PERSONAL FINANCE SECRET | Search results for M -->
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query M. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query M. Sort by date Show all posts

What I Learned from Warren Buffett | How Warren Buffett decides if something is a good investment.

by Bill Gates.

arren Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist, Roger Lowenstein (New York: Random House, 1995).

Roger Lowenstein begins his new biography of Warren Buffett with a disclaimer. He reveals that he is a longtime investor in Berkshire Hathaway, the company that under Buffett’s guidance has seen its share price rise in 33 years from $7.60 to approximately $30,000.

In reviewing Lowenstein’s book, I must begin with a disclaimer, too. I can’t be neutral or dispassionate about Warren Buffett, because we’re close friends. We recently vacationed together in China with our wives. I think his jokes are all funny. I think his dietary practices—lots of burgers and Cokes—are excellent. In short, I’m a fan.

It’s easy to be a fan of Warren’s, and doubtless many readers of Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist will join the growing ranks. Lowenstein’s book is a straightforward account of Buffett’s remarkable life. It doesn’t fully convey what a fun, humble, charming guy Warren is, but his uniqueness comes across. No one is likely to come away from it saying, “Oh, I’m like that guy.”

The broad outlines of Warren’s career are well known, and the book offers enjoyable detail. Lowenstein traces Warren’s life from his birth in Omaha, Nebraska in 1930 to his first stock purchase at age 11, and from his study of the securities profession under Columbia University’s legendary Benjamin Graham to his founding of the Buffett Partnership at age 25. The author describes Buffett’s secretiveness about the stocks he picked for the partnership, and his contrasting openness about his guiding principle, which is to buy stocks at bargain-basement prices and hold them patiently. As Warren once explained in a letter to his partners, “This is the cornerstone of our investment philosophy: Never count on making a good sale. Have the purchase price be so attractive that even a mediocre sale gives good results.”

Lowenstein describes how Warren took control of Berkshire Hathaway and cash-cowed its dying textile business in order to purchase stock in other companies. The book traces how Berkshire evolved into a holding company and how its investment philosophy evolved as Warren learned to look beyond financial data and recognize the economic potential of unique franchises like dominant newspapers. Today Berkshire owns companies such as See’s Candy Shops, the Buffalo News, and World Book International, as well as major positions in companies such as American Express, Capital Cities/ABC (now Disney), Coca-Cola, Gannett, Gillette, and the Washington Post Company. It also is a major insurer that includes GEICO Corporation in its holdings.

Readers are likely to come away from the book’s description of Buffett’s life and investment objectives feeling better educated about investing and business, but whether those lessons will translate into great investment results is less than certain. Warren’s gift is being able to think ahead of the crowd, and it requires more than taking Warren’s aphorisms to heart to accomplish that—although Warren is full of aphorisms well worth taking to heart.

For example, Warren likes to say that there are no called strikes in investing. Strikes occur only when you swing and miss. When you’re at bat, you shouldn’t concern yourself with every pitch, nor should you regret good pitches that you don’t swing at. In other words, you don’t have to have an opinion about every stock or other investment opportunity, nor should you feel bad if a stock you didn’t pick goes up dramatically. Warren says that in your lifetime you should swing at only a couple dozen pitches, and he advises doing careful homework so that the few swings you do take are hits.
For example, Warren likes to say that there are no called strikes in investing. Strikes occur only when you swing and miss.

Warren follows his own advice: When he invests in a company, he likes to read all of its annual reports going back as far as he can. He looks at how the company has progressed and what its strategy is. He investigates thoroughly and acts deliberately—and infrequently. Once he has purchased a company or shares in a company, he is loath to sell.

His penchant for long-term investments is reflected in another of his aphorisms: “You should invest in a business that even a fool can run, because someday a fool will.”

He doesn’t believe in businesses that rely for their success on every employee being excellent. Nor does he believe that great people help all that much when the fundamentals of a business are bad. He says that when good management is brought into a fundamentally bad business, it’s the reputation of the business that remains intact.

Warren likes to say that a good business is like a castle and you’ve got to think every day, Is the management growing the size of the moat? Or is the moat shrinking? Great businesses are not all that common, and finding them is hard. Unusual factors combine to create the moats that shelter certain companies from some of the rigors of competition. Warren is superb at recognizing these franchises.

Warren installs strong managers in the companies Berkshire owns and tends to leave them pretty much alone. His basic proposition to managers is that to the degree that a company spins off cash, which good businesses do, the managers can trust Warren to invest it wisely. He doesn’t encourage managers to diversify. Managers are expected to concentrate on the businesses they know well so that Warren is free to concentrate on what he does well: investing.

My own reaction upon meeting Warren took me by surprise. Whenever somebody says to me, “Meet so-and-so; he’s the smartest guy ever” or “You’ve got to meet my friend so-and-so; he’s the best at such and such,” my defenses go up. Most people are quick to conclude that someone or something they encounter personally is exceptional. This is just human nature. Everybody wants to know someone or something superlative. As a result, people overestimate the merit of that to which they’ve been exposed. So the fact that people called Warren Buffett unique didn’t impress me much.

In fact, I was extremely skeptical when my mother suggested I take a day away from work to meet him on July 5, 1991. What were he and I supposed to talk about, P/E ratios? I mean, spend all day with a guy who just picks stocks? Especially when there’s lots of work to do? Are you kidding?

I said to my mom, “I’m working on July fifth. We’re really busy. I am sorry.”
She said, “Kay Graham will be there.”

Now, that caught my attention. I had never met Graham, but I was impressed with how well she had run the Washington Post Company and by her newspaper’s role in political history. As it happened, Kay and Warren had been great friends for years, and one of Warren’s shrewdest investments was in Post stock. Kay, Warren, and a couple of prominent journalists happened to be in the Seattle area together, and owing to an unusual circumstance they all squeezed into a little car that morning for a long drive to my family’s weekend home, which is a couple of hours outside the city. Some of the people in the car were as skeptical as I was. “We’re going to spend the whole day at these people’s house?” someone in the cramped car asked. “What are we going to do all day?”

My mom was really hard core that I come. “I’ll stay a couple of hours, and then I’m going back,” I told her.

When I arrived, Warren and I began talking about how the newspaper business was being changed by the arrival of retailers who did less advertising. Then he started asking me about IBM: “If you were building IBM from scratch, how would it look different? What are the growth businesses for IBM? What has changed for them?”

He asked good questions and told educational stories. There’s nothing I like so much as learning, and I had never met anyone who thought about business in such a clear way. On that first day, he introduced me to an intriguing analytic exercise that he does. He’ll choose a year—say, 1970—and examine the ten highest market-capitalization companies from around then. Then he’ll go forward to 1990 and look at how those companies fared. His enthusiasm for the exercise was contagious. I stayed the whole day, and before he drove off with his friends, I even agreed to fly out to Nebraska to watch a football game with him.

When you are with Warren, you can tell how much he loves his work. It comes across in many ways. When he explains stuff, it’s never “Hey, I’m smart about this and I’m going to impress you.” It’s more like “This is so interesting and it’s actually very simple. I’ll just explain it to you and you’ll realize how dumb it was that it took me a long time to figure it out.” And when he shares it with you, using his keen sense of humor to help make the point, it does seem simple.

Warren and I have the most fun when we’re taking the same data that everybody else has and coming up with new ways of looking at them that are both novel and, in a sense, obvious. Each of us tries to do this all the time for our respective companies, but it’s particularly enjoyable and stimulating to discuss these insights with each other.

We are quite candid and not at all adversarial. Our business interests don’t overlap much, although his printed World Book Encyclopedia competes with my electronic Microsoft Encarta. Warren stays away from technology companies because he likes investments in which he can predict winners a decade in advance—an almost impossible feat when it comes to technology. Unfortunately for Warren, the world of technology knows no boundaries. Over time, most business assets will be affected by technology’s broad reach—although Gillette, Coca-Cola, and See’s should be safe.
One area in which we do joust now and then is mathematics. Once Warren presented me with four unusual dice, each with a unique combination of numbers (from 0 to 12) on its sides. He proposed that we each choose one of the dice, discard the third and fourth, and wager on who would roll the highest number most often. He graciously offered to let me choose my die first.

“Okay,” Warren said, “because you get to pick first, what kind of odds will you give me?”

I knew something was up. “Let me look at those dice,” I said.

After studying the numbers on their faces for a moment, I said, “This is a losing proposition. You choose first.”

Once he chose a die, it took me a couple of minutes to figure out which of the three remaining dice to choose in response. Because of the careful selection of the numbers on each die, they were nontransitive. Each of the four dice could be beaten by one of the others: die A would tend to beat die B, die B would tend to beat die C, die C would tend to beat die D, and die D would tend to beat die A. This meant that there was no winning first choice of a die, only a winning second choice. It was counterintuitive, like a lot of things in the business world.

Warren is great with numbers, and I love math, too. But being good with numbers doesn’t necessarily correlate with being a good investor. Warren doesn’t outperform other investors because he computes odds better. That’s not it at all. Warren never makes an investment where the difference between doing it and not doing it relies on the second digit of computation. He doesn’t invest—take a swing of the bat—unless the opportunity appears unbelievably good.

One habit of Warren’s that I admire is that he keeps his schedule free of meetings. He’s good at saying no to things. He knows what he likes to do—and what he does, he does unbelievably well. He likes to sit in his office and read and think. There are a few things he’ll do beyond that, but not many. One point that Lowenstein makes that is absolutely true is that Warren is a creature of habit. He grew up in Omaha, and he wants to stay in Omaha. He has gotten to know a certain set of people, and he’d like to spend time with those people. He’s not a person who seeks out exotic new things. Warren, who just turned 65, still lives in the Omaha house he bought for himself at age 27.

