I think we are saying the same thing.
OTOH, perhaps it's easy to say post-factum that we should have invested in great companies (BRK, NSRGY, AAPL, GOOG), since now we know that they had great performance. What if we have picked MSFT or JNJ back then?
On yet another hand, I don't think it's easy to define great companies. I would never think KSB3.DE is a great company (not sure if you're implying it is). :) Or are you talking about "great opportunity" here, which is different from "great company"? How do you define "great opportunity" then? I can claim that Chinese gaming companies have "outstanding risk reward" :) and yet clearly so far they've shown no reward. :(
On the fourth hand, even if you invest in a great company, what do you do when it's overpriced (which is most of the time)? Think TJX or PNRA or NFLX or AAPL/GOOG. That's very hard to me: holding an overpriced though great company.
Anyway, I think I'd be happy to concentrate my portfolio into couple great companies. But would I?
List of (maybe :)))) great companies I hold now: AAPL, AXP, BASFY (??), BH (???haha???), BRK, CMI (?), CVX, DSX, FRFHF, GLW (??), INTC, JNJ, JPM, MDT, MGDDY, MKL, MSFT, RE, SBMRY, TJX, TSCDY. Even if I cut my portfolio down to these, that would be ~20 positions, half of them fairly valued or overvalued. Clearly, you could disagree that some of these are great companies and cut the list more. But would that be a good portfolio going forward? If you could select just the great companies you like and invest in them, would you do that, buy-and-hold and expect to have great return in next 10 years? A better return than if you actively invested in mediocre cos? |
