<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Buysiders.com &#187; Diversified financials</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.buysiders.com/category/industries/diversified-financials/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.buysiders.com</link>
	<description>Investidor Profissional (IP)&#039;s blog: value investing across disciplines and around the globe</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:03:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Buffett pearl: 1998 speech</title>
		<link>http://www.buysiders.com/2010/02/02/buffett-pearl-1998-speech/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buysiders.com/2010/02/02/buffett-pearl-1998-speech/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 20:21:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>IP</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capital goods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diversified financials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Food for thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Food, beverage and tobacco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Home]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Portfolio Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retailing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Risk management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Utilities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[berkshire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRKA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[buffett]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lessons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[portfoliomanagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[riskmanagement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[speech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[valueinvesting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buysiders.com/?p=688</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Buffett was particularly expansive regarding his processes and methods, and this alone makes this video worth the time (some 90 minutes). The fact that it was October 1998, a pivotal time in the dot-com boom and just after the LTCM imbroglio makes it even more interesting.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In this <a title="Buffett's 1998 speech" href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6231308980849895261#" target="_blank">speech to University of Florida MBA students</a> Buffett was particularly expansive regarding his processes and methods, and this alone makes this video worth the time (some 90 minutes). The fact that it was October 1998, a pivotal time in the dot-com boom and just after the LTCM <em>imbroglio</em> makes it even more interesting. And there&#8217;s a download link to guarantee this doesn&#8217;t go away anytime soon, but you can watch an embedded version right here if you read on.<span id="more-688"></span></p>
<p>We don&#8217;t have any intention to be the &#8220;ultimate source for all things Buffett&#8221;, as a lot of people already do a great job at this and we thank them for uncovering these pearls. But this video is special. The parts on &#8220;moats&#8221; add up to some of his most detailed comments yet on the subject.</p>
<p>We don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s any exaggeration to say that Buffett has transcended the investment realm and that this is interesting for people in all walks of life. We&#8217;re certainly making backup copies.</p>
<p><object id="VideoPlayback" style="width: 400px; height: 326px;" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="100" height="100" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-6231308980849895261&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=true" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><embed id="VideoPlayback" style="width: 400px; height: 326px;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100" height="100" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=-6231308980849895261&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=true" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buysiders.com/2010/02/02/buffett-pearl-1998-speech/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alice in wonderland</title>
		<link>http://www.buysiders.com/2009/12/20/alice-in-wonderland/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buysiders.com/2009/12/20/alice-in-wonderland/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:22:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>IP</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Banks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate Governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diversified financials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Food for thought]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Home]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buysiders.com/?p=532</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Alice "Snowball" Schroeder last month wrote a piece on Bloomberg called "Wall Street makes it hard to earn a legal living". While IP has always discussed the obvious conflicts of interest for all the market's agents, and the sell side in particular, Alicemisses a turn in the road somewhere - falls down the rabbit hole? - and turns this article into quite the generalization. The issue of conflicts of interests deserved a better effort.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alice &#8220;Snowball&#8221; Schroeder last month wrote a piece on Bloomberg called <a title="Alice's rant at Bloomberg.com" href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&amp;sid=aSBXFKI5Gvlg" target="_blank">&#8220;Wall Street makes it hard to earn a legal living&#8221;</a>. While IP has always discussed the obvious conflicts of interest for all the market&#8217;s agents, and the sell side in particular, Alice misses a turn in the road somewhere &#8211; falls down the rabbit hole? &#8211; and turns this article into quite the generalization. The issue of conflicts of interests deserved a better effort. <span id="more-532"></span>Background: Formerly Morgan Stanley&#8217;s star insurance analyst, Ms. Schroeder left in 2003 to write the only (so far) authorized Warren Buffett biography, Snowball (by the way a nice book in its revealing details, but other books offer better practical insight into Mr. Buffett&#8217;s methods). So Ms. Schroeder is supposed the be the &#8220;expert&#8221; on how Wall Street works because she has &#8220;been there, done that&#8221;. Currently her sources of income, supposedly, are book royalties, speaking gigs and writing assignments at such publications/ properties as Bloomberg.</p>
<p>Her former experience makes it all the more shocking that she could come up with such generalizations as <em>&#8220;there is only so much alpha &#8211; that excess return above a baseline average &#8211; to be had in an efficient market&#8221;</em>. Efficient market??? One would think that she would use her time with Warren Buffett a little better.</p>
<p>Take this sentence:<em> &#8220;The harder that money managers, traders and analysts must work to get information that gives them an edge, the more likely some are to cross a legal line.&#8221;</em> Her point is that one must have an edge to get alpha, and since <span style="text-decoration: underline;">some</span> people obviously will cross the legal line to get this edge, therefore the incentive is there for <span style="text-decoration: underline;">everyone</span> to behave in legally unclear territory (her own words are stronger than this).</p>
<p>Wow. The logical implications of this line of thinking in other aspects of life are just too obvious to explore, so let&#8217;s stick to our own bread-earner.</p>
<p>Sometimes &#8220;edge&#8221; is as simple as having a long-term horizon while others panic with short-term fluctuations. Sometimes &#8220;edge&#8221; is receiving the same information everyone else is receiving and processing it in a more sensible context, depending on one&#8217;s general latticework of frameworks, mental models and past experiences &#8211; all of which is taken to the next level when one has a team of bright people with diverse backgrounds just itching to get their hands on a problem of this sort. Sometimes edge is checking an information against suppliers, customers, competitors and industry consultants&#8217; opinions. Some people are even finding edge in the &#8220;wisdom of crowds&#8221;, e.g. sites where investors share their best ideas for the sake of gaining access to other investors&#8217; ideas.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s called diligence, also referred to as &#8220;hard work&#8221;.</p>
<p>Incentives for criminal behavior have always existed, and incentives to deter it &#8211; threat of punishment, corporate culture, moral standards &#8211; have always been around, too. It is no &#8220;privilege&#8221; of Wall Street, as much as it is no privilege of authors, engineers, politicians&#8230; OK, we may be wrong about that last one.</p>
<p>I wish we could end this right here, but Ms. Schroeder doesn&#8217;t stop there. She says banks are so crooked as to need a break-up between its many different areas. Since everyone is chasing the same &#8220;alpha&#8221; inside a bank, <em>&#8220;The aggregate number of people trying to carve fees out of investor returns simply overwhelms the potential gains for stockholders.&#8221; </em>And then she completes the thinking:<em> &#8220;Breaking up the banks into their constituent parts and forcing them to return to privately funded partnerships might reduce the apparatus that provides all parties with the incentives to cheat.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>Even if that wasn&#8217;t a generalization, who&#8217;s forcing anyone to invest in bank stocks? It&#8217;s precisely because such conflicts <span style="text-decoration: underline;">sometimes</span> exist that we have always been very careful when approaching investment banks as investment opportunities. From what we&#8217;ve seen, the model doesn&#8217;t seem like it is built for shareholders, so we have a general aversion to these stocks. That doesn&#8217;t mean we advocate government intervention to change it! We just vote with our feet and stay out. If we are to tamper with investment banks&#8217; model, why not tamper with insurance companies? Asset managers?</p>
<p>As if it wasn&#8217;t enough, she adds the <em>coup de grâce</em>:<em> &#8220;(&#8230;) I sense a breath of change in the air. Kids who left college to import crafts made by women war refugees in Sudan are beginning to be envied by junior bankers who toil 80 hours a week creating spreadsheets. That’s a trend to be encouraged. Aspiring young bankers and hedge-fund managers, be assured of this: The more of you who choose to import crafts from Sudan, the easier the rest of you will find it to make a living legally on Wall Street.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>Should we point out that these things are cyclical and there used to be a time when everyone wanted to be an internet start-up slave? Then VC, then oil, then private equity, then&#8230; then&#8230;</p>
<p>Well, the overall message here is to remain very skeptical of what you read, no matter who it comes from. It&#8217;s amazing that Ms. Schroeder used her position as a &#8220;former player&#8221; to perpetuate such old stereotypes and &#8220;make-sense&#8221; generalizations. In the end, it can all be forgiven if she was just trying to sell more magazines&#8230;</p>
<p>BONUS: if you&#8217;ve read this far, here are books we think are also very useful on Mr. Buffett:</p>
<p>1) <a title="The Essays of Warren Buffett at Amazon.com" href="http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Warren-Buffett-Lessons-Corporate/dp/0966446127/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1261325653&amp;sr=8-1" target="_blank">The Essays of Warren Buffett: Lessons for Corporate America</a>, edited by Laurence Cunningham. It&#8217;s a selection of &#8220;best moments&#8221; from Mr. Buffett&#8217;s own annual report letters &#8211; organized by topic, which makes it the best overall AND reference source on Buffett&#8217;s thinking.</p>
<p>2) <a title="The Warren Buffett Way at Amazon.com" href="http://www.amazon.com/Warren-Buffett-Way-Second/dp/0471743674/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_1" target="_blank">The Warren Buffett Way</a>, by Richard Hagstrom. An analysis of Buffett&#8217;s classic investments &#8211; hits and misses &#8211; by one the portfolio managers at Legg Mason. A more direct, investment-oriented book, a perfect complement to the classic above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buysiders.com/2009/12/20/alice-in-wonderland/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Western Union vs. Moneygram</title>
