Recently, it's quite magical. Whatever question I have in my mind, the video platform seems to miraculously push related questions to me immediately.
Yesterday, I was thinking about Tesla's stock, and this morning I saw a video sharing a comment from Duan Yongping about Tesla from early on.
He said: Buying Tesla was the coolest mistake he ever made.
After watching the video, I quickly searched online and found a series of viewpoints he shared on Xueqiu regarding Tesla from his early years.
His main idea is:
He thought Tesla was a very good company in its early days, so he bought its stock.
However, after multiple interactions with Tesla's customer service and the company, as well as repeated observations of Musk, he gradually felt that the company's corporate culture had serious issues, and these problems could eventually cost the company its life over time.
Additionally, he expressed some sharp views on Musk's personal traits and how these traits could severely impact Tesla.
Of course, Duan Yongping also mentioned that this does not mean Tesla is a bad company; he believes Tesla could very well be a game changer. However, as an investor, he no longer wanted to hold such stocks and lost interest in the company, so he decisively sold all his Tesla shares.
He admitted that buying Tesla stock was a mistake.
But this mistake was very "cool" because when he sold all his shares, Tesla's stock still brought him good returns.
However, after he sold his Tesla shares, the stock continued to rise. According to the majority opinion, selling a stock that is still going to rise in the future—what kind of operation is that?
Yet, years later, Tesla's situation seems to be gradually confirming Duan Yongping's predictions from back then.
After watching Duan Yongping's comments and thinking about the management issues, I recalled a viewpoint that Buffett once mentioned (in essence):
When he chooses a company, he certainly looks for one with a good management team, but he prefers companies with a strong moat that even a fool could manage well.
My understanding of this statement is:
A company that can survive long-term will inevitably encounter a poor management team or even a reckless spendthrift at some point in its development. But if the company itself has a strong moat, the damage caused by such management teams and spendthrifts within a limited time frame is also limited, or the risk is quite controllable.
When I read this statement before, I found it hard to understand. Are there really such companies in the world?
The companies that the old gentleman invested in, like Coca-Cola and American Express… I didn't understand or know anything about those American companies.
However, recently, after seeing Musk and Tesla, I thought about some other companies, and it seems I have slightly understood this statement. It appears that such companies do exist, and it seems our country has such companies:
Moutai is one of them.
Yuan Renguo and Gao Weidong both served as chairmen of Moutai and were later subjected to various forms of investigation. In Gao Weidong's experience, there is even no indication that he had any significant experience in the liquor industry or the business field.
Yet, it seems that these individuals managing Moutai have had extremely limited negative impacts on the company.
As management, it seems that as long as they do not change Moutai's formula, do not alter Moutai's ecosystem, and ensure Moutai's quality, it seems that even if they do other things, it would not significantly affect Moutai's business and value.
Perhaps this is what the old gentleman meant by having a strong moat—a company that even a fool can manage?
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
