I like both Buffettology and Buffettology II as books I can go back, skim through, and find straightforward ways of examining the worth of stocks. I give it 5 stars as being excellent for steering you to good investments. But don't assume every other method and every investor is as stupid as the book claims: it will lead you to value this book's opinion alone too much.
In Buffettology II, I'm sure many novice investors come away with the idea that EVERY major investor is an idiot and that through Warren-like value-investing methods you will have a tremendous advantage on the rest of the market. They also treat long-understood investing phenomena, like a long-lasting competitive advantage, as if it's only being revealed to the world through this book. For example: "...we'll let you in on one of Warren's best kept secrets. He figured out that some, but not all, companies have what he calls a "durable competitive advantage."" HE figured out? Ben Graham and Phil Fisher were writing books about it while Warren was just getting out of college. Phil Fisher's "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits," published in 1958, goes to great length explaining the situations to look for in which a company has such an advantage.
I'm glad such a thing is discussed in the book while at the same time I'm outraged the authors LIE to me to make the book look more unique and valuable. EVERY chapter includes some kind of thing like that which makes you wonder at the authors' motives.
Why do they need to lie and exaggerate if they're really providing the best way for the average person to evaluate stocks without going through the whole, formal, "asset value, earnings power value, growth value" math calculations required by advanced methods as per Greenwald, et al's "Value Investing"?
- Amazon Business: Make the most of your Amazon Business account with exclusive tools and savings. Login now
- Amazon Business : For business-only pricing, quantity discounts and FREE Shipping. Register a free business account