		<link>http://www.buysiders.com/2009/10/28/western-union-vs-moneygram/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buysiders.com/2009/10/28/western-union-vs-moneygram/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:27:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>IP</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Diversified financials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investment Themes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Portfolio Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diversifiedfinancials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[globalization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MGI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[migrantmoney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[migration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moneygram]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[remittance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[westernunion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WU]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buysiders.com/?p=410</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looking at the world's largest remittance players, it's perhaps useful to use Moneygram - smaller, under-covered and nearly-bankrupt - to better understand Western Union.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>World&#8217;s #1 and #2 remittance players. At first we imagined we could use <a title="Moneygram's I.R. page" href="http://www.moneygram.com/MGICorp/InvestorRelations/index.htm" target="_blank">Moneygram</a> &#8211; which is smaller, under-covered and almost went bankrupt through the poor use of its float (CDOs and whatnots) &#8211; as a counterpoint to <a title="Western Union's I.R. page" href="http://ir.westernunion.com/investor/index.cfm?country=global" target="_blank">Western Union</a> (4x larger and more focused on money transfers). But as one reads more about Moneygram, two points emerge: 1) although a &#8220;cigar butt&#8221;, it&#8217;s a whole different company (owners/managers/operations) and could become an investigation target; 2) its restructuring and recapitalization process (by Thomas H. Lee Partners and Goldman Sachs) is a &#8220;case study&#8221; in itself.<span id="more-410"></span></p>
<p>Now back to what got us interested in Western Union (&#8220;WU&#8221;):</p>
<p>Western Union, a spin off from <a title="First Data Corp.'s I.R. page" href="http://ir.firstdatacorp.com/" target="_blank">FDC</a> in Dec&#8217; 06 at $20 (having reached $30 at the high and $10 at its lows), is trading at 18$, or 13x fwd earnings, has a relatively low tangible assets base (it doesn&#8217;t need to lease, own or operate offices/points of sale: they use OPA (other people&#8217;s assets) that are already &#8216;there&#8217;, like a post-office, a general retail or groceries store, a bank, a pharmacy &#8211; and its (WU&#8217;s) software solution seems to be easy to plug-in and get going), seems to enjoy capillarity + network effects (now with 400,000 agents connecting millions of people/businesses) and a very old, strong, familiar brand (trust is paramount).</p>
<p>The main point is to understand quickly the barriers to entry/ risk of substitutes in the core business, since in theory it would be &#8220;so simple&#8221; to banks, cards or processors to compete with them, and yet, at least in the core, they don&#8217;t. These potential competitors act as channels (Itaú, for instance, is a channel for Moneygram &#8211; deal signed recently).</p>
<p>The second point of attention would be &#8216;existence and use of float&#8217; in the model. WU was making almost 50% ROIC before the spin-off. It is now using its excess cash to buy back shares and deleverage the company, as debt was inherited when it paid the traditional &#8220;special divididend&#8221; to the parent company at the IPO.</p>
<p>As usual, people are paying more attention to the Mexican-US corridor market ($26 billion), but emerging markets, like India ($55billion) and China ($40 billion) are already larger transfer pools. It should go without saying that cross-border &#8220;mobile-enabled&#8221; cash transfers (such as payments via cell phones or credit card money transfers) are a few years away due to regulation issues. Also, banks like Citibank, BofA, Wells Fargo and US Bancorp tried to go on their own and achieved negligible results (3% of the market altogether, and some like US Bancorp decided to act as distribution). Citibank tried something with Banamex more centely, and it should be interesting to see how it&#8217;s working. Wal-Mart has also started to play the game. In India, Internet remittances seem to have a relevant share (it&#8217;s totally different in Mexico) and might force some margin compression, and VISA is always trying something &#8220;new&#8221;. In 2006, WU&#8217;s internet transfer in the US was still pretty small, at $100MM, just 2% of its total revenues. Regulatory risk (especially in Europe) also demands a special check.</p>
<p>It all boils downs to the famous &#8220;why wouldn&#8217;t their hefty margins collapse?&#8221; question. That&#8217;s the case to kill.</p>
<p>Useful links:</p>
<p><a title="Foreign Affairs' take on remittances" href="http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/65448/dilip-ratha/dollars-without-borders" target="_blank">Can the global flow of remittances survive the crisis?</a> &#8211; Foreign Affairs, Oct. 16th 2009</p>
<p><a title="WU at the NYT, Nov. 2007" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/world/22western.html" target="_blank">Western Union empire moves migrant cash home</a> &#8211; Old (Nov. 2007), big but very interesting NYTimes article on Western Union. Free registration required. Don&#8217;t miss the cool <a title="Interactive chart on migration money flows (NYT)" href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/11/17/weekinreview/20071117_MIGRATION_GRAPHIC.html" target="_blank">interactive chart</a>! Also read a <a title="Migrant money flow at the NYT" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/18/weekinreview/18deparle.html?ref=world" target="_blank">related article</a> published 4 days before this one.</p>
<p><a title="WU on Youtube" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_TP3G06jCI" target="_blank">One of Western Union&#8217;s videos</a> on Youtube. Yes, they have a channel&#8230; Check out the <a title="WU's Global Migration Forum videos" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gConUyiasNY&amp;feature=related" target="_blank">Global Migration Forum</a> videos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buysiders.com/2009/10/28/western-union-vs-moneygram/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
