A little less than two years ago, the consensus among market players was that there was “extremely low visibility” for the next few quarters and that “the occasion called for caution”. Considering that the world financial system was close to the abyss, it was indeed advisable to adopt a conservative attitude – though at times like those in 2008, to have high-quality real assets at very low prices seemed to us a more attractive alternative than lending money to governments. The “low visibility” issue, however, is a matter that deserves greater reflection.

Is it true that, over time, investors really alternate between times of “excellent visibility” and “very poor visibility”?  Or is it possible that this is an illusion of the human mind, and in reality investors alternate between times in which they think there is greater or lesser visibility? We believe that the second alternative is the one that best describes the real situation: the future is uncertain by nature and what varies is our perception of it. As Warren Buffett once said: “Forecasts usually tell us more of the forecaster than of the future”.

Many market players live under the illusion that the future is foreseeable, and using worksheets where projections cover from 5 to 10 years, they end up perpetuating situations and circumstantial results, ignoring the natural business cycles. This is one of the traits of the human cognitive system: the tendency to attach greater importance to recent events than to older ones. It is natural, therefore, that in a crisis environment, negative aspects prevail over positive ones, and that at good times the opposite occurs. Perhaps even more worrying is the fact that events with fat-tail[1] characteristics start being neglected in analyses. In another curious trait of our cognitive system, Daniel Kahneman, who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002, calls attention to the difference in individuals’ perception of gains and losses. An individual who loses R$50,000 tends to feel a negative impact greater than the positive impact of a R$50,000 gain.

All these aspects help to explain why the markets are doomed to alternate times of under-valuation and over-valuation. When the economic environment deteriorates, there is a general perception that “visibility” is lower, so that analysts and investors not only revise their projections downward (perpetuating low returns and results), but also their portfolios, usually in order to bring painful financial losses to a halt. During the process, prices start to better reflect the uncertainty of the future. When the economic environment improves and remains positive long enough, the opposite occurs and the visibility illusion appears again. All goes well until a new and “unexpected” adverse event occurs, and the cycle starts again. History shows us that turbulence and adverse events occur more frequently than investors would like: something always happens! That is why discipline and patience are necessary.

Just to illustrate some of the problems that are prowling around us at present: growing domestic inflation and interest rates in a rising trend; slack domestic fiscal policy, including the dangerous use of state-owned banks; default on the debt of several countries in the Euro zone; the sustainability of the Euro as a single currency; the possible mass adoption of mercantilistic policies (which lead to competing devaluations among the main currencies, rising protectionism and reduced world trade); rises in taxes worldwide; the “unexpected” rise in US debt (due to aid for bankrupt states); the Chinese growth model giving signs of  exhaustion; the ageing of the Japanese population and its impacts (difficulty in refinancing Japanese government securities); etc… As Ronald Reagan would say, “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is our problem”.

In the month of May, 431,000 new jobs were generated in the USA, of which 411,000 resulted from government hiring of temporary workers for the 2010 US census. How long will the government manage to support the US economy?

The thing is that, at present, there are a great number of possible adverse events that may trigger a reduction in “visibility” and in the appetite for risk worldwide. And when we look at the Brazilian market, we continue getting the impression that a great many asset prices already reflect optimistic expectations and there is little room for surprises. As Nassim Taleb said: “Beware of calm waters”… In this context, we continue waiting for clearer opportunities where we may allocate more funds safely, and meanwhile we receive over 10% per year in interest for being patient – which is not bad at all.

Where may we be wrong? One possibility, for example, is that Brazilian assets in general might accompany a possible appreciation in the US stock market, which in turn would occur only to offset the continuous issuing and loss of value of the US currency, and the loss of control over US inflation. Thus, the nominal appreciation of assets would only serve to keep the value of companies constant in real terms. We do not believe there is any justification for the Brazilian market as a whole to accompany this appreciation, unless Brazilian domestic inflation also gets out of control. And even if this happened, the risk/return ratio would not be worthwhile. According to Warren Buffett’s teaching in his fantastic article of 1977, “How Inflation Swindles the Equity Investor”, at times of high inflation, investment in equities is only the least mediocre alternative among many others. The perverse effects of inflation also impact companies’ results and investors’ gains. When adjusted for inflation, the gains, in real terms, tend to be very poor.

