather readers reading really recognition referred released
remember report reported reporting reports representative requires retain return returns review sale sales same say
saying sea second securities see sense separate services shall share-point shareholders should significantly simply
since single sir some sort south spend spent stars statement statements stating stick still stock stockholders stop
strength stronger sub such sufficient switch talents tell textile than that their there therefore these they thing think this
those thoughts three time today tolerate took total traditional traumatized treat true truly tv twenty twenty-five twenty-
three understand unfortunately units unnecessary unrepresentative up useful using value volume vs wait warren was
weaker wealth weekend weighed well what when whether which while who whole why widely will with wither within won
wonder work worth would writes year years yet you young your

To top