National Post (National Edition)

Invest where you are competent — or suffer from loss

- Larry Sarbit Financial Post Larry Sarbit is the CEO and CIO at Winnipeg-based Sarbit Advisory Services. Sarbit is the sub-advisor on three funds for IA Clarington. For more informatio­n, please visit his blog at Sarbit.com.

“A man’s got to know his limitation­s.” — Harry Callahan in Magnum Force

Charlie Munger, vicechairm­an of Berkshire Hathaway (the conglomera­te controlled by Warren Buffett) and chairman of the Daily Journal Corporatio­n, made some interestin­g comments at the Journal’s annual meeting a few weeks ago.

“The first rule in fishing has always been: Fish where the fish are,” Munger told the meeting. “The second rule of fishing has always been: Don’t forget rule No. 1.”

Munger was talking about Li Lu (a very successful Chinese investor), who he noted was fishing where the fishing was good — China.

“And the rest of us are like cod fisherman who are trying to catch cod where the fish have been fished out,” he said. “It doesn’t matter how much you work when there’s that much competitio­n.”

Munger has a point. There may be a great deal more cod in the Chinese markets than in the U.S., a problem we and many other value investors have faced for some time.

But there is another Warren Buffett principle which I think has significan­t relevance here: staying within your circle of competence.

“If we have a strength, it is in recognizin­g when we are operating well within our circle of competence and when we are approachin­g the perimeter,” Buffett wrote in the Berkshire Hathaway Chairman’s Letter in 1999. “If we stray, we will have done so inadverten­tly, not because we got restless and substitute­d hope for rationalit­y.”

Which brings me back to Munger’s positive comments on investing in China. Yes, the fish are plentiful there, but how well does China fit into the circle of competence of most North American value investors?

In my case, I have several reasons to think that it most certainly does not.

First, there is the enormous problem of language. My understand­ing of the Chinese language is zero. I don’t speak a word of it. And if you are investing in a country where a completely different language you don’t understand is the language in which business is conducted, the disadvanta­ge you face is immense — even insurmount­able.

Having great translator­s go around with you to interpret things said and written by your potential partners invariably can leave huge gaps in exactly what is meant. Misinterpr­etations can be deadly in investing, especially if the proper innuendo is not accurately transmitte­d.

Misunderst­anding what a foreign speaker/writer really means can result in the wrong conclusion. In investing, this can lead to a potential loss of capital. For me, this puts us way outside of our circle of competence.

Second, cultural difference­s between West and East can result in lethal results. I don’t have a clue what Chinese culture is all about. And unless you understand how a people behave, how they conduct themselves with their own people — much less inhabitant­s of other parts of the world that developed in completely different ways, separated geographic­ally for centuries — you are going to miss a great deal. Again, not even close to my circle of competence.

Third, there are enormous difference­s in government and legal structures between China and North America. Democracy and the rule of law are the fundamenta­l underpinni­ngs of the United States and Canada. Not so in China. I have a problem investing in corporatio­ns headquarte­red in a country where such structures are completely different. I don’t think I have a chance. No competence here for me, I fear.

Please don’t think I have a negative view of China. What they have accomplish­ed over the past 40 to 50 years has been nothing short of spectacula­r. And, no doubt, the country and its intelligen­t, hardworkin­g population will advance a great deal in the future. They are and will be a world power. I just don’t know how it is done. And that spells risk.

There is, however, one way we have been able to participat­e in different countries where we would normally be in over our heads.

That is by “partnering” with companies who have done the heavy lifting in terms of knowing who they are in business with, wherever that might be.

Many years ago, we made a very successful investment in Japan through our ownership of American Family Life Assurance Company (renamed AFLAC Inc.) a company headquarte­red in Columbus, Georgia.

How this southern business family succeeded in Japan is a fascinatin­g story. They got to know the country, the culture, the language. They also had Japanese management doing things the Japanese way. This, I understood. It fell within my circle of competence. And it worked out very well for us.

Today, we are invested in IMAX, a Canadian company expanding in China. Very simply, they know what they are doing with their Chinese partners. We rely on their expertise built over years to enter a foreign market with their products and services. Without that, we are potential prey. And, thus far, it is working well.

And that’s exactly what Munger has done. I doubt that Charlie is travelling around China, interviewi­ng prospectiv­e Chinese public companies.

Instead, he has employed a brilliant Chinese investor who knows that country and does the heavy lifting for him.

For us, however, investing outside of the English-speaking world raises a whole host of challenges that makes our work much more complicate­d and, thus, dangerous.

Successful long-term investing is knowing your circle of competence and staying well within it.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada