Relationship-based business is my focus

I came across this article in the Huffington Post today and the message resonated with me.

Although the article is directed towards the advertising & media industry the underlying message is fundamental to all businesses.

The author describes what I see as a dichotomy in many industries today.  At one extreme is a push towards “efficiency”, automation, and a “one-size fits all mentality”.

At the other end is a push towards customized solutions, relationships, and individual focus.

If you know anything about my business philosophy then you know that I lean towards the latter.  I am most interested in getting to know my clients needs and educating my clients on how to customize their mortgage so that it fits their financial objectives and philosophy.

Unfortunately I see too many homebuyers and homeowners opt for the former by working with so called “low-cost” mortgage providers who promise to provide loans with the “lowest rates and fees”.  I am reminded of a quote from one financial guru who said, “sometimes the loan with the lowest rate is not the loan which will bring your clients greater wealth over time.”

I am left thinking of ways that I can deepen my relationships with my clients, better educate them to make sound decisions, and be an adviser for them over time.

Any suggestions for me?  Please comment below…..

Phil Fisher’s “Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits”

Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits is considered to be Phil Fisher’s signature book on investing. This investment classic was originally published in 1958 but the content is timeless.

In this book Fisher describes his unique investment criteria which is more growth oriented than the value approach that I have been more interested in as of late. However, despite the difference in investment objective Fisher has plenty of valuable insights to share about his research approach which is much more qualitative in nature than Graham’s & Dreman’s.

I was initially introduced to Phil Fisher by reading The Warren Buffet Way by Robert Hagstrom, Jr. In Hagstrom’s book he describes Warren Buffet’s investment philosophy as a synthesis between the Benjamin Graham & Phil Fisher.

In my quest to learn everything I can about Warren Buffet and his investment approach I naturally had to read this investment classic.

Lesson’s/ Note’s from Common Stock and Uncommon Profits:

* You can get an idea of how Fisher views “stockbrokers” in his humorous description- “men who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.”

* On patience- “…it is often easier to tell what will happen to the price of a stock than how much time will elapse before it happens.”

* On buying companies and sticking with them- “ ….finding the really outstanding companies and staying with them through all the fluctuations of a gyrating market proved far more profitable to far more people than did the more colorful practice of trying to buy them cheap and sell them dear.”

* On stocks vs. bonds- “Bonds have become undesirable investments for the strictly long-term holdings of the average individual investor.”

* On causes of inflation- “It seems to me that if this whole inflation mechanism is studied carefully it becomes clear that major inflationary spurts arise out of wholesale expansions of credit, which in turn result from large government deficits greatly enlarging the monetary base of the credit system.”

* “Scuttlebutt”- This is the word Phil Fisher uses to describe his method of interviewing various people with ties to a specific company to learn more about the firm’s prospects. These individuals may include competitors, suppliers, customers, “scientists” (research and development), industry analysts, etc.

* Fisher’s 15 points- These 15 points represent the criteria that a company must meet in order to be an attractive investment. Fisher admits that a company may not need to meet ALL 15 of these criteria but certainly should meet most of them.

* Point 1- Does a company have products or services with growth potential?

→ Measuring growth- “….growth should not be judged on an annual basis but, say, by taking units of several years each.”

→ “These companies which decade by decade have consistently shown spectacular growth might be divided into two groups….I will call one group…fortunate and able and the other group….fortunate because they are able.” Good investments are those that are fortunate because they are able.

→ On management- “…the investor must be alert to whether the management is and continues to be of the highest order of ability; without this, the sales growth will not continue.”

* Point 2- Does management have a determination to continue to develop products or processes that will further increase sales after existing products and processes have been exploited?

→ Google?- “The investor usually obtains the best results in companies whose engineering or research is to a considerable extent devoted to products having some business relationship to those already within the scope of company activities.”

* Point 3- How effective are the company’s R & D efforts in relation to its size?

* Point 4- Does the company have an above-average sales organization?

* Point 5- Does the company have a worthwhile profit margin?

→ a comparison of profit margins should be made “for a series of years.”

→ boom years vs. slow years- During boom years in an industry the marginal companies will grow profits at a quicker pace than more favorable companies. This is because in less prosperous times the marginal companies are not as profitable. Be aware of this when comparing profit margins.

* Point 6- What is the company doing to maintain or improve profit margins?

* Point 7- Does the company have outstanding labor relations?

* Point 8- Does the company have outstanding executive relations?

* Point 9- Does the company have depth in its management?

* Point 10- How good are the company’s cost/ accounting controls?

* Point 11- Are there aspects of the business which make the company outstanding to its competition?

→ I think of this as the concept of a “moat” which Buffet often looks for in a company.

* Point 12- Does the company have a short-range or long-range outlook in regard to profits?

* Point 13- In the foreseeable future will the growth of the company require sufficient equity financing that will cause dilution which will ultimately cancel out current stockholders benefit?

