← Excess Returns 
Excess Returns
100 Baggers Leave Fingerprints | Chris Mayer Wrote the Book and Tells You How to Find Them
01:01:50
Loading summary
Transcript113 lines
- [00:00]
Chris Mayer
You're going to miss the very, very early stage where you're, you know, you're not going to be able to tell companies that are not profitable or very, very early stage. But you know, that's okay. If they're, if they're the real deal, you'll have plenty of time to buy them. The multiple thing is hard, but then again, it's always hard. You know, the great businesses will often trade near their, near their highs and often trade for what seem to be high multiples. Every business has just a handful of really important variables and everything else is kind of noisy. Everyone's always talking about this quarter and next quarter and at most you're talking what the rest of the year is going to look like. There's no attention on or questions about what the business might look like over a decade. I always think of Charlie Munger. You know, he used to say, if you're not confused, you don't really understand what's going on. I don't believe in the trimming and adding and trading around your positions, which all of my peers seem to love to do.
- [01:03]
Matt Zigler
You're watching Excess Returns. I'm Matt Zigler hosting today, but who do I have with me? Slumming it from his normal status of exclusively Talking Billions, an investment advisor to families and the founder of Blue Infinitas Capital, as well as the host of one of my favorite podcasts, Talking Billions, we've got Bogomil Baranowski joining me as co host today. Bogomil, say hello.
- [01:24]
Bogomil Baranowski
Hello, everyone. Hello, Chris. Hello, Matt. I'm so excited to be a part of this.
- [01:28]
Matt Zigler
Well, don't, don't spoil the hosting job. I got one job today because our next guest, our guest, our sole focus of our love and attention and admiration. He needs no introduction, but we'll do it anyway. Author of the investing classic Hundred Baggers. Stocks that Return on Hundred to one and how to Find Them. Former editor of the Capital in Crisis and Myers Special Situations newsletters, and most recently co founder and portfolio manager at Woodlock House Family Capital. Hello, my fellow time binder, it's Chris Meyer. Welcome to the show. Chris, how you doing?
- [01:58]
Chris Mayer
Hello, Matt. I was going to say that's a very tame introduction by your standards, but then you got your singer there in the end. That's, that's it.
- [02:05]
Matt Zigler
I had to sneak something in. Yes, yes, you gotta go to. Gotta go to just press records to hear the John Mayer and Oscar Meyer wiener references. Let's dive straight in. We got lots to talk about today. I want to talk With AI and I want to start here because you're a creative person and you're an investing person and when I think about AI and artiful artificial intelligence and how huge or huger this market is supposed to be and you're out there talking about a hundred to one, social media is telling me there's like thousand to one opportunities out there. We seem to have this trend in artificial intelligence and companies and businesses around this stuff. You literally wrote the book on hundred baggers. Do you see anything in this space? I'm not asking you for a stock or a prediction, but do you see any of this space that's the fertile soil of where the next hundred bagger could emerge from?
- [02:54]
Chris Mayer
Oh, I'm, I'm probably, definitely something will happen. I mean it's still so early, you know, and I mean my eyes are getting open on this stuff. Every week somebody does something that I'm like wow, that's pretty incredible. I mean one of my friends sent me an analysis done by ChatGPT on old menu freight lines and it was really good actually. And it was, I think the key was in the way he did the questioning. I mean he did it very detailed and in depth, like methodically. Show me this, then show me that, show me this, show me that and what chat GPT out was thought pretty good, you know. So I think financial analysts might be in trouble. But that's just the beginning. I mean, I don't know, I mean. Well, I'm sure like any new technology there will be fortunes built on it for sure. But picking in the early, especially in the early days is very difficult. I mean you can go back to automobiles and radio and same thing. So an Internet. So it'll be interesting to watch but I don't have any specific answers there.
- [04:02]
Matt Zigler
The follow up inside of that, is there anything about looking around emergent or brand new industries to try to find who those winners are? Or do you just literally need to let time play out like in autos or the Internet or whatever else?
- [04:16]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, I think it's the latter. I don't know any particular way to weed out the very, very early players. I mean when I did the hundred bagger study, one of the things I did intentionally was weed out a lot of the very small caps. For example, I think the market cap limit may have been 50 million. It was really low. But the idea there was to try to get to a point where we can at least maybe make some predictions. And for that we need to see some of the numbers, we need to see some of the results. So great companies leave fingerprints in their financials. Now you're going to miss the very, very early stage where you're not going to be able to tell companies that are not profitable or very, very early stage. But you know, that's okay. If they're the real deal, you'll have plenty of time to buy them. I mean, one of my favorite case studies in the book was Lobster Beverage. And one of the key lessons off that is that you had years really to buy it and make more than a hundred times your money. You could see it, you could see the returns, you could see the growth in sales and cash flow. You didn't have to buy it when it was very, very early. And more conceptual, you know, I'm thinking.
