Showing posts with label book review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label book review. Show all posts

Friday, June 10, 2011

Free Capital Book Review



Free Capital
How 12 Private Investors Made Millions in the Stock Market

Wouldn't life be better if you were free of the daily grind - the conventional job and boss - and instead succeeded or failed purely on the merits of your own investment choices? My new book Free Capital: How 12 Private Investors Made Millions in the Stock Market offers an insight into this life.

Based on a series of interviews, the book profiles 12 highly successful private investors.  How did these people originally get interested in investment? How did the interest progress to the point where they were able to give up their day job? How do they spend their time now?

Around one-third of the interviewees are ex-City professionals; one-third are other degree-educated professionals; and one-third left school at or before 18.  Most gave up all employed work in their 30s or 40s to become full-time investors.

Geographers, surveyors, activists and eclectics
The book presents the investors in four groups.
Geographers have a top-down focus, starting from the overall investment landscape, and focusing first on broad trends and macroeconomic conditions. 
Surveyors have a bottom-up focus, starting from the individual elements of the landscape, focusing first on the idiosyncrasies of particular companies.
Activists seek to influence company managers’ decisions in line with their own views – by dialogue and persuasion, by using the votes on their shares, and if necessary by publicity.  Most investors seek to avoid companies where management changes are required, that is they do not go looking for trouble. The activists are investors who do go looking for trouble.
Eclectics are a residual category. One eclectic is a day trader who trades partly on short-term news flow, and partly on technical analysis.  Another is a fundamental investor who draws on both top-down and bottom-up analysis. 
[could divide into a part II post here, if you want shorter posts. Alternatively, you could remove one or more sections]
How do we know these investors are any good?
Six of the investors are ‘ISA millionaires’ who have accumulated over £1m in PEPs and ISAs. Four of these – including Financial Times ‘My Portfolio’ columnist John Lee – had reached the £1m milestone by 2003 or earlier, and another two in 2005 and 2006.  Given the inability to borrow, and low contribution limits in PEPs and ISAs, these results are arithmetically impossible without exceptional investment returns.
For some of the investors, the regulatory requirement to declare publicly any major shareholdings above 3% of a quoted company gives further evidence of their substantial wealth. For example the Swedish micro-cap investor Peter Gyllenhammar – profiled in chapter 10 of the book – is named in many major shareholding announcements every year.
Characteristics of the free capitalists

The final chapter of the book identifies similarities and differences between the 12 investors’ stories. Some of the similarities are as follows.
Future time perspective Time perspective is a psychological concept which describes how an individual parcels consciousness into a past, present and future, and how much attention they give to each. The investors have a future time perspective. Their habitual focus on the future is not a duty or a chore – they seem to prefer perceiving the world through this perspective.
It is unsurprising that investors should focus mainly on the future when thinking about investments. But it was more interesting to see signs that they had had this perspective from a young age, well before they ever thought about investing.  Individuals with a present time perspective – those who focus more on living for the moment – may tend to spend rather than save any increase in income, and so never get started as investors.

No overnight success Most interviewees initially spent several years following the typical pattern of a novice investor – neither making any real money, nor losing enough to put them out the game.  This pattern did not seem to be inconsistent with eventual success as an investor.

Mainly smaller companies Most interviewees invest mainly in smaller companies. They rarely hold shares in the FTSE350 index. In other words, they ignore the top 90% of the stock market by market capitalisation.

Low appetite for leverage Most of the investors use little leverage or debt of any kind in their investments. Some had spread bet accounts, but this appeared to be motivated mainly by tax considerations rather than a desire for leverage.

Money for freedom, not for spending The interviewees appear to live modest lifestyles relative to their accumulated wealth. Investment for them represents first and foremost a source of quiet freedom, rather than a source of ostentatious spending power.

Not team players The investors all work alone.  They make their own decisions, and they appear to be little influenced by any form of group affiliation.

A craft, not a science The investors use relatively simple analysis and heuristics.  None relies on modern portfolio theory as understood in the academic world (“like learning Physics to play snooker” said one interviewee), or on any other sophisticated quantitative analysis. This is despite the fact that several do have strong quantitative or business school backgrounds.


Guy Thomas
The contents and first chapter of Free Capital are available FREE here
The book is available (usually priced around £10) as a paperback or e-book from Amazon, the publishers Harriman House and many other booksellers.
All author royalties will go to charity.

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene: A Book Review




Book Review: The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins’ ‘The Selfish Gene’ is a well written and enjoyable book. As the title suggests, it is an exploration of the role of genes in evolutionary theory. Dawkin’s asks us to accept the genes are programmed to survive and that we or any other organism are merely ‘survival machines’, within which evolution plays out the outcomes of gene mutations.

This asks us to reframe our assumptions about the world and accept it as a huge battleground for genes fighting for survival. This can be a liberating thought for a scientist because it then allows him to apply scientific method and rationalize behavior using this initial assumption. Indeed, Dawkins goes on to explain a collection of interpersonal, societal and biological relationships by applying game theory to the behavior of the ‘survival machines’ within these relationships.


The Selfish Gene

Pivotal to this idea is the notion of ‘selfishness’ in the title. In fact, to Dawkins, the genes are just trying to ensure their survival (and promulgation), in other words, they are not so much immoral as amoral. However, the term ‘selfish’ is probably used to highlight this amorality, and he spends ample time explaining how apparently altruistic behavior is, in fact, selfish behavior.

He adds succor to this conclusion by pointing out that he is not advocating the case for selfishness as an evolutionary moral code. This would make his argument weaker. On the contrary, he is arguing that this is how it actually is.

On the whole it is an interesting read and I would advise it as a thought provoking tome. However, it would have been preferable if Dawkins extended the scientific rationale to his exploration of religion. He touches-unsatisfactorily-upon religion in the book, but never manages to reach what I think is the inexorable conclusion of his this theory.

Dawkins, Genes and God

It is entirely feasible that a gene that causes the brain to accept submission to a higher authority (an idea which characterizes all religious thought) as the ultimate creator exists. If such a gene is successful then the ‘survival machines’ (us) that it occupies might see continued promulgation. Those that do not possess it might seek immortality by treating to recreate this creation process and dying out with their failure. In this sense, religion can be seen as an entirely necessary part of evolutionary development. I happen to believe that history shows us that all men ultimately submit. Even as established religions seem to be on the decline in, say Europe, they are being replaced with no end of new age nonsense. Dawkins’ irrational belief is his faith in ‘science’ and science killed many more men than religion did in the last century.

Whilst the idea of this gene seems obscure enough, it is entirely consistent with Dawkins’ approach. Animals do not seem to trouble themselves with notions of Gods or question their ultimate reality or creation. We do. Why Dawkins seeks to isolate this one area of evolution and then subject it to the onslaught of ‘reason’ in his later works is a real mystery.


Source:

Dawkins, Richard 'The Selfish Gene' Oxford University Press, 1989