His affinity for routine extends to his investment practices, too. Warren sticks to companies that he is comfortable with. He doesn’t do much investing outside the United States. There are a few companies that he has decided are great long-term investments. And despite the self-evident mathematics that there must be a price that fully anticipates all the good work that those companies will do in the future, he just won’t sell their stock no matter what the price is. I think his reluctance to sell is more philosophical than optimization driven, but who am I to second-guess the world’s most successful investor? Warren’s reluctance to sell fits in with his other tendencies.
Warren and I share certain values. He and I both feel lucky that we were born into an era in which our skills have turned out to be so remunerative. Had we been born at a different time, our skills might not have had much value. Since we don’t plan on spending much of what we have accumulated, we can make sure our wealth benefits society. In a sense, we’re both working for charity. In any case, our heirs will get only a small portion of what we accumulate, because we both believe that passing on huge wealth to children isn’t in their or society’s interest. Warren likes to say that he wants to give his children enough money for them to do anything but not enough for them to do nothing. I thought about this before I met Warren, and hearing him articulate it crystallized my feelings.

Lowenstein is a good collector of facts, and Buffett is competently written. Warren has told me that the book is in most respects accurate. He says he is going to write his own book someday, but given how much he loves to work and how hard it is to write a book (based on my personal experience), I think it will be a number of years before he does it. When it comes out, I am sure it will be one of the most valuable business books ever.

Already, Warren’s letters to shareholders are among the best of business literature.

Already, Warren’s letters to shareholders in the Berkshire Hathaway annual reports are among the best of business literature. Much of Lowenstein’s analysis comes from those letters, as it should. If, after reading Buffett, you’re intrigued by the man and his methods, I strongly commend the annual reports to you—even ones from 10 or 15 years ago. They are available in many libraries.

Other books have been written about Warren Buffett and his investment strategy, but until Warren writes his own book, this is the one to read.

source : https://hbr.org/1996/01/what-i-learned-from-warren-buffett.
August 14, 2020

Warren Buffett reveals his investment strategy and mastering the market (PART 3).

ANDY SEWER: Right. Why don't we do an update about the Health Care Initiative, which now, the company has a name-- Haven. Was that your idea?

WARREN BUFFETT: No. I didn't worry about a name. We could've gone on as a no-name operation for 10 years, as far as I'm concerned. We've got a wonderful partnership in the sense that it's large and has reasonable market muscle, with more than a million employees among the three of us.

We've got three CEOs that can make things get done and organizations that so are so big that normally, they wouldn't get very bureaucratic. If you tried to do this with many big companies, you'd have legal weighing in and public relations weighing in. We don't have any of that stuff.

They may have them in certain areas, but Jamie hasn't got to worry about doing that sort of thing and neither does Jeff. So we've got a unity of commitment and an ability to execute on the commitment. The only problem is, you've got a $3.4 trillion dollar industry, which is as much as the federal government raises every year, that, basically, feels pretty good about the system.

As we went around talking to people to find a leader for the group, for example, everybody says, the system, it turns out very good medicine. But you can't go from 5% of GDP to 18% without really making you less competitive, among other things, in the world. So everybody thought the system needed some adjustment, just not their part of the system. And that's very human. I'd do the same thing, I'm sure, if I was in the same place.

So there's enormous resistance to change, while a similar acknowledgment the change will be needed. And, of course, if the private sector doesn't supply that over a period of time, people will say, then, we give up. We've got to turn this over to government, which will probably be even worse.

ANDY SEWER: How often do you talk to Jamie and Jeff about it? I know Todd Combs, I think, is your point person.

WARREN BUFFETT: Todd really does all the work. If this works, give Todd 100% of the credit from the Berkshire standpoint.

ANDY SEWER: Does Haven have to buy companies to gain expertise? What do you--

WARREN BUFFETT: No.

ANDY SEWER: What is the plan?

WARREN BUFFETT: The plan is to support a very, very, very good thinker on this subject, who is a practicing physician and who commands the respect of the medical community, to, in effect, figure out some way, so that we can deliver even better care and have people feel better about their care, too. They have to perceive that they're receiving better care over time and stop the march upward of costs relative to the country's output.

We've got this incredible economic machine, but we shouldn't be spending 18% when other countries are doing something pretty comparable in terms of doctors per capita, hospital beds per capita, and all that. The very top stuff in medicine, I think, is very much concentrated in this country, and that's great.

I want us to be the leader, but I think we're paying a price. If we're paying seven extra points of GDP, that's $1.4 trillion a year.

ANDY SEWER: Is the administration focusing-- by focusing on drug prices, is that sort of a rabbit hole? Is that missing the bigger picture?

WARREN BUFFETT: They're trying. And Congress, generally-- I mean, you talk to the average congressmen-- they regard it as a problem. And they see specific instances of drug prices or something like that.

It's a big problem to change. The problem is, it intersects in so many ways. And that's why we've got Gawande heading it, and We've got three bigger-sized organizations backing him. We're not trying to do it to make money. That is not a goal that we end up with some business that we make money off of.

ANDY SEWER: Will he be talking to health insurers, for instance?

WARREN BUFFETT: He'll be talking to everybody. His game plan is not something we're going to try and lay out, because it's in his head, to some degree. I mean, obviously, we selected him by hearing, and reading, and so on what he's done.

But he'll learn as we go. We will conduct certain experiments, or he will, and try out a community, where one of us has a lot of employees maybe. There are various ways to experiment.

ANDY SEWER: Shifting gears, where do you find things like that Abe Lincoln tail-and-leg quotes? Do you read Bartlett's book of quotations--

WARREN BUFFETT: No, I don't read, but probably 50 years ago, I looked at a few Bartlett's quotations. But I read a lot and--

ANDY SEWER: Do you just remember these things and apply them?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, if you're 88 years old, I mean, you ought to remember something. You don't remember what happened yesterday, but you remember the old stuff. You've got a lot of interesting quotations in your head.

ANDY SEWER: Yeah, but not like you do, I think. That's great. OK, so one company you invested in was GE, and you did well with that investment.

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah, I was too early, actually. If you look back, I was very active in the last half of September and early October. And then I wrote that article in later October. And I knew it was going to get bad. I wrote in the article, it was going to get bad.

But I didn't think the stock market would react as much as it did between then and March. So I had, more or less, used up our powder well before the bottom was hit.

ANDY SEWER: That's interesting. How have you avoided not getting back into GE more recently? I mean, I'm sure that they've reached out to. Everyone says, why doesn't Warren Buffett invest in GE, and save it, and take it to the promised land? It's this great American company.

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, actually, I think Larry is actually doing a good job.

ANDY SEWER: Larry Culp?

WARREN BUFFETT: The Danaher. Yeah, Larry Culp at the Danaher is a good sell, and, I think, his priorities are straight. And, I think, he's a very able guy, and he's on the right track. And I'm a I'm a fan of GE's in the sense that we're a big buyer from them. We're a big seller to them. I know them, the managers.

Jack Welch is a very good friend of mine. We don't agree on politics 100%, but we have a lot of fun together, and I love the guy. So I've got a great desire for GE to do well. It just hasn't looked that attractive to me.

ANDY SEWER: You talked about the groves of trees in the letters shareholder. One was the third grove, which was sort of the in-between stakes.

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah, the equity interests.

ANDY SEWER: Yeah. Is it is it the case that those are sort of not the healthiest grove of trees? And why would that be?

WARREN BUFFETT: No, Pilot Flying J is very-- there are companies that, under GAAP accounting, we have the record under equity method. We own more than 20%, but we don't control them. So it's treated under GAAP accounting as a special category. It didn't fit well in the other grove, so I had to make it a separate grove by itself. It's not that significant a grove.

ANDY SEWER: You say that the sum of Berkshire has a greater valuation than the parts.

WARREN BUFFETT: That is true.

ANDY SEWER: Did you ever try to calculate that? How much is that?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, that depends on circumstances. There's some times when the float from insurers can be very valuable. There are some times when the ability to use production tax credits will stay in the utility business, but have been on as part of our consolidated return, helps. But that varies a lot. But it is a plus, and we can move capital.

Take a business like See's Candy, which we bought 40-odd years ago. It's a wonderful little business. It's put us out of capital. We've tried 50 different ways to expand geographically, do all kinds of things. Doesn't work. And we'll try it again, and it won't work. But we can move that capital to help buy BNSF Railroad or do all kinds of other things.

So we've got a seamless and tax-efficient way of moving capital where it's needed. And we've got some companies that really chew up capital, and we've got others that kick it off. And we can move it from one spot-- If you try to do that with your investments, you'll incur some taxes as you go along doing it. It's less efficient than what we've gotten.

TO BE CONTINUED
July 31, 2020


Warren Buffett reveals his investment strategy and mastering the market (PART 1).

ANDY SERWER: Warren Buffett needs little introduction. He's the godfather of modern-day investing. For nearly 50 years, Buffett has run Berkshire Hathaway, which owns over 60 companies, like Geico and Dairy Queen, plus minority stakes in Apple, Coca-Cola, and many others. His $82.5 billion fortune makes him the third richest person in the world. And he's vowed to give nearly all of it away. The Oracle of Omaha is here to talk about what shaped his investment strategy and how to master today's market.

I'm Andy Serwer. Welcome to a special edition of "Influencers" from Omaha, Nebraska. It's my pleasure to welcome Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett. Warren, welcome.

WARREN BUFFETT: Thanks for coming.

ANDY SERWER: So let's start off and talk about the economy a little bit. And obviously, we've been on a good long run here.

WARREN BUFFETT: A very long run.

ANDY SERWER: And does that surprise you? And what would be the signs that you would look for to see that things were winding down?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I look at a lot of figures just in connection with our businesses. I like to get numbers. So I'm getting reports in weekly in some businesses, but that doesn't tell me what the economy's going to six months from now or three months from now. It tells me what's going on now with our businesses. And it really doesn't make any difference in what I do today in terms of buying stocks or buying businesses what those numbers tell me. They're interesting, but they're not guides to me.

