What is the rationale for return on NTA (ie excluding intangibles)? As the company has paid a premium to NTA in an acquisition they want a return on the total investment (including intangibles paid away). Is it simply because you are trying to measure the underlying return the business can generate on its capital rather than the market value of that capital (ie total amount paid in an acquisition)?
I believe you are right, I think Buffett wants to see a business that is utilizing its physical assets efficiently indicating an efficiently run operation. I'm also assuming that he prefers to look at "tangible assets" as an old habit from his Ben Graham days. I'm not aware of many other investors using this metric
Removing intangible for invested capital couldl make you entry price a way higher.
If you bought a best quality company with too overvalued price, you are not going to earn much in the middle run 10 years, you will only earn a lot after 40 years, but can the company be growing at the same pace as of now for 40 years?
One of your very best posts in my opinion. Could you please write similar posts about, let's say Terry Smith, Francois Rochon, Chuck Akre or any other favorite investor of yours? That would be marvelous!
I know of many novice investors who may benefit from this article. Do I have your permission to share it with selected 2-3 as an email, so that they can read the whole article and not just the free portion. I will not share it unless I have your permission.
Hope to meet you in Omaha next month. If you decide to go, please DM me in Twitter, so we can arrange a meeting.
What is the rationale for return on NTA (ie excluding intangibles)? As the company has paid a premium to NTA in an acquisition they want a return on the total investment (including intangibles paid away). Is it simply because you are trying to measure the underlying return the business can generate on its capital rather than the market value of that capital (ie total amount paid in an acquisition)?
I believe you are right, I think Buffett wants to see a business that is utilizing its physical assets efficiently indicating an efficiently run operation. I'm also assuming that he prefers to look at "tangible assets" as an old habit from his Ben Graham days. I'm not aware of many other investors using this metric
Removing intangible for invested capital couldl make you entry price a way higher.
If you bought a best quality company with too overvalued price, you are not going to earn much in the middle run 10 years, you will only earn a lot after 40 years, but can the company be growing at the same pace as of now for 40 years?
One of your very best posts in my opinion. Could you please write similar posts about, let's say Terry Smith, Francois Rochon, Chuck Akre or any other favorite investor of yours? That would be marvelous!
I know of many novice investors who may benefit from this article. Do I have your permission to share it with selected 2-3 as an email, so that they can read the whole article and not just the free portion. I will not share it unless I have your permission.
Hope to meet you in Omaha next month. If you decide to go, please DM me in Twitter, so we can arrange a meeting.
🙏
Hello P K,
That is a great idea, I will make similar articles for other super investors in the future.
Of course, please share it!
Appreciate it P K 🙏
Great article 🙌
Thank you, sir! 🙏🏽
How do we calculate the Sensible Price?