We Study Billionaires - The Investors Podcast Network
Dec 20, 2025

A Soulful Journey to Stellar Returns w/ Nima Shayegh (RWH064)

Summary

  • Core Philosophy: The guest advocates a concentrated, long-term approach focused on businesses with durable reinvestment runways and resilient economics, while ignoring macro theatrics.
  • Quality and Roots: Emphasis on qualitative “roots” like culture, customer alignment, and management integrity as causal drivers of future economics over easily measured “branches.”
  • AppFolio (APPF): Bullish case on vertical property-management software with high stickiness, continuous feature expansion, strong pricing power, and a decade of >30% annualized returns despite frequent drawdowns.
  • Carvana (CVNA): Example of an asymmetric opportunity in used car e-commerce, outlining execution history, market scale, pricing dynamics vs. CarMax, the 2022 collapse, and subsequent recovery potential.
  • Themes Highlighted: Vertical Software benefits from referenceability and workflow centrality; Used Car E-commerce leverages logistics integration, pricing, and scale effects.
  • Market Outlook: Volatility and drawdowns are framed as normal and even beneficial for recycling capital, reinforcing staying fully invested in high-quality compounders.
  • Risk/Process: Sell decisions driven by opportunity cost (“love” decisions) rather than fear-based rebalancing; structure and aligned LPs enable patience through turbulence.
  • Overall Perspective: Success stems from humility, alignment, and a calm, reflective process that privileges deep thinking over hyperactive trading.

Transcript

(00:00) Personally, the craft of investing was  the part that I loved. That's how I wanted to   spend the majority of my time. That meant that  the structure had to be exceedingly simple and   free from unnecessary complexity. So, today I run  one portfolio. There's fewer than 10 holdings. I   might find one or two new ideas in a year. (00:23) The rest of the year is spent quote   unquote sharpening the axe. That simplicity gives  you an enormous amount of space for reflection,   to try to think clearly, space to make  long-term decisions without distractions.   Before we dive into the video, if you've  been enjoying the show, be sure to click   the subscribe button below so you never miss an  episode. It's a free and easy way to support us,   and we'd really appreciate it. Thank you so much. (00:52) Hi folks, it's a great pleasure to be   back with you on the Richer, Wiser, Happier  podcast. The conversation you're about to   hear was a total joy for me. My guest is a  high-flying young hedge fund manager named   Nema Shay, who's one of the most talented and  thoughtful investors I've met in recent years.  (01:11) In some ways, this episode is an unusual  one. For one thing, Nemer is still in his 30s,   which makes him possibly the youngest fund  manager I featured on the podcast. Also,   as you know, I've tended to interview a lot  of investors who are already very well known.  (01:32) People like Howard Marx, Ray Dallio,  Bill Miller, Terry Smith, Rick Reer, Chris Davis,   and the like. By contrast, Nema has flown  almost entirely under the radar. As far   as I'm aware, this is the first extensive  wide-ranging interview that he's ever given.   Nemo runs a relatively small hedge fund called  Roomie Partners, which is named after the 13th   century Persian poet and mystic Roomie. (01:54) He works on his own in California,   managing money for a fairly small group of wealthy  limited partners. He's not really focused on   marketing or gathering a huge amount of assets.  Rather, I would say he follows in the tradition   of investors like Nick Sleep and K Sakaria who  really were devoted entirely to the essential   challenge of generating superb long-term returns. (02:20) Nema, much like them, does it by investing   in a very concentrated portfolio, in his case,  fewer than 10 stocks. His approach to investing   also owes a great deal to his mentor, the late  great Lou Simpson, who was one of the most   successful stock pickers of all time. Nema spent  several years working for Lou, who was hailed by   Warren Buffett as one of the investment greats. (02:42) In today's episode, you'll hear a lot   about what Nema learned from Lou, about the art of  long-term investing. I think you'll soon see why   I'm so impressed with Nema and why I regard him as  one of the rising stars of the investment world.  (03:03) He's not just an excellent stock picker,  but also a a really interesting thinker and I   regard him as unusually wise and prematurely wise  both about markets and life. In any case, I hope   you enjoy our conversation. Thanks so much for  joining us. Hi folks, I'm absolutely delighted to   welcome today's guest, Nema Shai. Nema is a very  talented hedge fund manager who runs an investment   firm in California called Roomie Capital Partners  which is named somewhat idiosyncratically after   the great 13th century Sufi poet and mystic room. (03:32) Nema is definitely one of the most   thoughtful people I know in the investment  world and he and I have had several fascinating   conversations privately over the last few years  but he typically flies under the radar so it's   really a rare gift to have him on the podcast. (03:49) It took a lot of cajoling and coaxing   over the last couple years to get him on  the podcast and to have this opportunity   to share his insights more broadly with  you, our listeners and our viewers. So,   Nema, it's lovely to see you. Welcome. Thanks  so much for joining us. Thank you so much for   the invitation. It's a real honor. It It took a  while, but we're here together in the end. So,   thank you. It's great to see you. (04:07) I wanted to start by asking   you about your family background because I  I think it's fair to say that your parents   weren't yearning for you to go to Wall Street or  become a kind of swaggering hedge fund manager,   right? What kind of environment did you grow up in  and how did it shape the person you would become?   Yeah, thank you for the question. (04:27) My parents came to the US,   they came to Southern California following  the Iranian revolution and like many Persian   families of that era, they basically had to  come here and start from scratch. I was the   first generation to be born and raised in the  US. You know, my family is full of intellectual   curiosity. Many people were educators. (04:54) Multiple people have authored books.   You know, my family has a handful of  really talented musicians. Almost no one,   very few people in my family were all that  interested in business. You know, dinner   conversations in my house would sort of migrate  to philosophy or classical music, definitely not   interest rates or the stock market. So, business  was never really part of my orbit whatsoever.  (05:20) And I think that the initial spark of  interest in investing was sort of born out of   insecurity. If anything, I remember seeing how  both the dot bust and the 2008 financial crisis   impacted so many people around me, people that I  loved. And there's this particular discomfort when   you have no understanding for something like that  which is happening and sort of reshaping society.   you don't know why it happened. (05:50) You don't know what's going   to happen and really having just no sense. And  I sort of made it a priority to learn a little   more about this this world. And as I started  to learn more, it really felt like this very   natural extension of my temperament and interests.  And ironically, it's not all that different from   those same sort of dinner conversations that we  were having, which on the surface may have been   about literature or poetry or something like that. (06:22) But really, it was about observing human   nature and understanding human psychology and  sort of seeking the essence of things. What's   the nature of things? You know, trying to figure  out what's really going on. Now, at the same time,   in Persian culture, there's this running joke  that you can be anything you want as a profession.  (06:41) anything you want, any kind of doctor or  engineer that your heart desires. And so when I   decided to become an investor, there really  wasn't much precedent for that. I would tell   that to someone in my circle and the response  would be something like, "So you want to be   like a bank teller?" And I would say, "No, you  know, I want to invest in the stock market.  (07:04) " And you could just see on their face  some concern like I had just confessed to like   a gambling problem. But from the very beginning,  investing was it felt like the ultimate kind of   intellectual adventure. It was this microcosm  where you could practice your discernment and   your creativity and your temperament and your  reasoning and you got this objective feedback   loop which was so appealing. It was incredible. (07:29) It was sort of an amazing thing that   you could professionally pursue your natural  curiosity. So, we were chatting right before   this conversation about your high school years  and that you were a somewhat eccentric high school   student and already very independent spirited. Can  you talk a little bit about that because it seems   like in some way that's something that all of the  best investors have in common is this this kind   of willingness to diverge from everybody else. (08:00) Yeah, it's a little embarrassing when   I reflect on it now, but a little funny as  well. When I was thinking about what led me   to investing, I was kind of playing back  all of these different parts of my life.   And one of the commonalities is that it was  always really difficult for me to buy into   something that my heart wasn't in it fully. (08:21) And I remember on many occasions in   high school, you know, once you turned 18,  I learned that you could actually just go   sign yourself out and you didn't need a  parent note anymore. You could just say   the reason you were leaving and sign your name  and and leave. And so there were many occasions   where I would not be all that interested in  whatever it was that we were studying and I   would sign myself out and I would ditch school. (08:44) And ironically, it wasn't that I would   ditch school and go smoke cigarettes  on the side of the building. No,   I would go to Barnes & Noble and read something  much more, you know, fascinating. And I think   that that natural inclination to go deep in  areas that I was very interested in was a bit   of a foreshadowing to investing for sure. It's  funny, I I was pretty similar at high school.  (09:10) I I went to eaten, right, where, you  know, it was very very disciplined. Like if   you if you showed up late, you were in  trouble and if your work wasn't good,   you got literally what was called a rip. They  would rip the piece of paper and you would have   to show your homework to your housemaster.  And I in my last year, I was only taking   three subjects like English, Spanish, and history. (09:27) And I just decided my history teacher was   boring, so I didn't show up to history anymore. I  just decided I was going to teach myself. And in   some weird way, as a journalist, as a writer,  that's a really useful characteristic. just   say no, I'm going off and doing my own thing.  And so I I think it's one reason actually why   I was really fascinated by great investors is  there is an element of kind of diverging from   the crowd and deciding no, I'm just going to  crack the code for myself. You guys just make   more money than we do (09:53) as writers.   U I'm not sure, but I think it's definitely true  that this willingness to think for yourself was   definitely hammered into me as a child. Not so  much with investing, for sure, but this tendency   to not accept what is the commonly held view or  the mainstream view or what the news media is   talking about all the time or the narrative, but  to try to figure out what's actually going on.  (10:23) And my parents certainly instilled that  in me pretty early. And you went to UCLA and   then studied mathematics and economics. So in  some way there was a part of you that was kind   of very left hemisphere oriented as you've  explained it to me in the past and sort of   convinced that if you could master things  like maths and statistics and economics,   you'd have these skill sets to understand reality. (10:49) And my sense is that you gradually came to   realize that actually comfort in numbers and  logical reasoning and the like was not going   to cut it. Can you talk a little bit about  that evolution? The way that it's actually   come together for me is this idea of branches  and roots. Roomie has this quote that I love   where he says, "Maybe you're searching among the  branches for what only appears in the roots."   And I think that that quote has a  lot of significance for investors.  (11:22) And when I just reflect on the investment  industry broadly, I noticed it both in myself,   but I noticed it in the industry in general.  And it's this idea that if you can just get   more precise, if you can quantify reality, if you  can sort of measure things, the industry today has   swung so far in the direction of quantification. (11:47) And you see it in expert calls and credit   card data and web scraping technology. We have  these extremely powerful tools today that can   measure and try to predict what's going on. But  it's still the case, as it's been for much of   the last century, that almost no one compounds  capital at very high returns for all that long.  (12:11) despite the fancy tools, despite,  you know, having tons of incentives,   despite working really hard, it's just still very  difficult. And so I reflect on this and I wonder,   what is it that we're missing? What is it  that we're missing? What is it that I'm   missing? because I started out as being really  technical and really focused on mathematics and   quantification and everything is about reason  and science and sure but it felt like I was just   lost in the branches and I missed the roots. (12:41) What are the branches and roots as   it relates to investing? So the branches are what  everyone can see and measure. It's last quarter's   margins. It's this week's unit growth. It's next  month's inflation print. You know, it's all of   these quantifiable pieces of information that  are devoid of reality, devoid of context. And so,   what would be the roots? The roots of a business  are all of these qualitative forces that are   causal to the future economics of a business. (13:11) You know, Lou Simpson used to always   say that all investing is figuring out  the future economics of a business.   