The article’s title had us thinking of another issue, one that’s just as important.

That’s because the title is obviously inspired by Jon Krakauer’s book “Into Thin Air”, which shared the first-person, dramatic account of a tragic Everest climbing attempt that claimed five lives. In the best-selling book, Mr. Krakauer very elegantly and convincingly singled out russian super-climber Anatoli Boukreev as guilty of omission and almost destroyed his career – until Mr. Boukreev’s own version of the tale appeared in the book “The Climb”, contradicting Krakauer’s book point by point as effectively or more. The debate raged for years until Mr. Boukreev’s death in another climb.

The point is: even EX-post, clear-tempered analysis of mistakes can lead to further mistakes. Just the attitude of looking back isn’t enough; one must be prepared to hear all sides of the tale with an open mind… even if that means a constant “sparring” of contradicting ideas in one’s mind. For every piece of hard-to-dig “evidence” there’s likely a solid counter-argument that should be considered just as diligently.

The second one on the dark side of creativity is much more speculative (research here).

The third one explores the relationship between power and lies.

For people who think they can “read” people very well, the fourth one is interesting.

Finally, the last one is about negativity in “second hand impressions”.

We can’t stress enough how great the book “Poor Charlie’s Almanack” is, since it gathers this speech and nine other talks Mr. Munger gave throughout the years. Some are classics in their own merits. You can find links to most of them in the Wikipedia page, but to have it all in one place saves a lot of time.

LINKS:

The audio to the speech – Found at this blog, many thanks.

Buysiders.com post on the book Think Twice – Mental traps are also discussed in this video with Michael Mauboussin.

Buysiders.com post on the multidisciplinary approach and communication.

Whitney Tilson reviews the speech – Motley Fool, 2002

A post on Seth Godin’s blog over Mother’s Day weekend had one sentence that “clicked” right away: “The best ideas come out of the corner of our eye, the edge of our consciousness, in a flash. They are the result of misdirection and random collisions (…)”

Nicholas Nassim Taleb had this to say about going to parties: “Go to parties. You can’t even start to know what you may find on the envelope of serendipity. If you suffer from agoraphobia, send colleagues.”

From a recent NYT article on the American University in Cairo and how it challenges students to “unlearn” in the first year: “Who am I? What does it mean to be human? These are the kinds of questions posed to undergraduate students entering this 90-year-old university during what the president, David D. Arnold, called a first year of “disorientation.” During disorientation, the students — 85 percent of them Egyptians — are taught to learn in ways quite at odds with the traditional method of teaching in this country, where instructors lecture, students memorize and tests are exercises in regurgitation.”

Charlie Munger has always talked about this: “Develop into a lifelong self-learner through voracious reading; cultivate curiosity and strive to become a little wiser every day.”

We’re sure we could come up with more “pieces” to this puzzle, and so could you, but we’ll let Mr. Munger himself sum it up perfectly for us:

“Experience tends to confirm a long-held notion that being prepared, on a few occasions in a lifetime, to act promptly in scale, in doing some simple and logical thing, will often dramatically improve the financial results of that lifetime. A few major opportunities, clearly recognizable as such, will usually come to one who continuously searches and waits, with a curious mind that loves diagnosis involving multiple variables. And then all that is required is a willingness to bet heavily when the odds are extremely favorable, using resources available as a result of prudence and patience in the past.”

There are many ways to “be prepared”, so here’s one: Build your own mental models with discipline and drive, sourcing as diversely as possible but always focusing on what’s really relevant, collaborating with a team of bright people both inside and outside your firm – better yet, people brighter than you.

It’s hard, patient, disciplined and long-term work, but it’s well worth it.

The video (21:35):

As an extra exercise suggested by a reader, try imagining someone writing this text 30 years from now.

Apply it both in the big picture and the small picture – from the broadest strategic moves of your company to its tiniest daily processes. Now change the underlined word “company” for “department” if you want to go small, or “nation” and “regulatory system” if you want to go big. For extra fun, try “life”.

Another interesting thing is that he alludes to a then-current state (he wrote this on January 17th 2010) of “don’t stress the distress”, that is, there was then a state of artificial “calm”. Well, judging from the last two days, the sea is no longer flat.

(Photo REUTERS/Erik de Castro)

Another caption for this photo could be: “Risk management in a hurry”. Nothing substitutes for planning.