* Point 14- Does the management talk freely to investors about its affairs when things are going well but “clam up” when troubles occur?

→ This is another are where I think Fisher had great influence on Buffet.

* Point 15- Does the company have management of unquestionable integrity?

* On growth vs. value- “The reason why the growth stocks do so much better is that they seem to show gains in value in the hundreds of per cent each decade. In contrast, it is an unusual bargain that is as much as 50 per cent undervalued.”

* A stock should be purchased when, “a worthwhile improvement in earnings is coming in the right sort of company, but that this particular increase in earning has yet produced upward move in the price of that company’s shares. I believe that whenever this situation occurs the right sort of investment may be considered to be in a buying range.”

* On when to sell- “This is when a mistake has been made in the original purchase and it becomes increasingly clear that the factual background of the particular company is… less favorable than originally believed.”

* On emotion- do not let ego enter into investing decisions. When an investment goes bad admit you were wrong and take your medicine (sell).

* On learning from mistakes- Fisher encourages investors to learn from their mistakes.

* Never sell a stock simply because it has significant outstanding gains. Fisher provides an analogy about a class of students. As an investor you are able to “buy” the future income stream of one of the students. As an investor you buy the student who had the brightest prospects. If this student goes onto law and school and becomes a highly paid lawyer you wouldn’t necessarily sell the stock in this student after they had made a lot of money in their career because it is likely that this person still has the highest income potential.

* On dividends- Fisher, like Buffet, concerns himself more with return on capital than on dividends paid.

* On diversification- Like Buffet, Graham, and many other value investors Fisher believes that investors should concern themselves with investing in good companies more than in many companies.

* On diversification- “Usually a very long list of securities is not a sign of the brilliant investor, but of one who is unsure of himself.”

* Buying best firms in un-favor industries- Although Fisher is not considered to be your classic value investor he does recognize that trends and fads do appear in the financial markets. Because of that he advocates for buying best firms in out-of-favor industries.

* On finding investment ideas- For Fisher, the most valuable source of investment ideas was in talking with other investment professionals whose opinions and knowledge he respected.

* In order to be a successful investor one must have “great effort combined with ability and enriched by both judgment and vision.”

In real estate downturn demand grows for Green building

The Economist had a great article in their Technology Quarterly section of the latest issue which talked about green homes.  Much of article talks about some of the technological innovations which are occurring specifically with windows. If you’d like to read the article yourself you may download by clicking here.

Especially in the Pacific NW I have to believe that more and more consumers will concern themselves with green principles.

If you have any other thoughts or resources that you can share regarding this subject I’d love it if you could comment on them below.

Analytical test

This has nothing to do with mortgages but I thought it was a pretty fun mind puzzle to challenge me.

Click this link to give it a whirl.

Be sure to comment on how you did!

Professional Partner quoted in Portland Business Journal!

I was excited when I picked up this week’s edition of the Portland Business Journal last night and saw Kate Myer’s picture on the front cover.  Kate was quoted in the story (click this link to download complete story-subprime-problems-loom-pdxbiz-kmyers2) not only because she recently purchased a home but also for her professional opinion on the impact that upcoming foreclosures will have on the local housing market.  Nice job Kate!

American’s are working deeper and deeper into their lives.

I came across this article in the Huffington Post and was reminded that the virtue of “delaying gratification” coupled with compound interest can make a big difference when it comes time to decide whether or not a person can retire.

According to this article more and more American’s are having to work past the age when we’ve gotten to retire in the past.  My guess is that this trend will continue into the future especially if/ when the Federal Government is forced to alter or eliminate entitlement programs.

What can you do to avoid having to work into your 70s?  Work with competent financial advisors (including mortgage professionals) who can help you plan. 

 

Gov’t spending vs. tax rates, what’s more important?

I usually don’t blog too often about politics or macro-economic issues but I came across this article in Barron’s written by Gene Epstein and wanted to share it with some of my friends and family. 

For me, I have always placed a higher priority on a politician’s stance on taxes than on their stance regarding government spending.  However, as this article points out I should be prioritize my attention in the inverse because if government spending exceeds government’s tax receipts I will end up paying for it in higher future taxes or via inflation.

Here are a few points from the article that I found interesting:

·         Friedman’s Law (famous economist Milton Friedman): “The real cost of government…is measured by what government spends, not by the receipts labeled taxes. The goods and services it buys are not available for other use.” So, for example, however the war in Iraq has been funded, its direct cost is measured by the men, women and material that otherwise would have been available for peacetime uses, not by the receipts labeled taxes.

·         When a tax cut is REALLY a tax cut?: Again, quoting Friedman- “When the so-called tax cut is accompanied by a larger rise in government spending than in prices.” By this reasonable standard, over the past half-century, at least, there have been no real federal tax reductions. The Kennedy, Reagan and more recent Bush tax cuts were all accompanied by a larger rise in federal spending than in prices.