And that statement might sound easy enough to  just blow right past it, but it actually creates   an extraordinarily high bar. Most investors tend  to fixate on the current economics, the current   branches. They fixate on the present reality. (13:36) But every once in a while, you can get   a really deep sense for what the future economics  of a business might be. And in those cases, it's   usually the case that you have a sense for the  roots. And so, what are the roots? The roots could   be something like the motivation of management,  the culture of the company, the quality of the   product, the alignment with customers. (13:54) None of that shows up on any   spreadsheet. You can't model it, you can't  quantify it, but they're actually the most   real parts of a business. So the question to me  became, if the roots are what truly matter, why   isn't everyone focused on them? And the challenge  from my perspective and actually the opportunity   is that the roots require some intuition. (14:17) So it wasn't all about getting   better at Excel and suggesting that the stock  market investing in the stock market requires   intuition I think makes many people uncomfortable  because it feels subjective and it feels squishy   and it feels you know very hard to communicate.  But it's precisely those qualitative invisible   factors that live upstream from the financials  that everyone else is sort of focused on.  (14:42) As you mentioned, you wrote this  piece, Roots and Branches, and I I think it   was originally a speech that you gave at Columbia,  maybe in our friend Chris Beg's class in 2023,   but then it became a shareholder letter of  yours. So, I I've read it in both places.  (15:00) And um you quoted in there I think  Robert Persik talking about pre-intellectual   awareness and you talked about this ability to  apprehend essence being supraational. Can you   talk a little bit about that sense that it's kind  of suprational? There's something pre-intellectual   in it. It's something I sometimes have talked  about with Chris Beg as well that he has this   sense that we have an embodied ability  to tell whether something is true or not.  (15:28) like when you meet a CEO and you're trying  to decide, do I trust this person? Is this person   actually honorable or not? Yes, absolutely. I  think that in most cases the roots of a business   are too hard to tell. It's not obvious. And I  think the first thing to note is that you only   really want to swing when it's pretty obvious. (15:51) In Buffett's parliament, you know, there's   no called strikes, but there are some cases where  you can know with some confidence what the roots   of a business are. And in Persian, we have  this very old expression that is probably more   than a thousand years old. And it is cheshmed,  which literally translates to eye of the heart.  (16:15) And it's this idea that the heart is  more than merely this organ that pumps our blood.   It's actually a faculty of perception and it's  capable of grasping non-material truths. And   whether we like it or not, we live in a reality  that's qualitative. And seeing with a qualitative   perspective is so important, I found in investing. (16:43) And in terms of the pre-intellectual   awareness, sometimes intuition is framed as this  sort of superpower that you have to develop.   And I think that it's less about developing  or sort of achieving a superpower and more   about clearing away everything that's muddying  or perception. I truly believe that all human   beings have this capability to discern and  perceive non-material qualitative truths.  (17:06) These are things like trustworthiness  and sincerity and ambition and beauty.   These are qualities that you can't model them and  you can't quantify them. You can't measure them,   but there's something pre-intellectual  that can actually grasp and recognize those   qualities when you're in the face of them. (17:29) You had a lovely example of this   when we spoke a couple of weeks ago where  you were talking about the experience of,   I think, going into the mall of a parking lot in  a Tesla in like the full autonomous driving mode.   Can you talk about that a little bit? Yeah,  I mean this is actually quite timely because   or Tesla got an update just this morning and I  was out, you know, testing it. It's version 414.  (17:52) 2 which is the latest update that the  company has rolled out. It's hard to explain what   makes this product special, but overwhelmingly  when I take my in-laws for a ride or my parents   or friends who are not familiar, there's this  kind of moment of awe. And the example that I   was talking about before was that we were driving  to Costco one evening and you know I click the   button in the car and it's navigating through all  of these construction zones and it pulls over for   emergency vehicles and it gets on the highway and  it gets off the highway. I haven't touched the   steering wheel or pedals the whole ride. And then (18:32) it pulls into the parking lot of Costco   and there's plenty of open spaces, but  it decides I'm going to skip these open   spaces and I'm going to go a little further  and see if I can find an even better spot.   And then it just pulls in perfectly and  it stops. It finds its own parking spot.  (18:49) And I'm thinking this is almost  a miracle that this exists. And very few   people I think understand the power of that  technology without having felt had a direct   perception of it themselves. And I think that  that is one example of coming face to face with   quality. There's plenty of other examples. (19:12) I'm sure the first time that we all   touched an iPhone, we thought, "This is some  incredible black magic." and the first time   you got same day delivery from Amazon where you  order a book and it shows up to your doorstep in   two hours. You know, some of these customer  experiences, it's worth just listening to   them because they tell you something about the  quality of what's leading to that experience.  (19:37) You had a lovely word for it that you  mentioned a while back that you and a friend,   an investor friend had talked about the  quality of blowness. Yes. Yes. blown away   is that that experience that I'm referring to and  unfortunately it's not an industry term that you   can quantify one out of 10 but I think it tells  you a lot about the quality of something that   you're encountering and it's anything as simple  as you know your favorite restaurant you have a   perception that tells you when the quality  of that restaurant has either improved or   deteriorated there's something within you  that knows and often times it's emotional   it's physiological we all have this commonly (20:15) held dogma that you're supposed to turn   off your emotions when you're an investor and  I'm not sure that that's that's always right.   Yeah. And it it's very related to both Robert  Persig and Ian McGill talking about left brain.  (20:36) There's a there's a lovely thing I think  you've quoted in one of your letters where Persig   writes about dynamic quality and he describes it  as the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality.   So I I think we have this sense this sense  that there's something there where you know   like my friend the endow would say you know  that quality has its own frequency like you   can tell when you're in the presence of  something usually that's extraordinarily   high quality but yeah it's it's hard to explain  it in spreadsheet terms and and there's something   lovely I think you once quoted something from  Roomie to me where he said something along   the lines of the the soul has been given its own (21:09) ears is to hear things that the mind does   not understand. And so it's it's kind of hard,  right? It's like in the same way that Nick sleep   and quesaria Zach were becoming obsessed with  Persig and I I think I wrote in my chapter about   them that you know on Wall Street it wasn't really  popular to be having all this mystical mumbo jumbo   about motorcycles and maintenance and the like. (21:34) And yet there's something real there that   tends to be I think underestimated  by very leftrain, very logical,   very numbers driven people on Wall Street. And I  think that there's even more to that. You know,   this idea that we should shut off our  emotions as investors, I think is a mistake.  (22:01) In my judgment, it's not so much emotions  per se that get us into trouble. I think it may   be the human ego that really gets us into  trouble. And there's a subtle difference,   right? You know, the human ego is like this  armor that we build that tries to protect us   against the uncertainties of life. It's  the part of us that operates from fear.  (22:25) It's the part of us that, you know, when  we realize how little we actually control in life,   we develop this ego to try to protect ourselves.  It's sort of self-preservation. And when we make   investment decisions from that place, of course,  we will make terrible mistakes because the ego is   what distorts our perception. We already  have this capability to discern quality.  (22:49) We have that cheshmade, but we  develop this egoic perception that kind   of muddies the mirror of being able to  see clearly. It distorts our perception.   And when I look around our little microcosm of  investing, I see this ego showing up all over   the place. You know, it could come in the form  of self-preservation. For example, I can't own   that because it'll make it harder to raise money. (23:13) You know, you hear that all the time. or   I can't sell this losing position because it  will be admitting to my clients that I made a   mistake. And the ego is unable to admit error.  The ego thinks it already knows. So then the   behavior becomes, well, I'm just going to hold  on to this losing position even though I know,   you know, it's not the right thing to do. (23:37) And I think another way that this   egoic perspective shows up in the investment  world is this illusion of control. And I'm as   guilty of this as anyone. You know, early on  as an investor, it was very natural to think   if you just build that perfect spreadsheet  or if you make the hundth customer call,   then you're getting closer to reality. (23:59) And we usually have to learn the   hard way that reality seldom bends to the whims  of our spreadsheet. And all that activity may be   simply masking our inability to just say, "I don't  know what's going to happen. the map is not the   territory. And you know, by contrast, emotion  can be incredibly beneficial to investors. It   might be blasphemous to say, but I don't think  investors are using their emotions enough.  (24:29) You know, in my experience, when you  discern whether the CEO sitting across from you is   trustworthy or not, or whether you've experienced  the craftsmanship of a product, these are all   pre-intellectual. there's a direct perception  and you sort of know it when you see it. Even   subtle emotions can tell you something important. (24:54) What I mean by that is when I reflect on   my ownership of a business, right? Like you've  owned a company for a few years. When you reflect   on just how that feels within you, that can tell  you a lot. When you own something for a few years   and you find yourself becoming more and more  impressed with the business as time has gone on,   that's a signpost by itself because the  normal experience is that you own something   for a few years and the mediocrity of it  just becomes more and more evident and it   just took you a while to figure it out. (25:23) So when you notice that you're   actually becoming more and more impressed  and you notice that emotion within yourself,   that is something to listen to. I think I want to  go back in time a little bit in the chronology of   your career because um in some ways you know you  you started out in a very different place in a   very different kind of environment where you  came out of college having left UCLA and you   got hired at PIMCO which is a very powerful firm  with enormous amounts of money under management.  (25:51) And I think at the time 2014 to 16 when  you were there it was the world's biggest bond   firm and had been co-ounded famously by Bill Gross  clearly a brilliant very eccentrically talented   difficult demanding guy by his own admission.  I was reading an article about him in the   um in the Wall Street Journal today from 2014  co-written by Gregory Zukman and he quoted   gross saying sometimes people will say gross  is too challenging and maybe so I would say   if you think I'm challenging now you should have  seen me 20 years ago so it's a kind of famously   hard charging intense place not the sort (26:26) of place where you would talk about   your emotions and your intuition and about  room and the like and in Zukman's article he   was talking about how people on the invest  team there would literally arrive at 4:30   a.m. and stay for 12, 13 hours or more. (26:46) What was it like as a 22-year-old   kind of new to the business, a kind of  hungry, driven, smart young investor,   and this is sort of so it's so not like a I  mean, obviously they're brilliantly clever,   highly educated people, but it wasn't a sort  of soulful, ruminative, contemplative kind of   environment. And it was sort of the opposite. Yes.  You know, Roomie actually has a quote which is   that all things are known through their opposites. (27:11) So I think in some ways that experience   working at a place with that sort of intensity  was what clarified and sort of gave me a sense   for what I wanted to be doing long term.  