This bears further comment: " .... success is so self evident (like positive cash flow and nicely growing top line and bottom line), that the price will already reflect the potential continuation of such a success 10 years hence, by then however, that price will, IMHO, be fundamentally too high to make VLNC a "safe investment".
I find a couple of controversial ideas in your statement. First, the words "so self evident" are subjective words. The level of "evidence" required is individual.
Second, and more importantly, your assumption that waiting for the level of visibility that fits one's risk adjusted return parameters means one cannot enjoy greater than market average returns is wrong in my view and experience.
I didn't invest in Cisco in 1991 but I have since 1993. I didn't invest in AOL in 1993 but I have since 1995. There are many other less prominent examples. I've invested much earlier in other great companies because I saw something that I didnt see as early in AOL or Cisco, in relative terms. But, in every company there are certain things that tend to correlate with success. At this point, in my view, VLNC does not have nearly enough of them to merit an investment. |