- [05:25]
Bogomil Baranowski
You and I spoke about profit pools. When you have a new innovation, I'm always wondering, are we going to destroy some profit pools? Are we going to create new ones? Right. So Internet by itself, we haven't really made money on. On it. We benefited from it and created thousands of businesses that wouldn't be possible. And with AI, I'm thinking for a minute that maybe we're going to create new businesses, but the initial wave, they are not the real profit pools.
- [05:53]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, or it will be. Or AI will be used by some existing player to enhance something that they do. So they'll get the benefit that way. But you know, you wouldn't necessarily, necessarily say, think of it as an AI play, you know, so I, I suspect we'll see a lot of that. Yeah.
- [06:12]
Bogomil Baranowski
I want to ask you about the twin engines. When you talk about the hundred beggars, usually you talk about the multiple and grow. And today we're looking at pretty high multiples across the board. Anything I look at, I feel like this could be half off easily. Maybe because I've been looking at markets for too long and I can see it trading at half a multiple. And then on the growth side, maybe it's just my impression that it's harder to find sustainable growth. There's so many businesses that are actually the opposite. They haven't grown in a long time. How do you think about looking for those twin engines today in these markets?
- [06:45]
Chris Mayer
I think it's easier to find the growth, actually. And I guess it depends on what you're drawing the limit at. But I mean, to find companies that could sustainably grow 15 to 20%, I don't know. Globally, I think there's lots to look at in that department. But the multiple thing is hard. But then again, it's always hard. You Know, the great businesses will often trade near their, near their highs and often trade for what seem to be high multiples. But I mean, if you really, truly find a great one then, and multiples your only concern, you know, maybe buy small or something and at least get your foot in and then wait patiently for when that opportunity comes because it could be, it could be a long time. I mean you look at some of these businesses, you might have to wait several years and you're giving up a lot of returns in that, in that timeframe. So yeah, the twin engines, harder to find, I mean, well, you can really find those. Every once in a while we have a, a crack up like a March of 2020 where you can get those working for you. But absent some sort of broad market crisis, it's very hard to get there.
- [07:58]
Matt Zigler
What about on the pure avoid side.
- [08:00]
Bogomil Baranowski
With the twin engines?
- [08:02]
Matt Zigler
Do you also look at that and see a lot of stuff in the market that feels like you'd avoid because maybe that growth engine isn't as firing as high as the multiple suggests?
- [08:15]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, I mean there are some businesses where I would say for me, I mean there's lots of businesses that I would say I come to the conclusion where there's no reason to in particular get involved now. Like I have a portfolio of existing names and the only way I'm going to swap out something I own for something new has to be very, very compelling. So yeah, I would say there's not a lot that's getting me super excited to make those changes right now.
- [08:42]
Matt Zigler
Stick with me on this point specifically around this concentration idea. Feels like especially in 2024, you couldn't go anywhere without hearing about the Mag 7 over and over again. And in my heart of hearts, I really liked imagining Jack Bogle as a concentrated investor with only seven stocks in his portfolio that he's like living or dying by. But you semi famously, infamously, dare I suggest, run a fairly concentrated portfolio. I mean, number one, what do you think about market concentration, index concentration as it relates to your own concentration? And then, you know, are there some lessons as a concentrated investor you'd like to tell people in a concentrated index fund these days?
- [09:23]
Chris Mayer
Well, it shows you it's very difficult to beat a concentrated portfolio when the, when the top names are allowed to run. And so the S and P has been difficult to beat during that run. And it works the other way too. I mean you can just get unlucky and you're concentrated and two or three of your names aren't moving for whatever reason. And Then you're way behind. So I had that happen to me a little bit last year, and now this year I'm actually up pretty decent and the market's down, so it all kind of washes out over the many cycles. But I've always been a fan of concentrated investing, and it's not for everyone. I mean, you have to know what you're buying and you have to be able to analyze a company and do all that. I remember there's a story Greenblatt told in one of his courses, and I think he was quoting Warren Buffett, but. And he said, you know, if you lived in some town and you suddenly, for whatever reason, came out, came into a bunch of money, and he decided, well, I'm going to invest in the best businesses in town. And you go around and you meet the management teams and you study the businesses and you come to, you know, there's seven businesses around you in the. In town that you think are good to put your money in. So you divide it up and you put a little bit of money in each one. And you would say that sounds like a pretty prudent thing to do. But if you change that to stocks, then all of a sudden people like, oh, that's very. That's very risky. What are you doing putting all your money in seven stocks? So, but again, I think the important part of that is you have to, you know, do the research and know what you're buying and think of it as if you were buying a private business or if you were buying real estate, something that you're going to own for a long time, and then you forget about the prices as much, as much as possible. Otherwise it's not possible. Otherwise you're better off probably in an index fund, which is hard to beat anyway.