And you know the experience of PIMCO I   was very lucky because I was hired there  directly out of undergrad. So I was the   youngest analyst on the team by by some years. (27:32) And it was this intense environment. And   you're right, we would get to the office  4:45, 5:00 a.m. You would have a suit and   tie on. It's usually dark when you arrive  in the office. It's usually dark when you   leave the office. There's this culture  that you're kind of expected to have a   smart sounding cogent opinion on every little  economic development, every little piece of   news that's related to one of your companies. (28:05) And I was so lucky to have had that   kind of experience where you essentially  have an ability to fly around the country   to meet with executive teams as a 22-year-old  to get access to any piece of research. Former   central bankers would come and advise us  on the economy. And so you would think   that we had every possible resource. (28:26) We had PhD computer scientists   that would come, you know, run correlations on  different asset classes. And we had hundreds of   analysts that were flying around the country  to meet with companies and form opinions on   specific securities. You would think that we  would have every possible resource there is   to compound capital at extremely high rates. (28:47) And yet I think six months in I was   reflecting on this and it was a little confusing  to me why people like Warren Buffett and Charlie   Mer and Louis Simpson and the like were able to  compound capital at 20 plus% for decades despite   being essentially a person in a room without  a computer. Whereas we're sitting here in our   very large offices working really hard. (29:13) you know, cortisol is in the air   with great pedigrees and our taon  and we're compounding at, you know,   basis points above the benchmark. Not to say  that that's not an admirable thing to do,   but it just felt like I was missing something in  some ways. Now, I was incredibly lucky that there   were certain people at PIMCO that took an interest  in my development and they really wanted to teach   me how to think about things the right way. (29:38) And so from that perspective,   it was an incredible learning experience and one  that I wouldn't trade for anything. There was a   lovely line I think in one of your shareholder  letters. I just read all of your shareholder   letters over the last couple of days and you wrote  somewhere, why in this age of information overload   where data gushes like a digital waterfall? Is  investment success still so elusive? Why does   Warren Buffett with his egg mcmuffins and bridge  games outperform the armies of well-paid analysts   with six monitors each? which I think gets at  this question that you were wrestling with at  (30:08) PIMCO. Like there's something really  strange about this game, right? That as you   put it in that shareholder letter, you have  these web scrapers kind of predicting weekly   revenues or algorithms discerning the emotions  of people's posts on X and you have every   tool and yet there's something that's missing. (30:27) And we'll we'll talk in a minute about L   Simpson which is sort of the opposite of that. But  what did you conclude about why these incredibly   smart people who in many cases I mean literally  I I think Muhammad El Arian was paid over $100   million a year. Bill Gross was paid over $200  million a year. I mean these were the smartest   incredibly intense people with every resource. (30:51) Why isn't that reflected in outrageous   returns like Warren? I think it's a complex  problem. When I reflect on what is the root   what's the root quality going on here I think  a lot of it has to do with risk aversion and   that's across the spectrum that's not just the  investment products that we were managing it   actually goes into the institutional level it  goes to many of the people overseeing these   institutions there is very little tolerance  for volatility no one wants to look wrong for   any short period of time even if it means that (31:26) your longerterm results will be much   better. There's very little tolerance for  discomfort of any kind. And so the bias and   the incentive structure is to just operate in a  way that will keep the assets. And if that means,   you know, slightly less performance over time,  I think that that's a trade-off that this   industry has has made for better or worse. For  better, you know, it it allows for people with   a different orientation to have better results. (31:57) Yeah. You mentioned somewhere that when   you look at the history of investing,  you see that there were these very long   periods of outperformance for a lot of the  great investors, you know, which are very   uncomfortable, right? They're emotionally very  uncomfortable, you know, whether it was John   Mayn Arcanes or Ben Graham or Warren and Charlie. (32:21) Can you talk a little about that because I   think I think that's one of the things that makes  outperformance so difficult is as as Monai once   said to me you know the most in the most important  quality of a great investor is the ability to   take pain. Yes. I think that studying investment  history at any level makes it clear that over the   course of a multi-deade investment journey, there  will be these large periods of underperformance   and large declines inside of those periods. (32:53) Just glancing casually at some of   the notable investment records of history,  this just becomes quite obvious. You could   look at the 1930s and great investors like Ben  Graham's fund I think declined by 70%. And he   was still making distributions out of his fund. (33:12) And so I think the starting capital was   down maybe 80%. By the end the personal portfolio  of John Maynard Kes I think declined by 80% in   the 1930s and the portfolio that he was  managing at Cambridge declined by like   half. You could go to the 1970s where Charlie  Munger had 80% of his capital in two stocks.   It was Blue Chip Stamps and the New America  Fund and they were both very cheap stocks.  (33:39) But his portfolio declined by more than  half in 2 years. In those two years alone made the   prior seven years of returns I think something  like zero cumulatively. Even Shelby Davis,   I was reading recently, I think his personal  portfolio in the 1970s declined by 60%   because he had margin debt at that time. (34:04) You know, in the last few years   of the 1990s, Lou Simpson himself was 50 or  60 points behind the S&P 500. And that little   stretch of performance actually wiped out like  a decade of outperformance against the market.   And of course, you know, Berkshire Hathway  itself has declined by 50% multiple times   over the years. So, the list goes on and on. (34:28) You know, I'm kind of a a nerd in looking   at these old old records because they fascinate  me. But we know we know that these periods of   extreme volatility and underperformance are just  very normal. So, the question then becomes given   that reality, how should you structure  your environment for that inevitability?   How should you structure your life and your  business and your environment? And what I found is   that when you have a truly long-term orientation,  you start to just have to surrender in some ways.  (35:00) You simply stop engaging with  certain kinds of questions. For example,   will there be a recession next year? Is the market  about to crash? Is AI a big bubble that's about to   pop? Is the US fiscal situation unsustainable and  going to lead to a crisis at some point? These are   all very interesting questions, but over a long  time horizon, they just don't matter that much.  (35:27) And spending a lot of time sort of  ruminating on these kinds of questions has   been an expensive distraction for many people  over many years. As far as I'm concerned,   there will be severe bare markets over time, and  there might be even one or two every decade. I   have found that it's not worth having a lot of  anxiety about when those periods come. It's much   better to just know that they will come. (35:52) There's a story about Lou Simpson   that really was instructive to me about this  and it was his experience in 1987. So he went   into the 1987 period thinking that stocks were  very overvalued and I think many smart people   at that time believed that stocks were very  overvalued. He couldn't find anything to do.  (36:17) So he actually took his portfolio to 50%  cash early in 1987. And you might think this is   incredible. This is you know clairvoyance. What  amazing market timing. And when he reflects on   that period, he sold stocks at the highs  and paid his taxes. And then the market   crashed and he sort of deployed a little more  capital, but the market snapped back so quickly   that he didn't deploy his capital fast enough. (36:48) And so he made the right decision at   the highs, but didn't make the right decision at  the bottom. And this to me was very instructive   because you have to make multiple decisions  correctly to really take advantage. And I   think in his estimation, he thinks that he added  some value net of all of that, but it may have   just been better to remain fully invested and just  roll with the punches. And so that's kind of the   approach that I've taken to thinking about this. (37:11) Just to close the loop on this idea of   your willingness to ignore macroeconomic  prediction, there were a couple of lines   I really like from your shareholder letters  that I wanted to highlight. One of them from   a recent shareholder letter. who said, "One of  the enduring amusements of this profession is   how reliably investors are shaken by  what is in fact a recurring pattern,   right? This pattern of of market meltdowns  and and dips and predictions of gloom and   doom." And you said, "What if we simply chose (37:37) not to partake in the theatrics?" And   I think that's a that's a really important  question just this decision as you put it.   It's a liberating question to to say no I I'm  willing to free myself from geopolitics and   macroeconomics and all all of that. (37:55) And what you said which I'm   quoting because I think it distills an enormous  amount of practical wisdom. You said we are   focused on owning individual businesses whose  long-term reinvestment dynamics are resilient   to changes in macroeconomic conditions. Do you  want to comment on that in any way? I think it   gets at such a profound and essential truth  about investing that if you're you can make   this very conscious decision just to focus on  businesses that are resilient to changes in   macroeconomics rather than saying I'm going to  try to predict what's going to happen. Yeah. I  (38:26) mean I think that this work is it's  almost unnervingly simple. You know the investment   business is really quite simple and at the end  of the day it's about trying to understand the   economic reality of a business and as I said  Lou used to say all the time that it's about   understanding the future economics of a business. (38:54) Now to the extent that the macroeconomy   is going to have a huge impact on the future  economics of this business then it may not be   a great business. To the extent that you  know going into a recession is going to   hurt the business or to the extent that there  will be competitive onslaught at some point   or you know a product might fail for example.  Things can happen in businesses all the time.  (39:17) And I think the idea is to own  specific businesses that are resilient   despite the inevitable sort of turbulence that  life presents. And I think it really simplifies   life to opt out of a lot of these things that  are outside of our control. I want to go back   and talk in in much more detail about Lou  Simpson who's clearly been in many ways the   formative influence in your life as an investor. (39:44) And so you moved to Naples, Florida in   um I think 2016 and worked until 2019 with Lou  at his firm SQ Advisers. And for people who   don't know, who've just heard us mentioning  him, Lou was head of investments for Geico,   this auto insurance company that's now  owned by Burkshire Hathaway completely.  (40:11) And he was there for 31 years, I think,  from 1979 to 2010, and crushed the market over   that period by a huge margin. You recommended  to me a book that I I read a chapter on Lou   yesterday, a book by your friend Alan Banello  on concentrated investing where he talks about   the circumstances when Buffett first hired him. (40:29) Um when Buffett said after meeting him   asked him about his personal portfolio and then  after meeting him said something like stop the   music we found our guy and he later said simply  put Lou is one of the investment greats. This   is from a letter I think that Buffett wrote in  2010. Tell us about what it was like when you   first met Lou because in some ways the culture  that he created was diametrically the opposite   of the culture that you had seen at PIMCO.  And this isn't a criticism of Pimco. It's   just he embodied something very very different. (41:04) Every time I think of Lou, the memory   that always comes is the first time that we met.  And I was in my mid20s at the time and you know   as you mentioned I was working at a more or less  traditional investment firm which was Pimco. And   I remember the energy that I carried with me at  my first job was this sort of over analytical   habit. I had this formality, this intensity. (41:33) And when I arrived in Chicago to meet   with Lou for the first time, I carried a lot of  that energy with me. The context of our meeting   was actually to discuss a company that I thought  he might be interested in. And in my mind, I   imagined this very intimidating investment legend  was going to rigorously cross-examine, you know,   every little detail of my investment thesis. (42:01) And so mostly out of insecurity,   I lugged along with me to Chicago this very  thick stack of research material with charts   and valuations and and everything. You know, I  was ready. I was sort of ready to go to battle   intellectually speaking. And I remember stepping  into the elevator with my suit and tie on and you   know, your heart's beating a little faster  than usual and I lugged along my data points   with me and my my thick stack of research. (42:28) And it's one of those long elevator   rides of where your ears are sort of popping  along the way. And I remember thinking I'm   going to be met by an assistant or ushered  into some kind of waiting area. And instead,   you know, the doors open and it's just  Lou himself standing in the hallway,   very unassuming, no formality, no pretention. (42:52) And he led me into an office that was   really the polar opposite of the office that  I had just been in, you know, the day before.   There were no Bloomberg terminals. There was no  financial TV on. It was like the library of a   scholar, you know, a comfortable chair, couple  piles of reading material and this just very   calm presence that immediately struck me. (43:18) And he looked at me as he led   me inside and he he said, you know, make  yourself at home. Let me make you a coffee.   And I remember that that line just sort  of stopped me in my tracks because here   was someone who had compounded capital at  worldclass rates for decades. Someone who   Warren Buffett had praised many  times over the years and someone   that I had been studying from afar since college. (43:43) You know, my idea of passing time between   classes in college was to pull up an old Berkshire  Hathaway 13F. And in some of those early years,   you could actually scan down and see which  holdings belong to Lou and which holdings belong   to Warren. And so I would sit there at the UCLA  coffee shop trying to reverse engineer why Lou   bought Freddy Mack or Moody's, why he bought Nike  in the early 90s and held it for 20 years or more.  (44:09) And now here he was, this person behind  these decisions, stepping away to make coffee   for a probably visibly nervous 20-some year  old kid who hadn't done anything yet and   who was so early in his compounding journey.  And I remember thinking to myself, you know,   I should be making you the coffee. (44:28) And when he returned,   he didn't launch into some kind of monologue.  He didn't try to assert how smart he was.   He would ask these questions with this very  sincere curiosity and it was this remarkable   receptiveness for someone with his experience  and with his reputation. And you know that   first meeting left such a deep imprint on me  because it kind of opened a window that there   was just a different way of being in this work. (44:56) It didn't have to be this hard charging   zero someum way of operating. This kind of  hyperactive way of operating. Lou carried   himself with remarkably little ego. And that was  so different from the archetype of person that   you typically run into in the investment world. (45:16) You know, the normal experience is that   you come across folks who are very bright,  very hardworking, but for whatever reason,   they insist on puffing up their accomplishments  and telling you all about their most recent   investment win and their assets under  management and all this sort of thing.   And Lou was just so different from this. (45:36) Some of his most extraordinary   achievements would just sort of slip out  accidentally after having known him for years.   He seemed deliberately uninterested in indulging  that kind of self- congratulatory aspect of   himself. He was quick to say, "I don't know. (45:57) " You know, when someone would disagree   with him or challenge one of his beliefs on a  company, he wouldn't get defensive. He would   simply say, "Yeah, you know, maybe you're  right. I should think about that more."   And I truly believe that his humility  was, you know, his lack of egoism was   the reason why he was a good investor, was a  big reason why he was a good investor because   it gave him a clearer perception of reality. (46:21) The one conversation that I ever had   with him, I think I may have told you this  before, this was when I had a Zoom breakfast   with Charlie Mer and a few people like Lou were  on the call and Lou already passed in 2022 was   already obviously pretty unwell, I think. (46:41) And he was so lovely on the   call and it was a very it was a very  strange call because I was told, "Oh,   our homework is going to be to study your book,  Rachel Wiseer, and then we'll discuss it." So,   I'm in this sort of embarrassing position  where it's like, "Oh, here I am. I'm going   to teach Lou and Charlie about how to invest. (46:58) And um there was a moment where someone   turn you know Charlie was very dominant through  the conversation and then someone turned to Lou   and said what do you think of the book Lou? And  Lou was really lovely about it like very very   polite and charming and said how helpful  it is to have stories of great investors   like because we learn through stories.  And then we were talking about Alibaba,   which he and Charlie had just  been buying. And that, you know,   Charlie had been saying, "Oh, I'm all in. (47:16) " And Lou said something like, "Well,   I just bought it yesterday, so it's bound to go  down 50% immediately." And there was something   sort of so self-deprecating about it. Like he  wasn't there to tell you I just bought the,   you know, and I asked him why why did you  buy it? And he was saying, well, you know,   it's a it's a dominant business in a fast  growing country and it's extraordinarily cheap.   But it was funny because it did go down 50%. (47:42) And um in a way it was like very typical   of him that he was so humble and self-deprecating  and in a way maybe it was also a recognition of   the fact this is a really hard game. You are  going to go through these periods where just stuff   happens. Yeah. Absolutely. You know, it brings to  mind a friend of mine offered me a definition of   humility that I think is remarkably precise. (48:08) I think it's the best definition of   humility that exists. He said that humility  is the awareness. It's your awareness of your   utter dependence on all that exists and  your interdependence on everyone around you.   And the opposite of humility, of course, is like a  self-centered perspective. To think that we did it   all alone, that we're the ones in control. (48:34) That clouds your perception. It   distorts your judgment. And this dynamic was  so clear when Lou talked about his portfolio.   When everyone else would pitch their great  ideas, Lou would say things like, you know,   I think the portfolio is just okay. Maybe  it's a little tired. And this is, you know,   this is one of the best investors of all time and   he's just sort of hoham about his portfolio. (48:59) Whereas if you went into the Monday   morning meeting of many large investment  firms, you would hear people pounding the   table on probably mediocre ideas in many cases.  And I think there's something that's objective   about his humility. It allows you to see things  clearly. And his humility wasn't performative. It   wasn't like this inauthentic humble bragging. (49:19) It came from a real awareness in how   little we actually control. And I think  Buffett's line about the ovarian lottery,   I think, captures that spirit so well. We all like  to believe that we are the sole cause of our own   success that things are so deterministic. (49:38) But in truth, you know,   so much of anything that goes right in life in  investing is really just the beneficence of life.   There's a really lovely line also in Alan  Banella's book that I remember seeing before   many years ago from Lou where he said  we are sort of the polar opposites of   a lot of investors. We do a lot of thinking  and not a lot of acting. A lot of investors   do a lot of acting and not a lot of thinking. (50:04) And I'm wondering what you learned from   him about the importance of detaching ourselves  from the noise and distractions and the kind of   casino element of Wall Street. Yes. Lou lived  a pretty balanced life in the years that I knew   him. He would read broadly. He had this amazing  sense of humor. You know, he would make it a   priority to exercise. In the mornings, he would  go for a long walk or he would go for a swim.  (50:31) I remember on one occasion it was  definitely in the middle of the week and I   think the market was open and I think our  portfolio was probably down quite a bit   that day and he just called me up and he said  you know there's this new exhibition at MoMA   in Chicago do you want to go with me and I said  great and we just spent the afternoon wandering   around you know looking at art and you know  this is this is very different from the kind   of experience that you might have at many many  investment firms. You know, I won't claim to have   all the answers about this, but what I do know (51:04) is that if you intend to have a long-term   investment journey and you have surrendered to  a lot of this volatility, I know that if you're   constantly sprinting and you're always wired and  you're reactive to every little data point and   you're just staring at ticks on a screen,  maybe that will help your results for the   next month or two months or six months, but over  the long term, it will completely destroy your   It will destroy your physical and mental health.  It will strain your relationships. And ironically,  (51:36) it will make the investment decisions  worse at some point. And it's sort of perverse   that the harder you push, the harder you try at  investing, the shorter your runway. And in the   end, compounding is all about the number of years. (51:54) And so, I think creating space in your   life is something that I learned from him and  something that's invaluable. So much of modern   investing is preparing a memo or updating a model.  You know, there's so much reactivity. And to his   point, you know, so little time is intentionally  devoted to reflection. And it's not intuitive for   most people to think that going for a walk may  be better for your portfolio than, you know,   adding another scenario to your Excel model. (52:25) Are you looking to connect with   highquality people in the value investing world?  Beyond hosting this podcast, I also help run our   tip mastermind community, a private group  designed for serious investors. Inside,   you'll meet vetted members who are entrepreneurs,  private investors, and asset managers. People who   understand your journey and can help you grow. (52:44) Each week, we host live calls where   members share insights, strategies, and  experiences. Our members are often surprised   to learn that our community is not just about  finding the next dog pick, but also sharing   lessons on how to live a good life. We certainly  do not have all the answers, but many members   have likely face similar challenges to yours. (53:05) And our community does not just live   online. Each year, we gather in Omaha and New  York City, giving you the chance to build deeper,   more meaningful relationships in person. One  member told me that being a part of this group   has helped him not just as an investor,  but as a person looking for a thoughtful   approach to balancing wealth and happiness. (53:27) We're capping the group at 150 members,   and we're looking to fill just five spots this  month. So, if this sounds interesting to you,   you can learn more and sign up for the weight  list at thevesspodcast.com/mastermind. That's   thespodcast.com/mastermind. or feel free to email  me directly at clay@theinvestorspodcast.com. If   you enjoy excellent breakdowns on individual  stocks, then you need to check out the intrinsic   value podcast hosted by Shaun Ali and Daniel Mona. (54:01) Each week, Shawn and Daniel do in-depth   analysis on a company's business model and  competitive advantages. And in real time,   they build out the intrinsic value portfolio  for you to follow along as they search for   value in the market. So far, they've  done analysis on great businesses like   John Deere, Ulta Beauty, AutoZone, and Airbnb. (54:20) And I recommend starting with the episode   on Nintendo, the global powerhouse in gaming. It's  rare to find a show that consistently publishes   highquality, comprehensive deep dives that cover  all the aspects of a business from an investment   perspective. Go follow the Intrinsic Value podcast  on your favorite podcasting app and discover the   next stock to add to your portfolio or watch list. (54:44) You've mentioned in the past that   sometimes your best investment insights feel  like these gifts of serendipity. They're not   always the result of mechanical rigor. But  I remember also you talking to me about the   importance of actually kind of structuring your  life in a very conscious way to give yourself   this kind of spaciousness and lack of noise. (55:07) And you were you were saying that it's   it's not just how you schedule your day and how  much meditation you do and the like. It's also   your choice of who your limited partners are and  your fund and who's on your team if you have a   team or the kind of businesses you hold. Can you  talk a little bit about that? Because it seems   to me this is such an important part of actually  creating a kind of countercultural lifestyle that   gives you a sort of unexpected edge in investing. (55:36) Yes, edge is a funny concept. Maybe we   talk about another time. My view is  that whatever you build, whether it's   an investment partnership or anything else,  it ultimately lives downstream from how you   choose to live and the values that inform that. (56:01) And so I have always tried to ask myself,   what are you actually optimizing for? Because  if what I'm doing is not in alignment with   the answer, my personality is such that  I will not last very long. I'll start to   feel that imbalance internally somewhere, even  physiologically. And in investing in particular,   the power of compounding reveals itself when  you stay in the game for a really long time.  (56:25) Longevity carries most of the freight  here. So for me, the first principle in deciding   what to do was to build the house that  you want to live in long term. You know,   that was really critical. And I can't tell you the  number of times I've seen someone very talented,   you know, lovely person build this sprawling  investment business only to privately resent   a lot of the complexity that comes along with it. (56:52) Less time becomes devoted to the craft of   investing. More time is spent managing people  or fundraising or doing administrative tasks.   For me personally, the craft of investing was the  part that I loved. That's how I wanted to spend   the majority of my time. And that meant  that the structure had to be exceedingly   simple and free from unnecessary complexity. (57:22) The work had to fit my temperament   and you know it had to sort of match your  energy in some sense. So today I run one   portfolio. There's fewer than 10 holdings.  I might find one or two new ideas in a year.   the rest of the year is spent quote  unquote sharpening the axe. You know,   that simplicity gives you an enormous amount of  space for reflection, to try to think clearly,   space to make long-term decisions without  distractions, space to have close relationships   with every one of partners. In more than six  years, we haven't had a single redemption,   which I think is some kind of record for a (58:00) strategy that's sort of flinging   up and down depending on the year. But  it's really a reflection of having found,   you know, so grateful to have found partners  who are truly high quality and are aligned in,   you know, our goals and in our thinking.  There's always an inherent tension, though.  (58:19) It's something that I've been wrestling  with for a long time and it's this idea that if   you can help more people, of course, that's  intrinsically better. It's something I spend   so much time wrestling with because what  greater fulfillment is it than to be of   service to people that you have real relationships  with? It's like the more the marrier. But there's   always this counterbalance to be mindful of. (58:38) And I don't think that you can scale   close real relationships infinitely. The moment  that you stretch something beyond its natural   equilibrium, I think it exacts a payment from  some part of your life, whether it's your work,   whether it's your personal life. (58:58) And stretching something   can dilute what makes it work in the first place.  