If we buy a business, we're going to hold it forever. So we're going to have good years, bad years, in between years, maybe a disastrous year some year. And we care a lot about the price. We do not care about the next 12 months.

ANDY SERWER: But are you surprised at how long this economy has been expanding?

WARREN BUFFETT: I've been surprised by all kinds of things in the last 10 years about the economy. I don't think there was any economist I've ever read that talked about negative interest rates for long periods of time. If you go back and read Keynes, or you read Samuelson, you read any of them, they do not get into a negative rate environment. I think now there's still $11 trillion that's-- of government debt around the world that's at a negative rate.

So we've never seen it before. And we've never seen, at least the conventional wisdom on it, a sustained period of long and growing deficits while the economy's getting better, extremely low interest rates, and really very little inflation. So something different's happening, but something different happens all the time. And that's one reason economic predictions just don't enter into our decisions.

Charlie Munger, my partner, and I, in 54 years now, we've never made a decision based on an economic prediction. We make business predictions about what individual businesses will do over time, and we compare that to what we have to pay for them, but we have never said yes to something because we thought the economy was going to do well in the next year or two years. And we've never said no to anything, because we were right in the middle of a panic even, if the price was right.

ANDY SERWER: All right, so you don't pay much attention to the dismal scientists then, I guess.

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I pay none in the sense of as a guideline to doing anything. It's entertainment. It's like going to a variety show or something like that. But I just don't know of any economist that actually has bought businesses successfully or done well in stocks. Paul Samuelson did. And as you may know, he was a big shareholder at Berkshire.

But it's-- they make guesses. And there's so many variables. In the hard sciences, you know that if an apple falls from a tree that it isn't going to change over the centuries because of anything or political developments or 400 other variables that go in. But when you get into economics, there's so many variables. And the truth is you've got to expect good times and bad times in business. And if you were to buy an auto dealership wherever you live locally or a McDonald's franchise or anything like that, you wouldn't try and time the purchase. You'd try and make the right purchase at the right price, and you'd want to be sure you got a good business, but you wouldn't say, I'm going to buy it because growth this year is going to be 3% instead of 2.8% or something of the sort.

ANDY SERWER: Fair enough. You have over $100 billion of cash at Berkshire.

WARREN BUFFETT: Berkshire does.

ANDY SERWER: Berkshire. Not you. Well, I'm gonna see how much you got.

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah! [LAUGHS]

ANDY SERWER: Maybe you do! Berkshire has over $100 billion in cash. And you say that you always want this company to be a fortress. So how much cash should an ordinary investor have on a percentage basis, do you think?

WARREN BUFFETT: It depends on their personal situation. If you're working in something where you're living off your paycheck from week to week, you want to have a little cash around, and you certainly don't want have a credit card that's maxed out or anything like that. But if your house is paid off, if you don't have big living expenses, you got a portfolio of decent diversified businesses, you don't really need any cash.

ANDY SERWER: So you can be more cash-free than Berkshire is.

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah. Yeah, I've got responsibil-- we've got insurance claims. We could have hurricanes that would happen, all kinds of things, where you might have to pay out billions of dollars. And I've got over a million people that own shares that are counting on me to run the place, so we get through periods like that.

But if I were retired, I had a-- say, a million dollar portfolio of stocks that was paying me $30,000 a year in dividends or something of the sort, and my children were grown, the house was paid off and everything, I wouldn't worry too much about having a lot of cash around.

ANDY SERWER: Let's talk a little bit about Apple. Everyone always wants to talk about Apple, right? It's kind of the it stock, it company. You have a $45 billion stake, more or less. How closely do you follow the company? People are concerned they haven't really introduced any new products.

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, if you have to closely follow a company, you shouldn't own it.

ANDY SERWER: Really?

WARREN BUFFETT: No. If you buy a business-- if you buy a farm, do you go up and look every couple of weeks to see how far the corn is up? And do you worry too much about whether somebody says this is going to be a year of low prices because exports are being affected or anything like that? You buy a farm, and you hold it for-- I've got one farm that I bought in the 1980s. And my son runs it. But I've been there once. It doesn't grow faster if I go and stare at it. I can't cheer for it, more effort, more effort, or something like that. And I know there's going to be some years when prices are going to be good and some when the prices aren't going to be good. I know there's years when yields will be better than others. But I bought the farm.

And it just doesn't-- I don't care about economic predictions or anything of the sort. I do care that over the years it's well tended to in terms of rotating crops. And I hope yields get better, which they generally have. In fact, that farm 100 years ago would have probably produced 30 bushels, maybe 35 bushels of corn per acre. Now on a good year, it'd be 200. We've really made progress in this country. That's one reason commodity prices, go back a couple hundred years, they've moved so little is because we've just gotten better and better at whether it's cotton or whether it's corn or soybeans or all kinds of things. And you and I have benefited from that.

ANDY SERWER: And so Apple's kind of like a farm.

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, it's a long-term investment. If you owned the best auto dealership in town, the best brand, and had somebody good running it, you wouldn't drop by every day and say, you know, how many people have come in today? Or, I think, interest rates are going up a little. Maybe we ought to slow down our sales.

No, you buy it knowing there's 365 days a year. You're going to own it for 20 years. So that's 7,300 days. Things are going to be different from day to day and year to year. You shouldn't buy it if the day-to-day stuff is important.

ANDY SERWER: Let's switch over to talk about buybacks, which is another hot topic these days. And you did a fair amount. If you look in the annual report, you can see that between December 13 and 24, it looks like you guys bought back about $233 million worth of Berkshire, which was right near that particular stock market bottom. How did you know that? What was going through your mind?

WARREN BUFFETT: If I knew, I'd had bought a lot more than 200. That's not a big purchase for us, actually. We will buy Berkshire when we have lots of excess cash, all the needs of the business are taken care of. We spent $14 billion on property, plant, and equipment last year, way more than depreciation.

So we take care of the needs of the business, then we have excess cash. We'd love to do is find other businesses to buy, but if I think the stock and my partner, Charlie Munger, think the stock is selling below intrinsic business value, we will buy in stock.

ANDY SEWER: So it obviously was at that point?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, we thought so, yeah. But what's really intriguing is when it goes down a lot. I mean, when you're buying dollar bills for $0.60 or $0.70, which, periodically, you get a chance to do it in stocks, then yeah, assuming you've the cash, whenever it gets so that some surprise could really take you out in some way. But if we've got excess cash, we'll buy it as fast as we can.

ANDY SEWER: At that point, it'll be more like a 2009 rather than just December of this pay season?

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah, exactly. If you and I own a McDonald's franchise together, and it's worth a million dollars, and you own 50% of it, and you come to me and you say, I'll sell out for $400,000, I'll buy you out.

ANDY SEWER: In my mind, I'd be wary of that for just that reason.

WARREN BUFFETT: You should be, yeah. If you want $600,000, you'll say come back tomorrow.

ANDY SEWER: So just continuing about buybacks, Senator Schumers and Sanders want the government to weigh in to sort of legislate when companies can do buybacks. And then also, there was a report recently about executives doing insider trading, it appears, around the times of buyback. So are buybacks kind of a problem?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, you'll have some people that misbehave irrespective of any activity. That really wouldn't have much to do with buybacks. I think, buybacks, the degree to which they've been part of nefarious activity that I've observed and put a lot of years in are very close to zero. But that just may be that there aren't enough opportunities.

But that article did not-- I didn't follow the conclusion on it. You're distributing money to shareholders, essentially. You can do it by dividends and presumably, American business should distribute money to its owners occasionally. We do it through buybacks. We've done some, and we don't do it through dividends.

But most companies do it through having a dividend policy. And then if they have money beyond the needs of the business, then, I think, if their stock is underpriced, then it makes nothing but sense.


TO BE CONTINUED

July 31, 2020

Warren Buffett reveals his investment strategy and mastering the market (PART 4).

ANDY SEWER: You talked a lot about the tax cuts and the benefits to Berkshire. You didn't really get into the costs of the tax cut, which surprised me a little bit. Are there costs? I mean, is it just free money?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, it makes a difference. The tax cut we get, for example, our utilities, as I mentioned in the report, that goes to the customers. That's just the nature of utility regulation. But net, we were a significant beneficiary from the tax cut.

Basically, let's just say we had one class of stock. We got two. You and I own a business together, and we think we own all the stock. But the truth is, before the tax cut, the government had a 35% share of the stock on income.

Now they didn't have a share of the assets, but they had a share of the income. And if it wanted to change it to 40, it could've changed it. But fortunately, it changed it to 21. And if we had a private business, if we had a McDonald's franchise together or an auto dealership together-- the third shareholder-- that invisible shareholder, the government-- just handed us back a bunch of the shares of stock. And our shareholders benefited, and a lot of other shareholder benefited.

ANDY SEWER: You talked about Ajit Jain and Greg Abel saying that Berkshire blood flows through their veins. Have they made a difference since they become vice chairs? And then are they like Warren and Charlie?

WARREN BUFFETT: No, they don't have the interaction. They each run a separate business. Ajit does not think about the other businesses. He thinks about the insurance business. And Greg does not think about the insurance business at all. And I think about the money and the capital and so on.

They're running two very big businesses. I mean, Ajit's business has, all told, a couple of hundred billion of assets. And Greg's business has $150 billion of revenues. They both would fit up there toward the top 10 or so in the country in terms of value, maybe the top 15. But they're very big businesses.

ANDY SEWER: But they're not exactly like you two guys?

WARREN BUFFETT: No, Charlie and I have a partnership thinking about the whole place, and we've done it forever now, and we still do.

ANDY SEWER: And Todd and Ted? I didn't see them mentioned.

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, they have $13 billion each, including pension funds, our pension funds, that they run. So the $173 billion we had at year end in equities-- well, we had 173, but we had another $8 billion in pension funds. So of the 180 or so, they had 26 between them that they're managing.

They got total discretion on that. They don't ask me. At the month end, I look and see what they did. They don't do much. They don't do a lot of trading or anything. But I look to see what changes they made.

