Berkshire’s Intelligent Acquisitions

  |  February 7   |  No Comments

Just going through the book “The Innovator’s Dilemma” by Clayton Christensen. I have a few posts I’ll likely write that relate to the book — this is one of them.

The Innovators Dilemma talks a lot about a company’s culture, and why incumbent leaders of a certain technology are restrained from participating in a disruptive technology’s upside. Christensen names these attributes as the incumbent’s downfall: (1) Current customers aren’t served by new market; (2) New market is too small for large companies; (3) Use of new technology isn’t fully known yet; (4) Processes that help them with current business hurt them with new business; and (5) New technology isn’t good enough yet to meet higher-end market demand.

One solution to the above issues is to acquire another company that can take advantage of the disruptive technology. If done correctly, this can solve numbers 1, 2, 4, and 5 above.

Christensen breaks down the factors that affect what a company can and cannot do into Resources, Processes, and Values. Resources are people, equipment, brands, technology, customers, etc. Processes are how companies transform those resources into products or services of greater value. Values are standards by which employees make and prioritize decisions (think of a company’s “Core Values” of the Jim Collins variety).

Continue reading… »

The Restaurant Investor

  |  November 25   |  4 Comments

I wrote the following article for partners of Braewick Holdings LP and readers of this blog. The article is on the story of Steak n Shake, Sardar Biglari, and what it takes for a restaurant to succeed. I’ve included the introduction here, but the entire article is in PDF format through the link below:

“The Restaurant Investor” by Max Olson

Phil Cooley and Sardar Biglari

In March, 2008, Sardar Biglari won the most important victory of his life. In an activist campaign to gain control of the board of directors of The Steak n Shake Company, Biglari and his partner received nearly triple the number of votes of the directors they were replacing.

It hadn’t been easy—their proxy fight with incumbent management had been going on for more than six months. Biglari and the entities he controlled first purchased seven percent of Steak n Shake during the summer of 2007. In August, the initial filing was made with the S.E.C. stating that Biglari had been in discussions with management. At this point, as with many activist investors, Biglari hoped that management would be open to his suggestions and criticisms of the company. He was the third largest owner of Steak n Shake at the time, holding more shares than all executive officers and directors combined. Only days earlier, C.E.O. Peter Dunn had unexpectedly resigned, stating his intent to “pursue other interests.” It seemed like the perfect time to reform the faltering restaurant chain.

Continue reading… »

1908 – 2008 – 2108

  |  December 22   |  No Comments

1907
The New York Times, 11/4/1907

In October of 1907, financial markets in the United States came to a complete halt. Credit markets froze, major banks collapsed, and the stock market plunged. Heads of industry, like J. P. Morgan, were forced to inject massive amounts of capital to prevent a complete collapse.

The circumstances of the Panic of 1907 are very similar to our current crisis. In both, the economy had experienced huge growth over the preceding decade. Banks lowered lending standards, which led people to take on more and more debt. When bank assets began to decline, depositors panicked, and there was a run on the financial system.

But for the rest of this post, I’d like to focus on the period that follows a financial crisis—not on the crisis itself. (Keep in mind that although I speak in terms of American progress, my point applies to any country around the world.)

* * *

The period following 1907 was monumental in American history.

Continue reading… »

Is the Internet Ruining Media? Hardly.

  |  August 10   |  No Comments

Theater

In Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, Elizabeth Wurtzel wrote an opinion piece titled “The Internet Is Ruining America’s Movies and Music.” She talks about how both businesses aren’t like they used to be, because of—you guessed it—the internet.

It’s easy to understand why many people in both the music and movie industries long for the good old days. They used to exist in government-sanctioned oligopolies where consumers had little choice in where their entertainment came from. Whether it was the three network TV stations, limited spectrum for radio, or your local theater being the only option for a movie. Here’s a passage from Wurtzel’s article:

In the era of the online music store — even if you buy from iTunes rather than stealing from LimeWire, the problem is the same — no one knows how to listen to a complete album anymore. Everything is slanted toward the hit single. This means that the music industry is oriented toward one-hit wonders rather than consummate musicians, and talent development is just not worth the trouble.

In reality, the opposite is true. One-hit wonders have always dominated sales in the music industry. This won’t change anytime soon—there will always be the megahits in the “head” of the long-tail. Places like iTunes or Netflix allow the obscure musicians and moviemakers to find some kind of an audience. Also, in the past, if I liked only one song from an artist, I may not purchase their album at all. Now, I can at least get the song I like.

In fact, 47% of our gross domestic product involves intellectual property (IP) transactions, and about 6% of our national worth — $626.6 billion annually — is from our copyright businesses. These are the segments of our economy that are suffering, or stand to do so, as a result of the Internet. The Internet, glorious as it is, should be thought of as the plague of postmodernity.

Because the internet (and computers in general) makes it easier to copy things, people like to blame it for destroying intellectual property rights. Yes, the internet has changed the dynamic for the media companies. But technology radically affecting an industry is nothing new. There are many reasons why the internet has changed media for the better.

Continue reading… »

CES Video Podcasts

  |  January 12   |  No Comments

Guy Kawasaki points readers to a list of videos from the Consumer Electronics Show last week. The feed includes the keynote speeches and more specific sessions by CES presenters. Below are the links to my favorite presentations. The Bill Gates keynote (very funny) link on the feed is broken, so below is the link to a segment of it on YouTube.

Bill Gates keynote
International Retail Power Panel / Retailers talk about retail trends and technologies (includes heads of Best Buy, Circuit City, and Target)
Chip Heath keynote / One of the authors of Made to Stick explains the concepts of the book.
Michael Dell keynote
Top 10 Technologies You’ve Never Heard Of

TED Talk Videos

  |  October 29   |  1 Comment

The TED Conference (Technology, Entertainment, Design) is held annually in Monteray, California. TED brings together some of the most intelligent thinkers and leaders from across the globe to talk about innovation, technology and other interesting topics. Below I list some of my favorite talks relating to business and technology. Be sure to check out all the other interesting speeches across many categories.

Each clip is about 20 minutes long. Below the links is one of my favorite talks, Malcolm Gladwell on Spaghetti Sauce.

Sergey Brin and Larry Page: Inside the Google machine
Jeff Bezos: After the gold rush, there’s innovation ahead
Seth Godin: Sliced bread and other marketing delights
Barry Schwartz: The paradox of choice
Steven Levitt: Why do crack dealers still live with their moms?
Jimmy Wales: How a ragtag band created Wikipedia
Jeff Skoll: Making movies that make change
Richard Branson: Life at 30,000 feet
Chris Anderson: Technology’s long tail
Malcolm Gladwell: What we can learn from spaghetti sauce



  • It's what everyone on Wall Street thinks but it's refreshing to actual hear them admit it.,
  • That's like saying: "The problem with Jeff Bezos is he thinks too long-term. We want short-term profits.",
  • …(he gets paid 6½ yrs when his warrants vest -- few investors have that luxury)." At least they have the courage to admit it.,
  • From an article today on $JCP: "we have major concerns about…the duration mismatch between Johnson & other investors…,
  • Just shows you how hard it is to be a long-term thinker in the short-term. At least in the stock market you can profit from the disparity.,

Archives