And it's something that I just continue to think   about. when you founded Roomie Capital  Partners, I I think it was October 2019,   so it's probably a few months after SQ  Advisor closed or after Lou decided to   close the firm and and retire. Do you remember  his advice to you? Cuz it seems like in some   I mean I remember reading that he typically had  something like 8 to 15 stocks I think at Geico.  (59:30) What did he advise you as you  launched your career as a fund manager?   You know, his main advice to me was to focus  on producing results rather than doing a lot   of the things that you're told you should be  doing, like getting a fancy office and putting   together a pitch deck and running around and  trying to raise money from all these people.  (59:53) And I am so grateful that he gave me  that advice because the first couple of years   gave me so much space that I think benefited  both the process but also the relationships   with the people that did invest with me from day  one. I started Roomie not too long before CO and   not too long before another decline in 2022. (1:00:20) And the experience of these these   periods were so serene. You know, not to say that  it's always comfortable to watch your account   balances declining, but it was about as easy as  you might expect because you felt this alignment   across the ecosystem that just made things much  more seamless. And I suspect if I would have   raised a lot of institutional capital out of the  gate that probably some percentage of that capital   would have left during one or these periods. And  maybe that experience would have been, you know,   uncomfortable and you would have felt like you (1:00:50) disappointed people and that sort   of thing. And I think his advice to just  focus on producing a good outcome for the   people who trust you was was wise. That word  alignment seems very central to you. Right.  (1:01:11) I was looking the other day at the  founding principles of Roomie Partners and   and you talked about a a culture rooted in  in alignment and elsewhere you write about   investing in a a small number of exceptional  businesses whose leaders are similarly driven by   a core sense of alignment. I think you're very  aligned in your fee structure as well, right?   Like you have a small management fee that gets  smaller as you get more assets under management.  (1:01:37) So the shareholders benefit from  the growth in scale and you get an incentive   allocation. Basically if you beat a 5% annual  hurdle the compound so it's cumulative. So if   you if you fall behind it becomes harder  and harder to catch up with the rabbit.   And there's a lovely line that you repeat  a lot in your shareholders where you say   I'm wholly uninterested in being rewarded for  simply existing. So you're not trying to gather   lots of assets and then just collect fees. (1:02:01) Can you talk about the importance   of that sense of alignment because I see  it also in the companies that you invest   in that something like Brookfield which  has always been one of your two or three   biggest positions. I remember you commenting once  about how they would invest billions of their own   capital alongside their shareholders capital  if they set up a huge infrastructure fund say.  (1:02:24) So it seems like alignment is a very  central theme for you. Very much. And the concept   of alignment is another root quality that can't be  quantified and it can't be measured. What happens   in the investment world is that we try to set up  rules and huristics to sort of force alignment. So   they'll say, you know, what percentage of the  company does the CEO own? Sure, if they own a   lot of stock, that's great, but not necessarily. (1:02:52) I think for certain kinds of companies,   certain kinds of people, the output doesn't  matter so much. Like, if Warren Buffett owned   a little less Bergkshire Hathaway stock, I don't  think his behavior would change all that much.  (1:03:10) If you gave him some big incentive  plan to incentivize him to compound,   I don't think it would change his behavior that  much. So, alignment is something that I think   it's best done. You have to sort of embody it  first and then the output of that is just the   output. In the case of Roomie, I wanted to  emphasize that this is a performanceoriented   partnership. It's not about raising capital. (1:03:32) It's not about having a good couple   of years. It's about compounding capital for  multiple decades. And I'm thinking in a quite   long time horizon when I make investments.  And what that means is that you also have to   find businesses where the managers of those  businesses have a similar orientation. So if   you can align that time horizon and that sense of  patience and that goal over across the ecosystem,   whether it's Bruce Flat at Brookfield is  thinking about the next 20 years and then   Roomie is thinking about the next 20 years and (1:04:06) Roomie's limited partners are thinking   about the next 20 years. If you can create  alignment across that ecosystem, the odds of   compounding, the odds of a good outcome, I think,  are dramatically improved. How does a company like   Brookfield or Appfolio, which have been two of  your biggest positions since inception, h how do   they embody what you're looking for in terms of  management, but also what you're looking for in   terms of what you call long duration reinvestment  runways? because it seems like a focus on the   potential for reinvestment is always almost like (1:04:43) the defining quality that you're looking   for in a business. I think Charlie said it  best where the longer you hold something,   the closer you will get to the intrinsic  reinvestment return of the business. And   so if you intend to own something for a  very long time, it's imperative that the   business itself is generating high returns. (1:05:09) Not to say that it's generating   high returns on a reported basis, but it has  an ability to reinvest at high returns because   if you're just throwing off cash and you have  to either dividend it out or buy back stock,   it's not intrinsically compounding the business.  So, I'm I'm looking for businesses that have this   intrinsic ability to compound capital over time. (1:05:28) So I basically won't buy things or add   to things unless I'm convinced that the  direction of the future economics. The   direction of the compounding of intrinsic  value is long lived. So that excludes all   kinds of things from the funnel. I tend not to buy  things just because they look statistically cheap.  (1:05:50) these ideas that they seem like  they'll be okay just for the next few years,   but they'll likely face some kind of existential  threat over the next few years. So, I won't buy   a melting ice cube regardless of valuation. I  won't buy bad business models or people that I   don't believe are aligned or talented. Some  people can do this well. Some investors can   do this well. I'm not one of them. (1:06:14) Now, in terms of the long   duration reinvestment, I think something like  Appfolio is a good example of that. It's a   business that sells software to real estate  property managers. And ultimately, the product   is a significant entropy reduction in the real  estate industry. So, it saves property managers   a lot of time. It reduces the need for labor. (1:06:40) It just simply makes their lives easier.   And the product allows you to fulfill many tasks,  whether it's collecting rents or screening new   tenants or scheduling maintenance or executing  a lease. And because it sits in the middle of   all these workflows and the employees at the  property management company are all trained on   this product, it creates an incredible stickiness. (1:07:06) It sort of enjoys this center of gravity   in the real estate market. that stickiness when  you have customers for 10 years, 20 years. In   many cases, many privately held software companies  will take advantage of that stickiness by cutting   costs, by stopping the innovation, by levering up  the balance sheet, you know, jacking up prices.  (1:07:30) But Appfolio's ethos, it sort of  embodies a partnership approach. It's by far   the most customer oriented culture in the market.  And to be in a position like that allows them to   take a much longer term view. So they tend to add  functionality that is impactful for the customer.  (1:07:53) And because they're sitting  in the middle of all these workflows,   they can continuously develop new features  and functionality that's increasing their   potential for pricing power. And as they add  these features, they can charge, you know,   a small sliver of the value created. And as  you grow in the market, the vertical software   business is such that you gain a reputation. (1:08:12) There's what's called referenceability,   which allows you to gain incremental market  share. When someone's making a purchase decision,   they're usually calling over to a friend of  theirs in the industry and saying, "What do   you use?" And they say, "Oh, I use Appfolio."  And so the product becomes kind of the standard   in the market increasingly as you get bigger. (1:08:31) And as long as you're treating customers   well, you have these relationships for a long  time. And so it's really a win-win sort of ethos   and allows them to reinvest capital for the next  decade. It's interesting because they're obviously   very customer focused and not that Wall Street  focused, right? Like that there was a sense I   I think in one of your shareholder letters you  wrote about how they would they would have an   investor day and they wouldn't they wouldn't  webcast it. They wouldn't have a transcript.  (1:08:55) They would have earnings calls and  they would have no Q&A session in the earnings   call. Can you talk about that? cuz it seems  like in the same way that you're having to   be fairly stubborn and obstinate in focusing on  the long term on long-term compounding of wealth,   you're also favoring businesses that are  kind of ornery in saying to Wall Street,   "No, no, we're perfectly happy to suppress  our short-term earnings because we're trying   to build value over time." That's exactly right. (1:09:28) And I think that I may be just drawn   to it because I notice when someone's doing  special, they don't always have to go and and   broadcast it to Wall Street. Now, Folio  certainly fits the bill there. You know,   it's an extremely nonpromotional culture. They  don't provide long-term financial guidance and   that frustrates, you know, sellside analysts  and many other funds because they basically   want the company to do their work for them. (1:09:51) They don't have Q&A on their quarterly   calls as you mentioned. You can listen to one  of their calls. It's like 10 minutes of prepared   remarks and then they say all right thank you very  much see you next quarter and you know people are   left like you know what happened and for that  reason the stock has been largely misunderstood   by the market for years and the shares have also  been closely held by a handful of long-term owners   for a long period of time you know I think at one  point it was more than 50% of the company was held   by people on the inside and that illquidity (1:10:25) and lack of promotionality creates   a situation where the shares historically have  traded with a fair amount of volatility. I was   recently looking back at this and it was  sort of interesting that the company has   been public for around 10 years now and over  those 10 years it's compounded quite nicely.   I think the long-term compound return has  been more than 30% a year for a decade.  (1:10:49) But over those 10 years, more than half  of the trading days of those 10 years were spent   in a draw down of more than 20%. So it's like you  hold this stock that's bouncing around and more   than half of the time you're sort of experiencing  this draw down which I think makes it quite   difficult for people to own something like this. (1:11:13) Can you talk about this general topic of   a willingness to hold stocks for a long time? Cuz  obviously your your fund isn't that old. It's 6   and a half years old, but there are these stocks  that you've held since the very beginning that   I assume you'll continue to hold for many years.  But when you look at a lot of the great investors,   you've written in the past about how, for  example, Ben Graham owned Geico from 1948   or Phil Fiser owned Motorola from 1955 or  Buffett bought the Washington Post in 1973   or Tom Russo bought stocks like Nestle in  1986 or Lou Simpson bought Nike in 1993  (1:11:44) or Charlie I think bought Costco in 1997  and they would just kind of hold. Same thing with   Chuck Akray with his American Tower investment  in 2002. Can you talk about the challenge of   holding exceptional businesses when even the  most exceptional businesses go through these   periods that are pretty awful? Absolutely. (1:12:10) It's something that I like to   spend some of my free time doing, which is to  reverse engineer the great investments of the   great investors. And not just those periods  where things are going great, but I'm really   keen to understand those long stretches of time  where nothing happens and it's hard for you to   sit on your hands and you start to see everything  else going up and you start to think, you know,   my current companies are not doing so well and  you get seduced by greener grass over there.   And I think so much about so much of (1:12:41) holding a business for a   long period of time is to be able to  see what you have clearly. You know,   Roomie has the quote where he says to  be able to look at the thorn but also   still see the rose. And so to have a balanced  understanding of what you have and not to be   swayed by these long periods of underperformance. (1:13:01) Costco is an example that I find to be   quite striking because Charlie bought the stock  I think in the early 90s and he held it until   his death. You know he held it for decades and  within that period you could look and say wow   you know I think the stock has compounded in  the high teens for multiple decades and so it   was a wonderful outcome but there was a period I  think between 2000 and 2010 where the stock didn't   move at all. I think it was basically flat. (1:13:33) And I wanted to understand this   case because it's very few people would  think of something like Costco flatlining   for an entire decade. But really what  happened was that they went into the   late '9s and they were very ambitious. (1:13:53) They thought they could grow   new stores at 10 or 15% a year and their  comps, you know, their same store sales   would grow in the high single digits and all  of that would sort of roll up with operating   leverage. you'd get to mid- teens earnings per  share compounding. And you know, that sounds   great. But what happened is that in the early  2000s, they realized that they sort of overshot   on their ambition and they had to rein it in. (1:14:16) So their store growth went down a   little bit and their same store sales were getting  impacted by a number of company specific issues   including competition from folks like Sam's Club  and Walmart. And the stock declined quite a lot.   