Todd, for example, he made a couple of small investments in private-placement-type operations. And I know what the businesses do, but I can't tell you their names.

ANDY SEWER: Was one of those-- you made this investment in Oracle, and you sold it. Was that something they did?

WARREN BUFFETT: No, that was not something they did. That was something I did.

ANDY SEWER: Yeah, and you said, you didn't understand it. That's why you sold. But than why'd you get it in the first place?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, that's a good question to which I do not have a good answer. I know enough about the cloud to know I don't know enough about the cloud.

ANDY SEWER: Right. OK. So Barclays put out a note. They said they were lowering the estimates for Berkshire for EPS. Do you read that stuff?

WARREN BUFFETT: No. Well, I mean, I may read it accidentally, but I don't seek it out to read. I'll put it that way. It just doesn't make any difference. If I spent time reading that, I wouldn't have the time to read 10Ks. And we're not going to do anything different.

I don't know what we're going to earn. As I put in the annual report-- and I really think this is unique-- we do not prepare financial statements monthly for Berkshire. There's just no other company that would do it. But there's no sense doing it.

I know where the money is. I know how the companies are doing, generally, but what difference does it make? Because I'm not going to try and hit any number for the quarter by having a sale on insurance or doing something even worse. And Charlie, he knows where we stand. And we know what businesses are doing well and which aren't. We certainly know where the money is.

ANDY SEWER: Another one-- UBS survey of Berkshire investors says, the five most important things to them are succession, investment performance, M&A opportunities, share repurchase, insurance margins. Do you read that? Does that surprise you?

WARREN BUFFETT: No, but I don't disagree with that. Somebody understands this.

ANDY SEWER: Your own investors.

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah. Well, that's important. To go back to when I started my partnership in 1956 that Berkshire came out of, there were seven people sitting there at a table having dinner, relatives primarily. And I said, here's the partnership agreement.

It's done under Nebraska law. It's four or five pages. You don't need to read it. But I said, here's a little half page, what I call the ground rules. And I want you to read these, and if you feel OK about that-- about the interaction, what the expectations are, and all of that sort of thing-- then we'll join forces.

And if you don't, it's fine. We shouldn't be partners. If I'm going to have a partnership with somebody, I want to be compatible. And when you have a public company, you can't control who comes in. I can't control some guy comes in and thinks we were going to pay big dividends or split the stock or something like that.

So by my actions and my communications and everything, I want to attract the people from the public market that I want, and I want to keep the others away. Costco was built-- Sal Price, who started the Price Club, I think, he sat down and figured out the customer he didn't want. And he set up a system that would keep away the customer he didn't want.

Who did he not want? He didn't want somebody buying a quart of milk with somebody behind him with a basket of $200 worth of goods waiting for that. So he put in a membership fee. And by putting in a membership fee, he killed all the drop-in business, the business that belonged to the 7-Eleven.

We want Berkshire to keep out people who have expectations about us that are different than ours. Good for them, and I hope they find somebody they fit. But if you're going to run a church, you want your seats to be filled by people that generally want to listen to your form of religion.

And you don't want it to change every week and say, gee, I need a new group. And I'll go out and talk to a bunch of investors and get them to come to my church next Sunday. Because there's only so many seats in the church. There's a 1,645,000 or so A-equivalent shares. And those are the seats, and I want them occupied by people that are on the same page I am.

ANDY SEWER: The Church of Berkshire. Seems like you've got a big weighting in financials. And of course, you finally invested in Jamie Dimon's company. Why banks right now?

WARREN BUFFETT: They're businesses I understand, and I like the price at which they're selling relative to their future prospects. I think, 10 years from now, that they'll be worth more money. And I feel there's a very high probability I'm right. And I don't think they will turn out to be the best investments at all of the whole panoply of things you could do. But I'm pretty sure that they won't disappoint me.

ANDY SEWER: Is climate change changing your insurance businesses?

WARREN BUFFETT: No, it doesn't change the insurance business.

ANDY SEWER: Does it change modeling or something in the business?

WARREN BUFFETT: It would change our insurance business if we were writing 20-year policies. If there was something that changed life mortality adversely to the interests of a life insurance company, you're stuck with a policy for 20 years if you write the life insurance policy. You'll keep paying your premiums if it's adverse to me. That's what's happened in long-term care insurance, for example.

But when you write a policy for one year at a time, see what the developments are. Cars, for example, are much safer to drive than they used to be. There used to be 15 deaths per 100 million miles driven. Now, there's a little over one. On the other hand, they've become much more expensive to fix. That little side view mirror, which used to cost 10 bucks, is now 1,000 bucks or something like that.

So you have things that are changing in terms of, if you're writing collision insurance, you've got to allow for the fact that the windshield, the bumper, all kinds of things, the side view mirror and all that are way more expensive. But if you're writing liability, people aren't going to die as often.

Climate has been changing. But the truth is that you now can buy really big catastrophe limits cheaper than you could buy them in 2005 or thereabouts, allowing for changes in the dollar and concentration of population. So far, rates have come down. That's the reason we've gotten out of the cab business to a great degree.

We were a very big writer of cab business 10 or 12 years ago. We aren't out of the cab business because of climate change. We're because the prices aren't right. And the world will change, and that's got very serious consequences. But it won't change that much from year to year. We've done very well during a period of some climate change.

ANDY SEWER: You've talked about technology advancing faster than our ability to understand it. And I'm wondering if social media, and Facebook, and Google, and Russian trolls coming in, is that maybe an example of that? Are you still worried about that problem?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I think cyber poses real risks to humanity. Forgetting about the problem even of misinformation. I'm just thinking of we have railroads running over 22,000 miles of track. And some of them are carrying ammonia. And some of them are carrying chlorine and things. We have to carry them. We have no choice about that. We're required by law to carry them.

I would rather do that in a non-cyber world than a cyber world. There are all kinds of things-- the problem by something like cyber is that it's moving, and it's just unpredictable whether you'll get some crazy guy, like stuck the anthrax in the-- you know, what they can do becomes magnified. You saw what 19 guys did on 9/11.

Tools in the hands or potentially in the hands of either crazy individuals, crazy groups, or even a few crazy governments are really something. And we don't necessarily know what all the tools they have are, and that is moving all the time. Again, Einstein said, I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. It's a dangerous world.

ANDY SEWER: I don't know if you've following this, Warren, but what do you think of Elon Musk's behavior as a CEO?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I think it has room for improvement. [CHUCKLING] And he would say the same thing. It's just, some people have a talent for interesting quotes, and others have a little bit more of a blocker up there that says, this could get me in a problem. But he's a remarkable guy.

I just don't see the necessity to communicate. I think I've got seven tweets, because a friend of mine signed me up for it. And she's called me about 100 times saying, can I tweet this or that? I said yes to her seven times, I guess, or something like that. I've never actually written one myself. I don't even know how to do it.


TO BE CONTINUED
July 31, 2020


Warren Buffett reveals his investment strategy and mastering the market (PART 5).

ANDY SEWER: Have you talked to Elon ever?

WARREN BUFFETT: He joined the Giving Pledge, so once or twice, but that's a lot of years ago, seven or eight years ago. He hasn't come to our annual gathering, so I haven't seen him for seven or eight years.

ANDY SEWER: So let's talk about this trade war that's been going on a little bit with China. And, I guess, I'd like to ask you, do you think that Donald Trump was right in calling out the Chinese government and, basically, putting them on notice?

WARREN BUFFETT: I won't have any comment on that. In terms of political activity, I don't put my citizenship in a blind trust. So when the election comes around, I'll do something.

On the other hand, people will interpret things I say about any president as, to some extent, coming from Berkshire. And they and they don't come from Berkshire. I'm just an individual. I'd be glad to talk about China, but I can't talk to you about that part of it.

ANDY SEWER: Fair enough. I mean, do you think there was room for improvement, then, in terms of the trade relationship between China and the United States?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I think that China and the United States absolutely are destined to be the superpowers beyond my great-grandchildren lives and will always be competitors and will be competitors in business. We'll be competitors in ideas, all kinds of ways.

There's no other way it would be, and we just have to make sure that competition doesn't get us to a point where we don't realize that the best world is one in which both the United States and China prosper. We do not want to have an island of prosperity and the rest of the world envious of us in a nuclear age. And China doesn't. Russia doesn't.

I mean, we all recognize the dangers of letting competition get out of control. You can be competitors without being enemies. And that's what all powerful nations have to realize over time. It's different than 200 years ago when you could have some dominant country, and then they may have done some things that you didn't like. But it didn't threaten the existence of the world.

You really threatened the existence of the world as we know it if important countries do not constantly recognize that they can compete, they can fight over certain things, but they can't regard it as, essentially, the equivalent of war.

ANDY SEWER: Here's a question from Kevin Chen, who is a Berkshire shareholder and an NYU professor. And he says-- and this is sort of along the lines of what you were just saying, Warren-- but do you think the US and China will be able to resolve their differences or are conflicts unavoidable?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I don't think conflicts are unavoidable. But I think it has to be active thinking on the part of every hugely-powerful country. Russia is hugely-powerful. I mean, 90% of the nuclear arms in the world are between US and Russia.

They have to recognize that the best world for them is one where they don't try and grab all the apples, basically, and we have to recognize that. And we can't-- the United States-- we can't think that either our ideas run the world, or we start getting aggressive about things. And China can't think that. Russia can't think that.

That's obvious. You've got to be sure things don't escalate. We had World War I with an Archduke. You can get chance incidents. I asked one of the presidents one time in terms of what he would do if awakened in the middle of the night with somebody coming to him and saying, absolutely somebody else has launched. Would you launch on that? And you've got 10 minutes to decide. I wouldn't want to have that responsibility. But you want to make sure you don't get to that point.

ANDY SEWER: Right. Right. Would you ever make a big acquisition in China. And if not, aren't you missing a huge portion of--

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah, the answer is, we would. We would.

