I read now that you say GOOG was or is a "no brainer" when you yourself said you didn't have a position when we talked about GOOG in 2016, and that was well after more than five years of "retained earnings growth"??
When somebody says "it's a no brainer", I cringe. I been around too long holding too many positions to ever believe that. There is always something - a wart, a risk, a new law, a general or sector market drop - something. When you're in the caldron, buys do not seem obvious/"no brainers". Later, when things quiet down, or business progresses and the stock moves up, one gets the luxury of looking back and saying it was a "no -brainer".
Or maybe "no brainer" does not mean "risk free". Otoh, if it's not risk-free - but in fact has some risk to it, then the buyer better use his/her brain to figure out what the risk is and the probability or possibility of that adverse event happening.
In my view, if someone actually believed, a priori, that there was indeed a "no brainer" buy, they should use the Kelly criterion, and put a huge chunk of their portfolio into the position. Maybe that's what Buffett does or tries to do. For internet people who talk about a "no brainer", it seems like a flippant comment, because only rarely do I read they have a significant portion (>20%) of their portfolio in the "no brainer" stock, assuming they have a portfolio of some size.
Jmo
|