And it went from, I think, 50 times earnings  in the late '9s down to 12 times earnings   somewhere in the early 2000s, maybe 2003, 2004. (1:14:38) And very few investment firms would be   able to hold a stock like that for the whole way  because throughout that period, it's so easy to   say, well, Sam's Club is going to come kill them  and this business has low margins. And you can   concoct all of these narratives to shake yourself  out of the position. I once asked Charlie what did   he see that allowed him to own something  like this for such a long period of time.  (1:15:03) And the first thing he did was  actually remind me, don't forget that in   markets where Sam's Club was opening stores across  the street, we were actually cutting our prices.   So you can imagine, you know, the very sharp  Wall Street analyst is doing his channel checks   and looking at what's going on in the stores  and he would find that this business doesn't   have any pricing power because everywhere that  Sam's Club's coming, they're cutting their own   prices. So what kind of good business  is Costco if they have to cut their own  (1:15:26) prices? But of course, these were all  temporary dynamics. And Charlie's answer was   that the product quality was improving,  the management was ethical, you know,   the culture was meccratic. These are all root  qualities that wouldn't ever have shown up in   any spreadsheet or in any fancy research report. (1:15:50) But the root qualities were what allowed   him to own the stock for multiple decades and  never get shaken out of it. Yeah. It's really   interesting. I was reading your account of your  dinner with him, which I think was just a few   months before he passed away at the age of 99  back in late 2023 and I was really struck by   the fact that all of the things he talked about  that enabled him to stay in in Costco for all   those years were really qualitative, right?  So unwavering commitment to customer trust or   employee loyalty or product excellence or ethical  people or a meritocratic culture or whatever. So,   it really reinforces what you were saying (1:16:21) before about trying to look for   qualities that aren't necessarily expressed in  a spreadsheet, but they do exist, but you have   to be attuned to recognizing them. And you said  you said something really nice in one of your   shareholder letters where you discussed this.  You were talking about the difficulty of going   through these periods of stagnation for a stock. (1:16:39) And you wrote this may be precisely why   attractive long-term returns are available  to those with a different temperament,   orientation, and structure. I think that gets  at something really important. You need this   kind of intellectual understanding  of why you want to be patient,   but there is an element of temperament that you  know as Charlie would talk about the ability to   defer gratification that if you don't have that  deferred gratification gene, it's really hard.   But then there's also this issue of structure  that you actually have to have structured your  (1:17:08) investment firms so that your  shareholders will allow you to be long-term,   which I think almost nobody has been able to do  like that. you know, you have like Josh Tarasoft   has like there are you have to be kind of slightly  orary to sort of say, well, I'm just not in the   asset gathering business and so I'm perfectly  happy to sit and just quietly compound money.  (1:17:34) Yeah, it's a really tricky  problem and I think so many of these   questions with investment, they are what's  called a divergent problem. In the 1970s,   there was this gentleman named EF Schumacher and  he wrote a few books that I really enjoyed over   the years. Schumacher himself was actually  a protege of John Maynard Kanes and one of   the books he wrote was called Smallest Beautiful. (1:18:03) Another book that he wrote is actually   called Guide for the Perplexed, which of course  is a homage to the same title by my monities.   Yeah. In guide for the perplexed, she talks about  the difference between convergent problems and   divergent problems. And a convergent problem  would be like one where the solutions to the   question increasingly converge on a single answer. (1:18:29) So the classic example would be how   should we create a two- wheeled humanpowered  means of transportation? And so people will   put solutions forth and increasingly you'll  learn that it's the bicycle and the bicycle   has been the answer the convergent answer  for quite a long time. Divergent problems   are different. Divergent problems are those  where they don't converge on a single solution.  (1:18:49) In fact many solutions become  polar opposites. And the classic example   here would be asking you know how should  we educate our children? And so one group   of people might say,"Well, you should  give the children immense freedom so   they can explore and nurture their own interests. (1:19:07) " And another group of people might say,   "No, you need discipline. You actually need  rigorous discipline and following the rules and   that's how they'll learn." And so at the extremes,  you've created a divergent problem where the   answer to how should you educate our children  is either freedom or discipline. And you're   sort of on two different ends of the spectrum. (1:19:25) And you know, I'm not sure that this   idea is all that new. I think Aristotle said  it best when he said that every virtue is in   the middle of two vices. But so much of investing  sits at this point, you know, to your point about   urgency versus patience, about working hard  versus letting go, about, you know, trust versus   skepticism, concentration versus diversification,  you know, generalist versus specialist.  (1:19:55) All of these these questions, you sort  of learn that you need both and you need them   in some kind of harmonious proportion which only  intuition can tell you, you know, how much of each   you need. And so with something like building an  investment firm, of course, you need some capital   to start. So you can't just go off and start,  especially when you're young in most cases.  (1:20:15) But if you spend all your time doing  that, then your actual investment performance will   suffer. There's this line that needs to be found  between the two. You know, another one is to have   a network versus to be independent. That's another  classic divergent problem that one has to solve   when they're in this investment business. Yeah. (1:20:33) You and I have talked a lot about that   in the past because you obviously spend a great  deal of time or have spent a great deal of time   over the years chatting with friends like  Chris Beg and Josh Tarasoft and the like,   these really smart people about investing. (1:20:52) And there is some crossover in some   of your your holdings and your approach and yet  at the same time I remember we were talking about   Carvana at some point and you said yeah I didn't  tell them I was investing in Carana. Can you talk   about that? Because Covena is a really interesting  example of something where you actually took a   different approach that you do have these  really exceptional long-term businesses,   but then sometimes you'll buy something where  there's tremendous asymmetric upside potential,   but that it's pretty hairy and it's not  something you really want to talk to   people about. So, so again it gets at this kind of (1:21:23) conflict between having a network where   you share ideas and actually being quite secretive  because you don't want people to judge you and you   have to defend yourself. Can you talk about Cavano  through that lens? Yeah. Well, first of all, I'll   say, you know, I'm incredibly grateful to have a  small circle of friends in this work. People that   I respect enormously, not just for their talent. (1:21:46) You know, some are peers, others are   mentors. And having a circle like that can  be incredibly valuable. You know, it gives   you access to thoughtful perspectives.  It can create a healthy intellectual   tension. It sharpens your own thinking. (1:22:03) But like like we were just saying,   like almost everything in investing, this  one there's a paradox to manage. Meaning,   if you rely too heavily on a network, you  risk group think and you risk outsourcing   your judgment. And that robs you of the conviction  that you need when markets become volatile. And I   always think of that that uh old Templeton  line where he says the best performance   is produced by a person not by a committee. (1:22:27) And you know, but on the other hand,   if you isolate yourself completely, you risk  missing important perspectives and you risk   falling in love with your own ideas, creating an  echo chamber. And so I try to live in that kind   of in between place, you know, what in Buddhism  they might call the middle way where you're open   and receptive, but at the end of the day, you're  trusting your own judgment, your own instincts.  (1:22:52) And so one of the most helpful  evolutions on that point is letting go for   me was letting go of what you, you know, might  call investor idol worship. Because when you're   just starting out, it's very natural to sort of  subjugate your own intellect because people that   you respect, you put them on a pedestal  to assume that because they're famous,   because they have a great track record or manage  a large fund, you know, they must know better.  (1:23:17) And of course, it's good to have  enormous respect for those who come before   you. But usually, you have to learn the hard  way that investment judgment is deeply personal.   I notice that all the time, even with people that  share an almost identical philosophy where it's   like we're finishing each other's sentences  in many cases, we still end up disagreeing   all the time about specific businesses and  position sizing and how to weigh certain   kinds of risks with a specific company. (1:23:44) And so investment judgment is   deeply personal and I think Carvana is probably  one uh example of this. You bought it. I I think   you know it had obviously had this amazing  period of expansion and then it got kind of   crushed in I think 2022 and a lot of people  thought it was going bankrupt and the stock   I think fell about 93% before you bought it. (1:24:10) You told me a great story at one   point about someone saying to you, you know, how  do you avoid things like Carvana and having to   kind of keep your mouth shut cuz you were quietly  buying Carvana. talk about the discomfort of that   of like being willing to go buy something like  that. Like what was it that you saw in it that   embodies this kind of this sort of slightly  more speculative part of your portfolio where   you're willing to take things where there's less  certainty and less of a guarantee of excellence?   Yeah, I'll preface this by saying  my preference is always for a large   holding in something where the risk of  impairment is basically deemed remote   and I would prefer the whole portfolio (1:24:50) to just be you can participate   in a tax deferred way in low risk compounding  for many years. You know, that's much better.   But every once in a while, you may find  something where you can have potentially   the same impact as a large successful  position, but even when the position size,   the starting position size is sort of immaterial. (1:25:16) And uh I will occasionally own something   where you have a smaller position and it's deemed  to be highly asymmetric. Warren Buffett has his   rules of investing about, you know, don't lose  money, don't forget, rule number one. And I I   might add in a little addendum in there that says  if you may lose money, just make sure it's not   that much. Make sure it's just a little bit. (1:25:33) And stylistically, I think on this   point, I've learned a fair amount from  people like Bill Miller. And you know,   another good friend of mine is Quincy Lee, who's  done some of this over the years, being able to   sort of migrate in and out different styles.  Even Charlie Munger, when I spoke with him,   he's done this to a certain degree. (1:25:51) He had his large Costco   holdings, but he also, you know, bought  something like Tenico in the early 2000s,   which was a distressed auto supplier. You know,  not a good business, but he was able to buy it   at a very low price and sort of participate  in this big big outcome. In terms of Carvana,   the story there really began when I was working  with Lou because we were shareholders of CarMax   and I think at one point we owned around  5% of Carmex equity and I still remember   being in Chicago, you know, walking down Michigan  Avenue listening to the Carvana Road Show and just   being completely struck by the thoughtfulness and (1:26:29) ambition of this management team. And at   the time, my own sort of investment pallet was not  really geared towards companies that were so early   in their growth, you know, growing hundreds of  percent, burning so much capital. And so I decided   to just watch watch and see from the sidelines. (1:26:52) And over the next few years,   they really executed flawlessly. They extended  into new markets. They turned their inventory   faster. They increased delivery speeds. They  improved profitability and specific cohorts.   They created like an in-house logistical  infrastructure that was vertically integrated   first party and they could create, you know, scale  economics and sort of uh create this much better   customer experience in the used car market. (1:27:18) And while I was working with Lou,   a colleague of mine, Armen, a good friend of  mine, he created this web scraping tool. It   was sort of an early web scraping tool that could  compare apples and apples cars on Carvana versus   cars on CarMax. And it was clear that Carvana was  underpricing the industry by like $1,000 per unit.  (1:27:43) And that's significant for a product  where the gross margins are like 2,300 for   CarMax over the years. And so it felt like  in a market that transacts 30 to 40 million   used cars per year, this business was poised  to compound. It had this long reinvestment   runway and these people were very focused. (1:28:00) And so I watched from the sidelines   as the stock promptly rose, you know, 20 times  in just a few years from there. And then,   you know, in 2022, a combination of bad luck and  misexecution basically brought the business to a   sudden halt. They made this big acquisition.  They took on a lot of debt in order to do it   to sort of finance themselves to sustain  this rapid growth rate. When the mistake   happened and the business sort of turned  the other way, the bonds got down to 30.  (1:28:27) The stock declined by, you know,  90some%. By the time we bought our first shares,   the stock had declined from 370, $370 to 25. And  I think the short interest at the time was 75% of   the free float. So everyone thought basically this  business was going to go bankrupt. And actually,   you know, my timing was not so great  because I bought the stock at 25 and   just a few months later it had gone to  $3.50 or something. So it went down.  (1:29:00) It went down by another 85% or so  after I bought it. And during this period,   I definitely was not talking it up to people that  I knew. I was talking about it. So, I would bring   it up just to talk about it. I wanted to  see if there were different perspectives,   but I didn't want to I didn't want to say that  I liked it and I didn't want to say that I owned   it because there were certain times during  this ownership where the stock would be up   or down 70% in a day because of some headline.  And what I wanted to prevent myself from was   having a lot of inbound inquiries from people. (1:29:32) Even though I want to be helpful,   I knew that it would be challenging for my  psychology to try to respond and defend it would   create commitment bias. And really, I think the  moral of the story is that stocks can do anything   in the short term. You know, literally anything. (1:29:52) And to spend a lot of time trying to   predict if or when they might go down by a lot,  I think has been challenging. I'm curious to   know how you handle the emotional psychological  side of the game of investing particularly as   a very concentrated investor. I think you own  about nine stocks and you'll often have maybe   90% in six or seven of them. And so obviously  there are periods where it's really volatile.  (1:30:15) I mean it gives you more of a chance  to outperform but also more of a chance to   underperform in certain ways. And I mean, your  returns have been excellent since you started   the fund, but you did have that year in 2022  where I think you were down about 42%. And then,   you know, the next year 1%. Yeah. And then  the next year you're you're back up about   70%. And I'm just wondering, I know you meditate. (1:30:35) You always seem to have a reasonably   chill kind of temperament to me. I'm curious how  you actually what you've done in practical terms   to deal with just the sheer emotional intensity  of the game. Maybe it's two things. The first is,   as I mentioned, it's really studying history.  It's recognizing that these periods are normal.   And so when they come, you shouldn't be surprised. (1:31:02) You should just know that every investor   has had their due over, you know, a 30, 40, 50  year record. every investor gets their time. And   so when it came in 2022, it didn't last that long,  but I was mentally preparing for it to last for   five or 10 years. I just knew that every investor  has these periods and so buckle up. You know,   that's what was going on in my mind. (1:31:26) So part of it, I think,   is just intellectually understanding that it's  normal and constantly reminding yourself of it,   constantly reminding your partners of it. It's  easy to become complacent when you notice your   capital accounts just rising, you know, month  after month to think that this game is easy.   And I think that these moments where things are  going really well are an opportunity for humility.  (1:31:48) And when the moments are going poorly,  it's an opportunity for trust to sort of recognize   that this is normal and to trust to trust the  process. In practice, I won't claim to have it   all figured out uh first of all, but I try to find  some harmony between different aspects of life,   whether that's work, family, health, inner life. (1:32:13) That may mean exercising, that may mean   making space for meditation. I think, you know,  my family, which I joked about in the beginning,   has no interest in business, is sort of a  blessing in some ways because spending time   with people that you love who have absolutely  no idea what the stock market is doing can be   great. And those things sound trit, but they  really do restore a sense of perspective and   a sense of proportion to this whole process. (1:32:39) I was very struck also in reading   your shareholder letters. There's a there's  a lovely section in one of them, I think,   about the willingness to surrender in the face  of uncertainty, which is sort of philosophically   very appealing to me because I spend a  lot of my time worrying about uncertainty.  (1:32:55) And um I'm going to quote this because  it's kind of really elegant. You wrote, "Surrender   also demands that we embrace uncertainty.  To surrender is to accept that markets are   fickle and anything can happen year to year. The  unknown cannot be tamed. Attempts to control or   predict it will only drain our limited resources. (1:33:15) There will be years when our portfolio   experiences sharp declines, likely for reasons few  expected, rather than fearing this inevitability.   My recommendation is to surrender to it. And  then you talk about how for you part of the   meaning of surrender is actually to stay  fully invested and not trade around your   core positions and just focus on the quality  of the businesses that you're invested in.  (1:33:36) I think that's such an interesting  insight. I've been thinking about this a lot   recently because I, you know, there's a part  of me that's sort of a pessimist that I always   think of that line from Yates where he says,  "Things fall apart, the center cannot hold.   Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world. (1:33:52) " And I always have this sense   when everything's been going well, oh my god,  it's all going to fall apart. And so there's a   part of me that having ridden this bull market  for the last 16 years sort of keeps thinking,   I really don't want to give back 50%. And then I  the last couple of weeks I've really been thinking   about this partly after a conversation with  Nick Sleep where he said you know just just   don't fiddle William just just leave it be if  if you get back 50% you'll just buy cheap stuff.  (1:34:17) And I'm like yeah why why am I even  worrying like I instead of trying to fight this   thing or predict this thing I should accept the  fact that my entire approach to investing anyway   is built on taking advantage of disruption. Like  why am I why am I bracing with this sense of pain   and fear at the prospect of disruption when it's  inevitable because we live in an uncertain world   and you should just sort of set yourself up to  kind of deal with it and so you'll survive it.   Does that does that raise any thoughts for  you? It's such a great point. The more that  (1:34:48) I've thought about this the point  on surrender I think surrender goes handinhand   with trust in some sense. The reason why  we can all intellectually say that it's   normal to go down 50% but we don't want it  to happen in some ways we don't trust that   we'll do the right thing when that happens. (1:35:10) You know there's a lack of trust   in the self and I think that the experience  in 2022 was illuminating in some ways because   on one hand in 2020 2021 it was as though  everyone's a long-term investor. Everyone   wants to own these stocks for 10 years because  month after month, it's just getting richer and   richer and richer and people are very excited. (1:35:28) But then in 2022, you could just see   the time horizon shrink and suddenly everyone  wants to learn a lesson. Everyone is, you know,   I shouldn't have owned this. What was I thinking?  And in some cases those were true, but in other   cases it was merely a reaction to price action. (1:35:47) And ironically, I think that had we   not had 2022, our returns since inception would  actually be worse. Like if you just took Roomie's   portfolio at the end of 2021 and just rode it  for the expected returns that I thought we were   going to get at that point. It would have been  okay if it was just linear up to the right. It   would have been nice and comfortable. (1:36:06) But I think the opportunity   that a down market gives you is the ability to  coil the spring. You can recycle your capital.   You can sell things that are down 30 40% to  buy things that are down 70 80 90%. And that   actually benefits you over the long run.  And that's why you know Warren Buffett and   L Simpson and so many people over history have  tried to make this point that volatility is your   friend. It's the friend of the investor. (1:36:36) And the hangup I think is that   even if we know that, do we trust our  ability to make the right decision when   that moment comes? And I think if you  trust that when we're down 50%. That   I'll know what to do. Then what's there  to fear? You can just sort of let it come.   Yeah. It's funny because the reality  is I look back to 2008 2009 I didn't   I didn't sell anything. I bought some stuff. (1:37:01) I didn't panic even though I lost my   job in the middle of the period as well. And then  in 2022 I think I I didn't sell anything and I   bought Burkshshire like four times. You know, I'm  not trying to say this in self- congratulation.   It's like more like so why am I so afraid  of like a repetition of pain when actually   I sort of I'm kind of okay in in periods of pain. (1:37:23) I I think cuz I'm sort of to some degree   a pessimist who always sort of expects it and  so I'm positioned to be able to take advantage.   I I don't know. So I mean some of it is just  managing our our own kind of weird psychology I   guess. Right. Absolutely. I think uh managing the  psychology, structuring the environment, you know,   the experience in 2022, I hate to put it this way,  but it really wasn't a big deal. It really wasn't.   It just felt like a normal run-of-the-mill time. (1:37:53) And I remember the day that Carvana   hit $355, I was out on a hike that morning, and  it really just wasn't all that big a deal. Now,   if it was a huge position, maybe it  would have felt like a bigger deal,   but it started out as a smaller position  and I sort of added to it on the other side.  (1:38:13) I added to it at 10 and I added to it  at 40. And so on on the way back the other way,   I I made it a bigger position. This is a  difficult balance to to find, you know,   between sizing something to the point where it  becomes psychologically difficult versus small   enough where you can sleep at night but still have  an impact on the portfolio if things work out.  (1:38:34) You said something very interesting  to me recently when we chatted a few weeks   ago as well where you talked about avoiding  fear-based decisions. You were saying that   you with something like Carana for example  you trimmed Appfolio to buy Carvana and then   later Carvana sores and you trimmed Carvana  a little bit but you were saying because you   are always running pretty much fully invested. (1:38:58) You're not really making fear-based   decisions. You're selling something because  you find something that you love more. Can   you talk about that? Cuz there's a really  interesting nuance there. I think that's not   something we usually discuss. Yeah. Someone  was asking me recently, how do you sell? And   it's the classic difficult question to answer. (1:39:16) And what just emerged was that my cell   decisions are like a love versus fear question.  And suboptimal sell decisions in my opinion are   fear-based decisions which are you know I had a  10% position and now it's 12% that's too big what   if it goes down I'm going to pair it back to 10. (1:39:39) This kinds of thinking happens all the   time in the name of sort of risk mitigation in the  name of rebalancing the portfolio. And if that's   the case you sort of never get the full benefit  of one of these great investments. So what's a   love decision? A love decision is something  where you feel compelled. You feel sort of   called to own more of this business over here. (1:40:00) But because you run fully invested,   you have to get the capital from somewhere. And  it's much more of a positive decision rather   than a negative decision. A negative decision  says, "This is too big. I'm scared. What if it   goes down?" A positive decision says, "I really  need to own more of this because it's so great.   I got to get the capital from somewhere. (1:40:19) " And I think that, you know,   sell decisions come in a few flavors. You  can either sell because you made a mistake,   which happens, of course, from time to time.  You can sell for opportunity cost reasons,   which is what I'm talking about here. There's  opportunity cost of capital. You'd prefer to   own one business over the other. (1:40:38) There's also the sell   decision which comes when something is  sort of egregiously overvalued. Meaning,   you know, you may not make money for a long  time. you may have negative returns for a   very long time from here. I'm not sure that  that has ever happened in my experience over   these first six years. So that that's super  overvaluation. I haven't seen that yet when   I'm studying these specific businesses. (1:40:57) So really I think 80 plus% of   the time it's an opportunity cost kind of a  calculation. I was struck when I was looking   at your letters the other day that you talked  about surfing a couple of times. You know,   you often have these quotes, and there was there  was one quote at the end of your January 2025   shareholder letter from John Katzen, this  great meditation teacher, who said, "You   can't stop the waves, but you can learn to surf. (1:41:24) " And then at the end of your January   2023 letter, you had a quote from William  Finnegan, the great New Yorker writer who   wrote this book called Barbarian Days, a surfing  life, which has a longer quote, but I'll I'll   read it cuz it's kind of cool, where he said,  "Surfing always had this horizon, this fear   line that made it different from other things. (1:41:47) You could do it with friends, but when   the waves got big, when you got into trouble,  there never seemed to be anyone else around."   