ANDY SEWER: Have you looked?

WARREN BUFFETT: We've been made aware of some things, yeah.

ANDY SEWER: On the flip side of the coin, are you concerned that the rule of law is different, that the accounting might be opaque?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I'd want to be sure I understood the accounting, obviously. In some businesses, that'd be easier to do than others. But I know the laws, the customs, the accounting, the people better in the United States than any place else. So there's some small hurdle in many countries to get over, which I can get over, but it's just not as easy as looking at something where I already know the answer from previous transactions or something of the sort.

So it it's easier to make a big acquisition in the United States. I'd have to do more work if I'm looking beyond the borders. But I love the idea of doing it. When we made the acquisition in Israel a dozen years ago, I didn't know what the tax rates were there. I didn't know what corporate law. I suspected that it would all be answered satisfactorily, which it was. But I didn't just automatically know it.

ANDY SEWER: It seems like you're more open about doing a deal in China than in previous conversations.

WARREN BUFFETT: I don't think so.

ANDY SEWER: No?

WARREN BUFFETT: No.

ANDY SEWER: It's out there.

WARREN BUFFETT: I'm open. Yeah. We made two decent-sized stock acquisitions there, and that worked out fine.

ANDY SEWER: Those are?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, PetroChina and DYD.

ANDY SEWER: DYD, yeah.

WARREN BUFFETT: DYD was Charlie's. But Charlie's very well-versed on China.

ANDY SEWER: Right. The US trade deficit has been widening and, of course, a lot of that has to do with our trade with China. Is that something that worries you?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I wrote an article about it for "Fortune" and the trade situation many years ago and when our deficit got to be large in relation to GDP. I don't think it's essential to have a trade balance. But I think that, if a trade deficit gets large, and it looks like you have no way out from it, that can be a real problem over time.

You're shipping little pieces of paper to the rest of the world, and they're shipping you goods. People are working making underwear or shoes someplace, and they get little pieces of paper from us. And it gets very tempting, if you've done that enough, to make sure that those little pieces of paper aren't worth very much over time when they want to cash them for something.

We don't have any problem running trade deficits. But if we ran really large ones, and we sort of worked ourselves into a box, where we didn't really have a solution to get those numbers down, it could be a problem. And I wrote about it one time. It's kind of a nice thing, actually. Wouldn't you like to have something where you just send out little pieces of paper, and somebody could supply you with their food?

ANDY SEWER: I'm living it.

WARREN BUFFETT: Right.

ANDY SEWER: Exactly.

WARREN BUFFETT: We call them credit cards.

ANDY SEWER: Exactly. Yes. OK, and last question. China is facing its slowest growth in nearly three decades. The leadership there lowered the targets, I think, to around 6.5%, 6%. Are you concerned about this slowing growth and the impact on global markets?

WARREN BUFFETT: Well, I don't worry about it in terms of global markets. China is going to grow a lot over time. When you think of what's happened-- was it in 1949-- but there's been nothing really like it. You had 20% of the world's population at that time perhaps, and it really hadn't remotely achieved their potential.

They had intellectual capacity. They had decent soil, all kinds of things. And what's happened there is almost beyond belief. And that game's not over, but we've had incredible developments in the United States. Real GDP per capita is six times what it was the day I was born in the United States-- six times. And we thought we were a pretty evolved country then and everything.

My parents wouldn't have believe it. They would have thought, this kid has really got it made being born in the United States. And it was true. We had this tailwind, and China's had a hurricane behind it in recent decades.

ANDY SEWER: In a good way.

WARREN BUFFETT: Absolutely.

ANDY SEWER: Because you were comparing it to the tailwind of the hurricane at their back.

WARREN BUFFETT: Yeah, at their back. And they have found a way of life that is dramatically different than existed for the billion. There was a billion then, maybe a billion, two, or three, whatever it is now. They have changed a country, really, of size that, I don't think, there's ever been anything like it.

We've done it, too, but it took somewhat longer. It was more stretched out. It was a remarkable period, but when you go to-- I first went there in 1995. And then, they regarded it as a miracle. Then I went back 10 years later, and it was a whole different country beyond that.

ANDY SEWER: Warren Buffett, thanks so much for joining us. I'm Andy Serwer. You've been watching "Influencers." We'll see you next time.
July 31, 2020

FAQ Best colleges in the us

Below 25 Best College in the US

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
#1 Best Colleges in America
Graduate Student: Massachusetts Institute of Technology is a fantastic school that offers students an opportunity to explore anything. The staff is second to none and always encourage students to challenge themselves in whatever it is they are passionate about. Walking down the halls, you feel the energy and passion from students. The students at Massachusetts Institute of Technology live and breathe Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. Everyone on campus is there to make the world a better place and that is what makes MIT so special. Everyone is highly intelligent and capable, but it’s the common desire to give back that makes the campus.

Stanford University
#2 Best Colleges in America
Alum: The campus is beautiful to start and provides many beautiful areas for studying or hanging out with friends. The campus is full of amazing resources including the libraries and professors. The academics are definitely challenging, but worth it. Go Card!

Harvard University
#3 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: I just finished my first year at Harvard. I had a rocky transition at first, but I am really loving it! The professors and TFs I have had are all really friendly and accessible, and there is an endless list of classes that I want to take. Conversations with peers are really thought-provoking and deep. You can find so many great communities through different activities, and there are so many great people on campus. Even as a freshman, I have been offered so many unique opportunities that I know come from Harvard's resources. I never thought it could, but Harvard has really become my home this year.

Yale University
#4 Best Colleges in America
Niche User: I really like the online courses from Yale University, you can choose btw a lot of different subjects and get smarter.
And the proffessors are amazing!
This university changed me a lot. Not only do I feel like an expert in my area of study, but I have been taught to write and speak in a much more compelling way than ever before. The university is very conducive to fostering strong friendships among undergrads. I have close networks of friends that I could not have formed elsewhere

Princeton University
#5 Best Colleges in America
Junior: There are great courses offered, and the people coming together here bring a variety of fresh ideas. There are many opportunities to learn valuable and world-changing skills and knowledge. Although there are also mechanisms at play that pull students into archaic ways of thinking, unfulfilling lifestyles, and professions that have a net neutral or negative impact on society. I'd also like to see greater diversity among the faculty and greater embodiment of diversity among the students. It's time for pluralism! Active expression and communal valuing of diversity - not diversity that is only quietly present and not honored for its value.

University of Pennsylvania
#6 Best Colleges in America
Senior: I truly love the University of Pennsylvania. I had an amazing time here and look forward to getting my graduate degree here next year. The highly professional environment and competitive atmosphere pushes students to reach their highest potential and grow beyond it. Penn also encourages students to have balanced social lives, and provides the students with the necessary resources to have their interests be represented within campus and in student groups. However, I must admit that Penn's hyper-competitive environment does have drawbacks, especially on students' mental health. I think Penn could tackle this by changing their grading scheme, especially for underclassmen.

Columbia University
#7 Best Colleges in America
Niche User: I visited Columbia at the end of March with a group and loved the vibe of the campus. Although I want to be as close as I can to or in the city, my ideal college campus needs look like a university setting. NYU, on the other hand, is right in the middle of the city and sometimes you can't tell where the buildings are without the NYU flags. I liked Columbia much better in that sense and I personally do not need to vouch for the education standard because we all know an ideal place to go for an intelligent, hard working student. Walking around the main area made me feel like I belonged there!

Duke University
#8 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: Choosing to go to Duke has been one of the best decisions I've ever made. Its campus is BEAUTIFUL; we have lush gardens and there are so many birds here, from towhees to even the occasional hawk. The opportunities here to get involved are almost overwhelming. We have this program called DukeEngage where students go to all parts of the world to work with communities through research and volunteer work. I will actually be going to Costa Rica this summer to help in rainforest restoratuon and conservation through this program!But what I truly love most about this school is its students. The atmosphere here is not competitive but collaborative. I came to Duke feeling insecure about my qualifications compared to those of the other incoming freshman. But never once did I feel belittled or patronized. Students here want each other to succeed, we want to see each other grow and challenge ourselves to improve. Here at Duke, 'Southern Hospitality' is the real deal!

Brown University
#9 Best Colleges in America
Junior: Brown University has been an incredible experience and has allowed me to pursue passions that I wasn't even aware I was interested in! The unique open curriculum allows students to take courses from a broad range of subjects and helps to ensure they find the right area of study. I personally believed I wanted to go into biomedical engineering, however, after taking a variety of classes at Brown in environmental studies, I have switched my major. Every teacher, student, and dean is so incredibly passionate about the work and everyone is constantly striving to be better which makes the University an amazing place and experience!

California Institute of Technology
#10 Best Colleges in America
Alum: Caltech is a very work hard play hard mentality. Academically, it has the most rigorous and intense coursework I've ever experienced. Alumni agree that any job after graduation pales in comparison to the Caltech workload. The professors are amazingly competent, and it's treated as no big deal to take a course taught by a Nobel-prize winner. I would say the classes are very theoretical with an emphasis on proofs, so it's not very industry-oriented (unless you study computer programming). Socially, although there's no Greek life, all students are sorted into one of eight dorm houses, which are essentially fraternities. There are parties, you just need to know where to look for them. The food is terrible, eating out or cooking your own is both cheaper and tastier. The dorms are old, but no major issues. Caltech isn't perfect, but it'll challenge you academically and get you a good job after graduation.

Washington University in St. Louis
#11 Best Colleges in America
Niche User: This school defines that you can not put a price on the education you receive. Every student is driven, focused, and goal oriented, so the competitive environment pushes you just as hard as the professors! The campus is extremely safe and beautiful and the research opportunities you receive are unlike any other!