·         Which party is more fiscally responsible?: I have always thought that those in the “conservative” republican party were the ones I could trust with cutting back on “wasteful” government spending.  However, according to this chart, since 1960 the 3 democratic administrations have managed to cut back on government spending as a percentage of GDP during their time in office while the 3 republican administrations each worked to increase it.

·         The most insidious tax: Perhaps the most insidious tax of all is the sheer printing of money, produced through three main channels.

The first is by selling Treasury bonds not to the public, but to Uncle Sam’s own central bank (a process often called the “monetization of debt”). From September 2001 to September 2007, the Federal Reserve “bought” an additional $217 billion of Treasury paper, for which it cut a check to the Treasury via its unique powers of money creation.

A second channel of monetized financing arises from the fact that the Federal Reserve holds approximately $750 billion in Treasury debt, and as such is entitled to the coupon payments on those holdings. But while it keeps some of this to finance its own operations, it doesn’t need most of it. So what it does each year is “return” the unused funds by cutting yet another check to the Treasury.

Since the central bank is, after all, just a part of the federal government, the whole process is rather as though an individual were to put his own personalized IOUs into one pocket, while paying himself the interest on those IOU’s into the other. For the government, what prevents this exercise from being a wash is that the pocket from which the payments come has the power to create money. According to the Office of Management and Budget, these “Deposits of earnings by the Federal Reserve System” totaled $173 billion from 2001 through 2007.

The third, more subtle way the government prints money is by inflating receipts via the larger process of monetary inflation. Through the printing of money by the central bank, wages, salaries, prices and asset values are all pushed up, inflating government receipts. The yield from this process was greater prior to 1985, when income-tax brackets were first indexed to prices. But there is still a kind of “bracket creep,” as people earn more money within higher brackets. In any case, no other part of the tax code is indexed in this way.

Needless to say during this election cycle I will be spending more time reviewing the candidate’s spending plans rather than their taxing plans.

Have a comment about this posting?  PLEASE CONTRIBUTE BELOW!

6 Tasks to Triumph in Tough Economic Times

My colleagues Tony & Jared of Equity Design @ Mortgage Trust recently wrote this excellent posting on their blog about 6 things we can all do to overcome these tough economic conditions. 

Among my favorite- dust off the bike and ride to work which is something I’ve done over the past few weeks!  Thanks Tony and Jared!

Here's a picture of my SWEET bike!
Here's a picture of my SWEET bike!

Don’t forget about fiscal literacy

The NY Times published a good article today outlining the presidential hopeful’s views on financial regulation (click this link to view).  By the sounds of it we can expect greater governmental oversight over the financial markets in the coming years.

It is no surprise that a reaction for greater financial regulation has resulted following the third financial collapse in as many decades.  In the 1980s the savings and loan crisis forced 747 financial institutions to fail.  In the 1990s it was the dot-com bubble that burst wiping out approximately $5,000,000,000,000 ($5 trillion) in market capitalization in only 2 years.  Currently, we find ourselves in the largest credit & housing expansion and downturn in US history (the extent of the housing cycle is creatively displayed in this video by John Burns).

In each instance the pattern of activity tends to be similar.  At first a small group of people begin to acquire an asset (i.e. stock, house, mortgage-security) and that asset class performs extremely well over a short period of time.  Word spreads that this particular asset class is a great investment and more and more people get involved.  So on and so forth until rationality has left the marketplace and folks are buying up the asset left and right without any regard to the actual fundamentals behind the investment.  Along the way enterprising and dishonest salesman find ways to “help” less educated and less sophisticated buyers get into the game.  Around this time is typically when the music stops and those left holding the asset are the ones who lose huge.

To a degree this explains how each of the aforementioned economic bubbles have occurred.  Many people have blamed the period of deregulation in the financial markets from 1970-2000 for allowing so many people to get into financial trouble.  If this is indeed the cause then it would only make sense to have the government tighten down on the financial markets.  It is no surprise then that the two presidential hopefuls are proponents of this approach as is Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. 

Although I do agree with these people that some additional governmental regulation would be helpful (so long as it is actually enforced) I think the greater preventive measure lies in our education system.  For me this period in our history is only partially about lack of government oversight and is more about lack of fiscal literacy among consumers.

The Economist wrote an excellent article about fiscal literacy which I posted on my blog back in April (view it by clicking this link).  My hope is that the presidential nominees will spend time this fall talking about ways to improve our national education system so that in the future consumers will be able to ask informed questions, properly analyze their options, and make quality decisions regarding their financial matters.  Otherwise we may find ourselves in this position again next decade. 

Worst idea….ever

I am not a real estate sales expert nor do I consider myself a man of “cutting-edge” taste.  However, I feel relatively confident in saying that the development referenced in this article on WSJ.com inspired by the “Lord of the Rings” Trilogy is the worst real estate development idea….ever.

What was this guy thinking?

What was Umpqua Bank thinking in giving this developer a loan to carry out his plan? 

Unbelievable……..