And then he said, "The waves were the  playing field. They were the object of your   deepest desire. At the same time, they were your  adversary, your nemesis, even your mortal enemy.  (1:42:06) They were your refuge, your happy  hiding place, but also a hostile wilderness,   a dynamic, indifferent world." And I was curious  given that you have both of these quotes about   surfing and that you live in California  like what's the parallel between investing   and surfing and managing a fund that's been  helpful to you to think through? Yeah, I won't   claim to be a great surfer. I love to surf. (1:42:31) I do think that there are plenty of   parallels in surfing and investing. Surfing  really demands a a surrender. This idea that   you're not going to predict what's going to  happen, but you have to sort of be open and   receptive. And you know, I had one experience  actually down in Costa Rica with Chris Bay.   And there was an investment lesson which came  ironically when I'm I was out there waiting for   a wave and I saw one coming and I sort of looked  to my left and looked to my right and being not a   great surfer I'm always looking for you know  someone to tell me this is the right wave to   take and I was looking and everyone was sort of  focused on their own there everyone was playing  (1:43:08) their own game. They were sort of  in their own heads and I was waiting for this   validation. I wanted someone to tell me this  is the right one and I just end up deciding   that this is a great wave and I took it  and it ended up being a lovely ride. But   it really sort of reinforced this idea that  no one's coming to save you particularly in   investing and that idea of investor idol worship. (1:43:38) It's easy to think that by following   someone else's path, by investing in the way  that someone else invests, that that's the   right path. But ultimately, it comes down to  you and you have to make your own decisions,   and you have to trust your own judgment, and you  have to develop your own discernment. There's no   substitute for that. Before I let you go,  we've talked a bit about the poet room.  (1:43:57) We've mentioned a few quotes from  him along the way. It was an unusual decision   in many ways to name the firm after a 13th  century Sufi mystic when you founded the   firm in 2019. How has he been a really important  figure for you both as an investor and in life?   I I guess this is related to the general sense  of why it's been helpful to you as an investor to   have this kind of deep spiritual life where you're  thinking about things like trust and surrender and   a willingness to end your periods of contraction  and you know getting beneath the facade and seeing  (1:44:34) the underlying reality. All of the  sort of things that that Roomie talked about.   You know, Roomie, as you say, he was a 13th  century Persian mystic. And one of the things   that I always find fascinating about him is that  in the late '9s, early 2000s, Roomie was actually   the bestselling poet in the United States. (1:45:03) So, he sold more copies than   Shakespeare, Homer, you know, Dante,  Milton, you know, take your pick.   And it raised a question which is what are all  these Americans doing reading the poetry of a   Persian mystic from 800 years ago. I think part of  it is that Roomie's ideas are universal. He speaks   to something timeless in the human condition which  is this deep yearning to see beyond the surface   and to discover meaning beneath appearance. (1:45:31) And one of the main stays of Roomie's   teaching, as you say, is this constant sort  of provocation. He provokes you to see past   appearances and ask what's actually real,  what's going on, what's the truth. And he   was also astonishingly prolific. He composed, I  think, 60,000 lines a verse, something like that.  (1:45:52) And yet, he wasn't even  a professional poet. You know,   I think he would laugh at the idea that people  are now calling him a poet. He was a spiritual   guide and he had disciples and many of his poems  were actually spoken, you know, spontaneously   when he was in this ecstatic meditative state. (1:46:11) And some of his companions would write   things down that he wrote. And as to why I chose  him as the namesake of my partnership, you know,   what I think makes him timeless is his ability to  embed deep truths about existence into the most   ordinary everyday imagery, whether it's a garden  or the sun or a candle or, you know, a moth.  (1:46:38) He points you from the obvious and the  visible towards the invisible and the essential.   And that way of seeing always resonated with  me as an investor because you know investing   at its core is an act of perception. It's about  seeing beyond the narratives and what the news   is talking about and what other investors are  talking about to try to grasp the essence of   the business. What is it that actually makes it  tick? And you know that's all Roomie was about.  (1:47:03) And is is there a favorite line or  saying of his that you live by? Like before for   example we we were talking about this willingness  to live with paradox and contradiction. I was   thinking of this line of his that you somehow  quote where he said life is harmony among   opposites which seems like a lot of what you're  doing is trying to find harmony between these   things like being aggressive and having a sense  of urgency and being patient and slowm moving and   and the like and having a circle of friends you  talk to but also thinking for yourself. You know,   are there things like that that really in (1:47:34) terms of your inner monologue daytoday   that you live by because you were taught them by  Roomie? You know, there's one quote of his that is   one of my favorites, which is if you are irritated  by every rub, how will your mirror be polished?   And you know, he's talking about on one hand,  he's talking about something that's probably   pretty obvious to everyone, which is that if you  take everything personally, if you're sort of   uh oversensitive, then you're missing the lessons.  You're missing sort of the teachings of these   moments that irritate you. But what he's (1:48:11) actually talking about was the   way that our egos distort our ability to see  clearly. So what is it about a mirror? You know,   in the ancient world, mirrors were not made  of glass. They were actually made of bronze   and the craftsman of those years would,  you know, I think for 10,000 years they   were probably made this way where a craftsman  would combine copper and tin and create bronze.  (1:48:38) And before glass mirrors existed, you  would just polish the surface of these mirrors   and polish it and polish it and polish  it until the bronze became reflective.   And if the metal that you were polishing  was left uneven or corroded, then when   the light came into the mirror, it would sort of  scatter in every direction. It wouldn't actually   reflect clearly. You couldn't see clearly. (1:49:02) And that to me, this metaphor about   us as mirrors, human beings as a mirror that needs  to be polished because we're essentially we start   out as this base metal which is not reflective  and is not beautiful. But with polishing,   you can sort of reflect the reality that is  such a precise metaphor for the human condition.  (1:49:27) And that unevenness and the corrosion  of an unpolished mirror is essentially akin to   the distortions that are caused by our own egoic  perspectives. When we need to appear superior,   when we fear being wrong publicly, when we fear  public humiliation, our perception of reality   becomes warped and we stop seeing things as  they truly are. And I think this has plenty   of parallels to investment because when we're  making decisions from that place of fear and ego,   then of course we make these terrible decisions.  Yeah. I mean that's that's my roomie quote.   Yeah. I love that. One of the reasons (1:49:58) why I love talking to you is   um I think I tend to have this sense that  investing is like this beautiful subset of worldly   wisdom as Charlie would say and that it sort of  includes everything and it's just this lovely   microcosm where you can you know you can study  like human nature and psychology and philosophy   and spirituality like it's it's all part of it and  I was reminded when we talked last time you you   quoted a conversation you'd had with I think  the author of Vaklav Smile who when you told   him what you did. He said, "Oh, you're a money (1:50:29) massager." And actually, I think this   conversation is proof that you are much more than  a money massager. Yeah. He uh I called him about,   you know, I was doing some work on the  renewable energy business. At the end of it,   we had this long conversation  and he said something like, "So,   what is it that you do again?" And I said,  "You know, I'm an investor." And he said,   "Ah, so you're a money massager. (1:50:52) " And I think that it's   classic that the perception of what this business  is is like we're sort of sitting around just   massaging this portfolio of securities.  You know, it's not a real profession. I   don't feel like it is actually a real profession. (1:51:10) It's sort of a it's a beautiful means   of exploring your curiosity and hopefully serving  people while you do it. On that note, it's just   been a real delight chatting with you and I hope  I'll see you soon. Well, we'll definitely see   each other in Omaha. I hope. But um but hopefully  I'll see you in New York before then. Absolutely.   It was a pleasure. Thank you. Thanks so much.  It was a real delight. All right, folks. I hope   you enjoyed today's conversation with Nema Shai. (1:51:30) As we draw to the end of 2025, I wanted   to take the opportunity to wish you a very happy  holiday and a wonderful new year. I also wanted   to take the opportunity to thank the fabulous  team at the Investors Podcast Network, which   makes it possible for me to host this podcast. (1:51:50) That includes Bianca, Sel, Camille,   Katrina, Noel, and Jasmine. And I'm especially  grateful to my terrific editors, Jadilia Lamper,   and Christine Romero, who um not only  do an excellent job editing the audio   and video versions of the podcast, but  are also unbelievably patient in putting   up with how late I always am with my deadlines. (1:52:11) So, thank you for your your tolerance,   your talent, and your kindness. I really  appreciate it. It's also a total pleasure to work   with my friends Stig Brodesen and Preston Pish who  co-founded the Investors Podcast Network more than   a decade ago. I couldn't have been luckier in uh  becoming partners with them. They've just been a   total delight. So, thank you. I'm really grateful. (1:52:30) And it's been fantastic to get to hang   out in the last year with my fellow podcast  hosts Clay and Sha and Daniel. And I've also   been particularly fortunate to get to work  closely with my friend and fellow podcast   host Kyle Griev who's been an invaluable partner  in helping me to create the richer wiser happier   masterclass. He's just been a lovely and  hugely capable partner on this project.  (1:52:55) So thank you. On a separate note,  I'm excited to announce that I'm about to   launch after many delays and much pondering a new  YouTube channel. You can find it by looking for   this handle apparently which is William Green  Markets and Life. And in the coming weeks and   months I'll be sharing pretty regularly some  of my favorite video clips from interviews   that I've done with many great podcast guests. (1:53:24) So these are people like Rick Reer,   Tom Russo, Mish Pabry, Joe Greenblat,  Ray Dallio, Samantha Mackmore,   Chris Bloomstrand and many others. And I  think I'll also share some clips from my   appearances on other people's podcasts. (1:53:42) So hopefully there'll be plenty   of interesting stuff there that if you're  deeply interested in this whole topic of   the intersection between investing and  life and how to think and how to live,   you'll find helpful and lifeenriching. I'm really  grateful to my friend and collaborator Weld Royal   who'll be helping to run my YouTube channel. Weld  has been an invaluable partner over the last year.   She officially is my chief of staff, although  given that I am the only person on staff,   I'm not sure really what that means, but she's  just been great to work with and I'm very grateful   to her. And also, I'm really grateful to Jeremy (1:54:14) Stikney, a renowned YouTube expert   who's given me and Weld a lot of great  advice that we'll attempt to follow.   And um my wonderful daughter Maline Green has  helped with the design of the YouTube homepage   for this channel and also designed the thumbnails  for all of the videos I think. So it's just a   real pleasure to work with your own kit. (1:54:35) What could be better in life? I   think for me anyway. Whether whether it's  as good for her, I don't know. Anyway,   I hope you'll check out this new channel  which as I say is William Green Markets   and Life. And feel free to subscribe. (1:54:53) And likewise, feel free as always to   follow me on X at William Green72 and to connect  with me on LinkedIn if you like. Uh and do let me   know how you're enjoying the podcast. I'm always  really delighted to hear from you, especially if   um if your messages are full of praise and warmth.  If uh if you don't like the podcast, just keep it   to yourself or mention it on YouTube. That's fine. (1:55:10) And in any case, thanks so much for   listening and uh take good care and stay well.  and I wish you and your family a very happy,   healthy, and prosperous, joyful new year. I wrote  a memo called fewer losers or more winners. You   have to make a choice. And if you're going to  try to win in investing, which means win in   our business means having superior results. (1:55:35) How can you possibly get superior   results? And the answer is you either have more of  the things that go up or less of the things that   go down or both. Most people can't do both because  the skillful aggressive player might be able to   get more of the winners. The skillful defensive  player might be able to have fewer of the losers.   Very few people have enough equipment to do  both. Most people that means you have to choose.