Rice University
#12 Best Colleges in America
Niche User: I love the community atmosphere. Everyone works together to expand on similar desires. Rice as a whole is a college that fuels specific passions! As a person living with a low-income, Rice is determined to help give me FULL FREE tuition to attend their campus because they see my potential. Rice is very specific in it's majors, and the one thing that may be open for improvement is the expansion of their courses to incorporate and be strong in all degree fields.

University of Notre Dame
#13 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: I love Notre Dame! It's a beautiful place, inside and out. We've got all sorts of clubs, students and academic interests. Personally, I am very pleased with the Mass and Sacrament availability as well as all the Catholic-related activities. Of course, not everybody is Christian; Notre Dame is a home for all. I've already found some solid friends with whom I enjoy spending these cold (and warm) Indiana days. ND meets 100% of financial need; this assistance extends beyond tuition and has allowed me to get the full Notre Dame Experience. Everyone here is passionate about something, and one passion we all share is a love for Notre Dame, Our Mother. Go Irish!

Northwestern University
#14 Best Colleges in America
Alum: Northwestern is a well-balanced school--top notch academics, great arts programs, amazing engineering and science facilities, in a minor city (Evanston) and very close to a major one (Chicago), and even a bit of sports culture. NU students tend to be fun-loving, driven and ambitious, both in their academic and extra-curricular pursuits. It's definitely a work-hard-play-hard atmosphere when you're on campus, and while there is danger in this as you can easily over-extend yourself (and many students do at some point), it makes for a fulfilling four years.

University of Chicago
#15 Best Colleges in America
Alum: It's nice to see that the University has increased campus diversity of financial aid resources for families that will make the campus more diverse in terms of student backgrounds. I enjoyed my time in college housing a lot! Get involved with your house - go on house trips, play intramural sports, take on a leadership position. If you need something - speak up and ask for it! You really can have a say in your university. Don't be shy to speak up and ask questions. The University can only continue to improve with that kind of input.

Pomona College
#16 Best Colleges in America
Sophomore: I'm only a sophomore, but I've gotten involved with research for all four semesters, received internship funding, had expenses for two conferences paid for, was actively involved in an award winning Mock Trial without any experience, and learned how to play the violin through free private music lessons. I've also been able to go to Los Angeles often for endless entertainment, natural beauty, and incredible eats. This place may be tiny, but it is bustling with opportunity. The academic experience is robust, with professors who love to teach and peers who love to learn. The Claremont Colleges add so much depth, and each is distinctive enough to venture out to and seek out new perspective. I had my choice of attending a world-renowned university over here, but I could see the difference in how the undergraduates were valued. The only thing I wish were different was the lack of name brand- Pomona is so unknown by most! Still, if you are willing to work hard, you can go anywhere from here.

Bowdoin College
#17 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: So glad I chose to come to Bowdoin! A very close community where people treat each other with kindness and are excited to learn from their peers. Quality of life is great, with great dorms, food and surrounding area. Classes are challenging but there is very little competitiveness and lots of support for students academically. For a small liberal arts school, there is a very healthy and fun social life.

Vanderbilt University
#18 Best Colleges in America
Sophomore: What I love about Vanderbilt is the commitment to creating a meaningful & memorable experience. Ever since stepping foot on campus - when I was met by my freshman Head of House and the Move Crew - I've been supported and welcomed. I've been encouraged to pursue my interests in and outside of the classroom and attended countless events.

Sometimes it feels like there are too many things to get involved in, especially with the weight of academics on our shoulders, but not everyone experiences this the same way. One of my favorite things is the identity centers like the Women's Center, Black Cultural Center and KC Potter (LGBTQ) Center who provide students with fun and informative programming and the comforts of home. Plus, can you ever go wrong living at an arboretum?
I mean this honestly (but always a little ironically), Anchor Down!

Dartmouth College
#19 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: Dartmouth is simply wonderful. It has such a wonderfully cozy and collaborative atmosphere, which combined with the unparalleled focus on undergraduate students makes it the best college there is. The only thing people should be aware of is that there will be a large number of wealthy students, so be prepared to face some new socioeconomic diversity. Overall, it is such a safe and fun college set in a beautiful part of the country!

University of Southern California
#20 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: Coming to USC was one of the greatest decisions of my life! I'm a first-gen, low income minority coming from Texas who had never visited California before, so you can guess just how big of a difference California was from Texas. I thought I was going to feel overwhelmed and flunk out, but I didn't! In fact, I'm thriving here. The university is very beautiful, the brick and gothic sorta architecture is very pretty and really relaxing. There are so many opportunities and a lot of different majors, so I'm sure you will find what you are looking for. There are a lot of different activities to join, so you will definitely find your group of friends as long you get involved!

Cornell University
#21 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: Prepare to work hard - especially if you're in STEM. As an engineering major my life here is a never ending cycle of attending classes, working in lab, engineering project team related work, doing homework and crashing/going to bed at 1-2AM. It may seem rough to the outsider but if you're coming from a challenging high school (as I did) its a relatively seamless transition and I am infinitely happier here at Cornell! There is constantly something new happening from the range of amazing speakers visiting, cool things your classmates are creating/doing, Ithaca's quirky charm, your eccentric professors , etc... I came here expecting the competition to be intense and thank goodness its not ; there's a sense of general comradery amongst engineers. The motto 'any person, any study' is really true. They have just about every major allowing allotting the opportunity to study a great variety of fields. Fair warning about Ithaca; it gets REALLY cold! Invest in a warm coat!

Georgetown University
#22 Best Colleges in America
Junior: Georgetown University is an incredible university with top-notch professors and academic programs. Professors DO seem preoccupied with their research, but most genuinely care about students. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of the university is connected to how pre-professional it is. This can translated to club culture. People are more focused on getting jobs after graduation than most other schools. This is connected to Georgetown's return on investment, however. Well worth coming!

University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
#23 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: From amazing academics to contagious school spirit, I have loved my first year at Michigan. The universe exceeded all of my expectations. Everyone student is motivated to do their best. This is not only in a classroom setting, but it is in every aspect of their lives. I am pushed by all my peers to try my hardest. Although a large school, the administration truly cares about every student, and there are countless numbers of resources available to help with anything one may need. The social aspect of school is amazing. There are so many different types of people, clubs, and parties, so everyone can find something they like. GO BLUE!

Amherst College
#24 Best Colleges in America
Sophomore: Amherst is simply an amazing institution. The student body here is top notch academically, yet friendly, not cutthroat. The professors are genuinely available, almost 24/7, and have an interest in seeing their students succeed. Make no mistake, the academic environment is rigorous - for the most part the student body is made of of academic "1%-ers," and the pace and expectation is what you'd expect from that.
The town of Amherst is a quintessential beautiful Northeastern college town.
People are super successful coming out of Amherst. The acceptances to top medical, law and other graduate schools each year is mind-blowing. Same with people going into finance/Wall Street.
All in all, Amherst is a magical place to spend 4 years!

Tufts University
#25 Best Colleges in America
Freshman: As a freshman at Tufts, I am constantly blown alway by endless opportunities available to undergraduate students at various academic departments, student-run organizations, and Tisch College of Civic Engagement. Students are here to learn from a wide range of perspectives and always listen carefully to one another to reexamine their thoughts. Even in today's political divisiveness, I find Tufts students relatively open-minded and tolerant to perspectives and thoughts that might be contrary to their own. Furthermore, as a student who plans on majoring in International Relations, I am always struck by how organized the program is here at Tufts. Professors and students are experts in their field, and I can easily see future diplomats and leading scholars in my classroom. There are conferences at the Fletcher school almost every week where leading scholars and researchers come and speak. I love Tufts!

Find More Best colleges in the us
May 26, 2019

FAQ Best colleges in texas

What are the top 10 colleges in Texas?
Best Colleges & Universities in Texas Top Consensus Ranked Schools 2018
Trinity University. 75.5. ...
Rice University. 75.2. ...
Texas Lutheran University. 71.8. ...
The University of Texas at Austin. 71.3. ...
Texas A & M University-College Station. 57.7. ...
Southern Methodist University. 68.6. ...
Texas Christian University. 68.3. ...
Howard Payne University.

Does Texas have good colleges?
Texas A&M University is the oldest institute of higher learning in Texas, opening in Bryan/College Station in 1876. ... U.S. News & World Report ranks Texas A&M as fourth in the nation for best value public schools. Its 19 different colleges house among them 128 undergraduate programs and 268 graduate programs.

What college has the best psychology program in Texas?
Top General Psychology Colleges in Texas Ranked by Quality
The University of Texas at Austin.
Texas A&M University - College Station.
Rice University.
Texas Christian University.
Southern Methodist University.
Southwestern University.
University of Houston.
Texas Tech University.

What are the major colleges in Texas?
Top universities in Texas
University of Texas at Austin (ranked 67th in the world)
Rice University (89th)
Texas A&M University (joint 195th)
University of Texas at Dallas (421-430*)
University of Houston (601-650)
Southern Methodist University (701-750)
Texas Tech University (701-750)
Baylor University (801-1000)

What are the oldest colleges in Texas?
Baylor University
Baylor University, chartered in 1845 by the Republic of Texas, is the oldest university in Texas operating under its original charter. Baylor University purports to be the largest Baptist university in the world, having an enrollment of over 14,000 students.

What is the biggest party college in Texas?
Top party colleges have a vibrant and diverse party scene - they offer fun options both on and off campus and students rate their peers as being fun, friendly, and into partying.
...
University of Texas - Austin. ...
Southern Methodist University. ...
Texas State University. ...
San Francisco Conservatory of Music. ...
Texas Tech University.

What are the cheapest colleges in Texas?
Cheapest Colleges in Texas by In State Tuition
In State Tuition        College Rating
$2,400 In State Tuition 1) The University of Texas at Brownsville Brownsville, Public Not For
$2,400 In State Tuition 2) South Texas College McAllen, Public Not For Profit -

What is the most popular college in Texas?

10 Most Popular Colleges in Texas
Texas Tech University.
The University of Texas at San Antonio.
Austin Community College District.
University of Houston.
University of North Texas.
Tarrant County College.
Houston Community College System.
Texas A & M University.

What is the easiest college to get into in Texas?
Colleges with the Highest Acceptance Rate in texas for 2019
Rank College
1         Wayland Baptist University Plainview, Texas 645 Applicants
2         University of the Incarnate Word San Antonio, Texas 4,149 Applicants
3         Lubbock Christian University Lubbock, Texas 810 Applicants
4         Schreiner University Kerrville, Texas 1,178 Applicants

What is the most expensive college in Texas?
Most Expensive Colleges in Texas by In State Tuition
In State Tuition              College                                                                                      Rating
$46,594 In State Tuition      1) Southern Methodist University Dallas, Private Not For Profit 87
$44,900 In State Tuition      2) Rice University Houston, Private Not For Profit                         98

What is the hardest college to get into in Texas?
According to the study, here are the top 20 hardest colleges to get into in the state of Texas:
Rice University.
University of Texas-Austin.
Southern Methodist University.
Trinity University.
Texas Christian University.
Houston Baptist University.
Baylor University.
LeTourneau University.

What is the largest private college in Texas?
Large and medium size private colleges and universities
Institution                          Founded Enrollment (Fall 2015)
Abilene Christian University 1906 4,427
Baylor University                 1845 16,787
Dallas Baptist University 1898 5,445
Rice University                 1912 6,623

What is the average cost of college in Texas?
The average annual in-state college tuition in Texas was $10,584 for the 2017-2018 academic year. This is $3,528 lower than the U.S. average and ranks Texas in the middle of the pack as the 38th most expensive and 15th most affordable state or district to attend college.

What major is Texas State University known for?
The most popular majors at Texas State University include: Psychology, General; Business Administration and Management, General; Multi-/Interdisciplinary Studies, Other; Kinesiology and Exercise Science; and Marketing/Marketing Management, General.

What are the most popular majors at Texas A&M?
The most popular majors at Texas A&M University--College Station include: Business, Management, Marketing, and Related Support Services; Engineering; Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies; Agriculture, Agriculture Operations, and Related Sciences; and Social Sciences.

Which of these Texas Unis has the better Pre-med program?
Rice U. Votes: 57 39.6%
UT Austin. Votes: 45 31.3%
Baylor U. Votes: 23 16.0%
Texas A&M U. Votes: 11 7.6%
U Houston. Votes: 8 5.6%

Where does University of Texas rank academically?
University of Texas—Austin's ranking in the 2019 edition of Best Colleges is National Universities, 49. Its in-state tuition and fees are $10,606 (2018-19); out-of-state tuition and fees are $37,480 (2018-19). The University of Texas—Austin is one of the largest schools in the nation.

What is a good SAT score in Texas?
Texas State SAT Score Analysis (New 1600 SAT) The 25th percentile New SAT score is 1020, and the 75th percentile SAT score is 1200. In other words, a 1020 places you below average, while a 1200 will move you up to above average

FIND MORE Best colleges in texas
May 26, 2019

How to Effectively Track and Accomplish Your Goals.


When it comes to accomplishing goals, one thing that many people tend to neglect is that, usually, goals must be consistently tracked and reviewed. This article points out the importance of tracking your goals and suggests four different approaches for how to effectively track your goals, according to the different nature of the goal itself. Main thing you can take away from this article is that no matter what type of goals you set, you should always find something to track your progress.

Steps.
1. Effectively track your goals. One of the most common reasons that people don't get to accomplish their goals is that we tend to get distracted, and we lose track of important things that need to be done consistently in order to move forward towards our goals. Maybe you have set a perfectly achievable goal and planned every detailed step, but without effectively tracking your goal and knowing your progress, most certainly you will get discouraged when the first obstacle gets in the way and end up giving up on your goal eventually.
2. Discipline yourself to keep on track to really achieve any goal that is worthwhile until it's accomplished. There are several ways to effectively track your goals.
3. Review your goals regularly, preferably daily.
Keep yourself constantly reminded of your goals by reviewing them at a specific time each day. It can be in the morning, first thing after you get out of the bed. It can be at night just before you go to sleep. Write down all your goals in a notebook, or store them in a computer software. When you review them, envision how accomplishing that goal will make you feel.
Check your current progress, understand what you did to move it forward, find out what else you still need to do. By doing this regularly, you train your mind to become alert to things that are related to your goals, and gradually your mind will automatically guide you to do whatever needed to achieve them.
4. Break down a goal into actionable steps.
Many people tend to easily get overwhelmed by all the things they need to do to accomplish a goal. The trick is to break down a bigger goal into smaller actionable steps. For example, say your goal is to start your own business. There are many things you will need to do. But before spending too much time on thinking about how difficult or time consuming they will be, first break things down a bit. For instance, obviously first few steps towards your goal could be: decide an overall direction or business model, find a right product/service to sell, list requirements to make this product/service work, etc. If any of these steps still looks big, break it down further. Once you break it down to doable steps, all you need to focus on is just one small step. As long as you keep doing these small steps, the completion of the goal will take care of itself.
5. Break down a goal into quantifiable results.
Find a measurable aspect of your goal, and write it down as a number. For example, your goal could be to lose weight, then the number is your body weight. If you want to finish reading or studying a book, the number is the number of pages to read. If your goal is to save money for a dream vocation, the number is the amount of money you put in a bank account. As long as you know what this number is, you will always know your progress. All that's left is just to keep doing things that help you move that number closer to your goal's end result, and stop doing what doesn't change the number.
6. Track a goal by the amount of time you spend on it.
There are certain kind of goals that can't be easily broken down to definitive steps. It is often difficult to find any obvious measurable aspects for their end result. They can be goals, such as, stay in shape, have a peaceful mind, become more fluent in a foreign language, etc. For this type of goals, you can try tracking the amount of time you spend on doing things required by them. For instance, to stay in shape, track how many hours you work out per week. For having a peaceful mind, track how much time you spend meditating, or doing yoga per day. For becoming fluent in a foreign language, track how much time you spend practicing speaking the language per day. So on and so forth.

Community Q&A.

Question : What is your motivation for change?
Answer : My motivation for change is my family. I'm currently married, and we want to start a family soon. I decided to go back to school so that I can have a degree to help open our own business. I want to motivate my children to get an education (college or not). I'm also motivated for change by the thought of being my own boss. Other motivations could include recognizing a problem area in your life, or simply feeling that you're not living up to your full potential.

Tips.
No matter what type of goals you set, you should always find something to track its progress. The benefit of doing this is that you will always know whether you are making progress or not. If you are, you will feel encouraged and become confident that your goal is reachable. If you aren't, you will know immediately that what you are doing isn't working for you, and it isn't moving you any closer to your goal. Then you adjust your plan and find something else to try, until you have found the right way to do things that will eventually achieve your goal.
Setting and achieving your goal shouldn't be that hard once you have learned how to effectively track your progress. All you need to remember is to review your goals regularly, break things down into manageable steps, make it measurable and finally track your time working on your goals. Once you have mastered to do these things, you can accomplish anything you want.
April 26, 2020


How Bitcoin Disrupts the Finance Industry .

Cryptocurrencies and their underlying blockchain technology are being touted as the next-big-thing after the creation of the internet. One area where these technologies are likely to have a major impact is the financial sector. The blockchain, as a form of distributed ledger technology (DLT), has the potential to transform well-established financial institutions and bring lower costs, faster execution of transactions, improved transparency, auditability of operations, and other benefits. Cryptocurrencies hold the promise of a new native digital asset class without a central authority.

So what do these technological developments mean for the various players in the sector and end users? “Blockchains have the potential to displace any business activity built on transactions occurring on traditional corporate databases, which is what underlies nearly every financial service function. Any financial operation that has low transparency and limited traceability is vulnerable to disruption by blockchain applications. DLT is therefore both a great opportunity and also a disruptive threat,” according to Bruce Weber, dean of Lerner College and business administration professor, and Andrew Novocin, professor of electrical and computer engineering, both at the University of Delaware.

Earlier this year, Weber, Novocin, and graduate student Jonathan Wood conducted a literature review on cryptocurrencies and DLT for the SWIFT Institute. Based on this review, the SWIFT institute recently issued a grant to conduct new research on DLT and cryptocurrencies in the financial sector. Weber and Novocin noted that just as disruptors like Amazon, Google, Facebook and Uber built software platforms and thriving businesses thanks to the connectivity provided by internet standards, next-generation startups will build new services and businesses with blockchains. “Many pundits expect blockchain, as a distributed technology, to become the foundation for new services and applications that have completely different rules from those running on hierarchical and controlled databases. Cryptocurrencies are an early example but many others will follow,” they added.

Kartik Hosanagar, a Wharton professor of marketing and operations, information and decisions, pointed out that the financial services sector is full of intermediaries such as banks that help create trust among transacting parties like lenders and borrowers. Blockchain, he said, is a mechanism to create trust without centralized control. “The power of eliminating intermediaries is the ability to lower transaction costs and take back control from powerful financial intermediaries.”

Regarding cryptocurrencies, Hosanagar pointed out that most of the value today is tied to speculative buying rather than actual use cases. But having a currency without a central authority offers “certain unique kinds of protections especially in countries with troubled central banks.” For example, Venezuela’s currency is rapidly losing value. For people who stored their savings in crypto, there was greater protection against such rapid currency devaluations. “Of course, cryptocurrencies have their own instabilities, but they aren’t tied to actions by central banks and that’s particularly relevant in countries and economies where citizens don’t trust their governments and central banks,” he said.

“Any financial operation that has low transparency and limited traceability is vulnerable to disruption by blockchain applications.”–Bruce Weber and Andrew Novocin

Hosanagar expects the first wave of applications to be rolled out in “private” blockchains where a central authority such as a financial institution and its partners are the only ones with the permission to participate (as opposed to public, permissionless blockchains where participants are anonymous and there is no central authority). Applications in the private blockchains, he said, will be more secure and will offer some of the benefits of decentralized ledgers but will not be radically different from the way things work at present. However, over time, he expects smart contracts (self-executing contracts when requirements are met) to be offered on public blockchain networks like Ethereum. “When securities are traded, intermediaries provide trust, and they charge commissions. Blockchains can help provide such trust in a low-cost manner. But trade of securities is governed by securities laws. Smart contracts offer a way to ensure compliance with the laws. They have great potential because of their ability to reduce costs while being compliant,” says Hosanagar.

According to Weber and Novocin, one area ripe for transformation is reaching consensus on important benchmark rates and prices. At present, they point out, different proprietary indexes are used to determine interest rates and the price of many mainstream assets. Blockchain can transform this. “Think of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and the recent scandals involving manipulation of benchmark values when they are controlled by a single entity that may not be capable of detecting false or fraudulent data. Blockchain could provide greater transparency around the process of creating agreed upon reference prices, and allow more people to participate in the consensus process.”

Weber and Novocin expect that in some areas intermediaries will find their roles reduced as blockchain allows for automation through greater transparency and traceability. In other areas, intermediaries will find themselves well-placed to take advantage of changing needs of their clients, as firms will need help to manage the shift to new standards as well as the greater complexity of open and traceable blockchain infrastructure. Intermediaries in areas that could potentially be disrupted, they said, “should get involved with projects seeking to set the standards, so that they can stay informed and position themselves to profit from becoming the leaders in the operations of the new markets that will emerge.”

Kevin Werbach, Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics, and author of a forthcoming book The Blockchain and the New Architecture of Trust,  said that it’s usually not helpful to focus on what aspects of a major existing market will be “transformed” or “disrupted” by new technologies. Important technologies, he said, are far more likely to be integrated into the system than replace it. According to Werbach, while some firms will fail to make the transition and some new ones will take hold, “over the long-run, virtually every historic innovation that eliminated some forms of intermediation also created new forms.”

Blockchain will reduce the massive duplication of information that creates delays, conflicts and confusion in many aspects of financial services, Werbach added. For example, when a syndicate of lenders participates in a loan, having one shared ledger means they don’t all need to keep track of it independently. International payments and corporate stock records are other examples where there are huge inefficiencies due to duplicate record-keeping and intermediaries. “End users won’t see the changes in the deep plumbing of financial services, but it will allow new service providers to emerge and new products to be offered,” said Werbach.

Bumps Along the Way

Angela Walch, professor of law at St. Mary’s University School of Law and a research fellow at the Centre for Blockchain Technologies at University College London, offered another perspective. She said there is a lot of excitement about blockchain as a distributed ledger technology for the financial sector because many believe that it offers a better, more efficient and more resilient form of recordkeeping. However, making use of the blockchain is not as simple as just buying new software and running it. “Blockchain technology is, at core, group recordkeeping. To reap its full benefits, one needs all the relevant members of the group to join the system. This requires collaboration with and across businesses, which is a potentially big hurdle, and may be the hurdle that most limits adoption.”

Governance is the biggest challenge in decentralized organizations, said Weber and Novocin. Members participating in a blockchain-supported financial function may have misaligned incentives, and can end up in gridlock, or with a chaotic outcome. They cite the example of the ‘DAO Hack,’ which was the first prominent smart contract project on the Ethereum network to suffer a large loss of funds. The Ethereum community voted to conduct a hard fork (a radical change to the protocol that makes previously invalid blocks/transactions valid or vice-versa) — reversing the transactions after the hack and essentially refunding the DAO investors. This was in effect a breach of Ethereum’s immutability and it left a sizeable minority of the community bitterly dissatisfied. This group viewed the Ethereum community as forsaking its commitment to immutable, permanent records. They refused to acknowledge the hard fork, and maintained the original Ethereum blockchain, now known as Ethereum Classic (whereas the forked version supported by the Ethereum Foundation is simply Ethereum).

“The power of eliminating intermediaries is the ability to lower transaction costs and take back control from powerful financial intermediaries.”–Kartik Hosanagar

“Distributed organizations serving an open community need to take care to design their governance systems, incentive structures and decision-making processes to create consensus without unduly slowing down the decision-making,” said Weber and Novocin. “Scenario planning or war gaming are worth exploring at the beginning of blockchain projects. Forward planning enables organizations to swiftly respond in a predictable way that is supportive of stakeholders. Publicizing these plans in advance can also build trust and user confidence.”

Cryptocurrency Risks.

Werbach listed a variety of risks and vulnerabilities related to cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin has shown that the fundamental security of its proof-of-work system is sound, but it has major limitations such as limited scalability, massive energy usage and concentration of mining pools. There has been massive theft of cryptocurrencies from the centralized intermediaries that most people use to hold it, and massive fraud by promoters of initial coin offerings and other schemes. Manipulation is widespread on lightly-regulated cryptocurrency exchanges.

For example, roughly half of Bitcoin transactions are with Tether, a “stablecoin” that claims to be backed by U.S. dollars but has never been audited and is involved in highly suspicious behavior. Money laundering and other criminal activity is a serious problem if transactions do not require some check of real-world identities. “There are major efforts to address all of these risks and vulnerabilities. Some are technical, some are business opportunities, and some are regulatory questions. There must be recognition among cryptocurrency proponents that maturation of the industry will require cooperation in many cases with incumbents and regulators,” added Werbach.

Hosanagar cautions that while decentralization offers significant value — and a significant number of miners/validators must verify the transaction for it to be validated — it is still susceptible to collusion. If one or a few companies running lots of miners/validators in a small network collude, they can affect the sanctity of the network. The big risk with cryptocurrencies, he added, is that most activity as of today is ultimately tied to speculation. It’s important for cryptocurrencies to discover a “killer app soon so there is some underlying value created beyond speculation of its future value,” Hosanagar concludes.

The Way Ahead?

Given all these challenges, what is the current mindset in the financial sector towards adopting these new technologies? And, importantly, should one push for wide acceptance and deployment, or is there need for them to stabilize first?

According to Werbach, “It’s not an either-or” choice. Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology in general, he noted, are immature currently. However, there are some areas where they are already able to be deployed effectively. The best way to work through today’s problems, is “to build working systems and see where difficulties arise,” Werbach said. Looking ahead, integration with law, regulation and governance will be critical. Blockchain and cryptocurrencies represent a new form of trust, he added. They will only succeed if they become sufficiently trustworthy, beyond the basic security of the distributed ledgers. “Law, regulation and governance are three major mechanisms to produce trustworthy systems that scale up to society-wide adoption. We need to find ways to address the legitimate concerns of governments without overly restricting the innovations that blockchain technology enables. I’m optimistic about that process over time.”

“We need to find ways to address the legitimate concerns of governments without overly restricting the innovations that blockchain technology enables.”–Kevin Werbach

Walch noted that while there are claims that some consortia are putting ‘blockchain’ systems into production, in many cases it appears that what they are calling a blockchain bears little to no resemblance to the original blockchain technology behind Bitcoin. In many instances, she said, existing shared databases are being called ‘blockchain’ for marketing purposes. “If people do use something they call DLT or blockchain technology in important financial systems, my hope is that they make the decision based on actual capabilities of the tech rather than its widely hyped and generally overstated capabilities,” Walch said. “Permissioned blockchains, which are the variation most likely to be used for financial systems recordkeeping, are very different from public blockchains like Bitcoin or Ethereum. I hope that a more modest and accurate understanding of the actual characteristics of permissioned blockchains sinks in before they are widely adopted.”

Regarding cryptocurrencies or cryptoassets, Walch said that the financial sector’s interest is “less about recordkeeping and more about a new financial asset that it can make money off of.” She pointed out that at present there is no clarity on how power and accountability work in these systems. The ongoing operation of crypto systems and the value they embed and support is reliant on the competence of, and ethical behavior by, unaccountable software developers and validators. “The financial sector believes it understands and can manage the risks of cryptoassets, but I am less certain and worry that hubris and greed are driving the push to create cryptoassets as a real asset class. This has been a bad mixture in the past,” says Walch. “I think it would be more responsible to let cryptosystems exist on their own for a while longer to let more of the kinks get worked out — if they can be; I’m not sure the governance ones can — rather than to rapidly integrate them into the financial system as we seem to be doing.”

“I … worry that hubris and greed are driving the push to create cryptoassets as a real asset class.”–Angela Walch

Conversely, Weber and Novocin feel that the financial industry is cautious about the new DLT technology. According to them, to build confidence in new blockchain systems there needs to be transparency around how the processes work and what the benefits are, and in order to secure adoption, they need to be straightforward to use. “Pundits have drawn parallels to the open source Linux operating system. Although only a few individuals use Linux directly, it quietly runs the vast majority of servers and cloud processors across the world. Similarly, early adoption of blockchain will likely happen in the background of business processes. Companies should get involved now, even if it is just to experiment with the concepts. By gaining familiarity with these new tools, they will be ready as the space continues to develop.”

Weber and Novocin expect that in the next few years, many more businesses will implement private blockchains to improve the transparency and traceability of their financial operations, supply chains, inventory management systems and other internal business systems. Clearer standards will be adopted and a few high-profile projects will emerge. Meanwhile, they said, R&D will continue among the many decentralized blockchain projects to invent more scalable public ledgers whether it be blockchain, Tangle, Hashgraph or something new. “Work is needed on better and more efficient consensus models, whether it be a new form of proof-of-stake or proof-of-work, or something else. There are many established groups, startups, companies and research teams that organizations can join, partner with, or support in order to contribute to research and expand their capabilities.”




Bitcoin (Currency),Bitcoin,Finance (Industry),Industry (Organization Sector),Brad Templeton,Singularity University,Innovation,Internet,Web,Website,Google,Disruption,Technology,Technological,Money,Currency,Gold,Big Think,BigThink,BigThink.com,Education,Educational,Lifelong Learning,EDU

July 16, 2020