- [11:14]
Bogomil Baranowski
The challenge is that you get the daily price quote so you know exactly how much those seven businesses are priced at at a given point in time, I think.
- [11:24]
Chris Mayer
So that's like the call, the call to action. You know, they just get those prices blinking. And when you watch them every day, it enhances the feeling that of volatility. So suddenly, you know when you're watching stocks every day and something goes up 2% or down 2% a day, you're like, well, what's going on? Why is it? Or it's down 5 or 6% a week, or up 5 or 6% a week, you're right away hunting for reasons like what's going on. But as you zoom out over a year or two years or three years, then those Just don't matter at all. And the volatility diminishes as well.
- [11:56]
Bogomil Baranowski
So the movement up is fun. It's cool to see you open the portfolio in the morning. You see, oh, wow, three of them are up so much. Hopefully more than the market. But then you have the drawdowns. And you and I talked about drawdowns in individual stocks in the market. You brought up March 2020. How do you deal with those times when you have a drawdown and when you hold stocks that we talk about the, you know, 100x you will have? And you make a point in your book many times, drawdowns when your stock reached a certain high and sometimes it's down 50% before it resumes the ascent. How do you deal with that time?
- [12:31]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, I mean, part of it is knowing that that happens, right? I mean, since I remember, I saw just recently that the overall market, the S&P 500 since 2009, has had something like 10 corrections of tension more. And of those 10 times, you know, three of them were more than 20%, one of them was more than 30%. But, you know, I think it was. I think it was Charlie Bilillo who said that, you know, every time that happens, it felt like the end of the world. It's true. Like, every time it happens, it feels like, oh, this is the big one. You know, this is. This is it. This is going to change. This is. And then, you know, with the passage of time doesn't seem like such a huge deal. So I think number one is appreciating that perspective. Like, I also tell people too, you know, like, look at the names you own now. Even look, look back 10 years and see how many drawdowns they've had and for how long. It's remarkable. Even companies that you think are very stable and they've had lots of drawdowns. So that's one. And then two is really educate yourself about the business and what are the key things? Like I always say, like, every business has just, actually just a handful of really important variables, and everything else is kind of noisy. And as long as those five things are all in place, then you just. You keep holding on. I think it has to be that way. Otherwise you're. You're just going to be whipsawed. And every, you know, you're getting whipsawed by bad quarters or even a bad year will put you off a great name. And so you have to give these businesses a certain band performance and they're allowed to slightly disappoint or disappoint sometimes or allowed to get ahead sometimes, but there's this band of expectations, and as long as you're kind of in that, you don't really worry. Meanwhile, the stock price has been going all over the place. You know, one of the little handy tricks that Thomas Phelps wrote about in his first book, and, you know, he just made a little table of like, it was Pfizer. He had just basic financial information, you know, like roe and sales and earnings. And you'd look at it and then he'd ask you, you know, just if this was all you knew, would you ever sell this business? Of course you would. You know, every year it was. Of course there was a year. Oh, yeah. Where it was maybe flat or down and then. But it would pick back up. But she would never sell. Well, the stock price was all over the place during that time. You know, people were buying and selling it every day. So it's a powerful lesson in that.
- [14:55]
Bogomil Baranowski
You have this quote from Floyd Odlum from 1933, you remember it from the book, where he says, there's a better chance to make money now than ever before. When the market collapsed in the 30s and his partners were all pessimistic, and he was thinking, wow, this is the time. And we haven't lived for anything like this before. But every time we have that 10% correction that you talk about, it feels like this is a better time to put some money to work than two weeks ago. And every time it's hard.
- [15:23]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, yeah, that's right. That's why people say, you know, I'll just wait. Wait till we get the correction. But then the correction comes and they can't pull the trigger. And then they just revise their target. Lower. Well, and they'll go lower. Yeah. Oh, wait for a bigger correction. Then when it does drop 20 or 30%, you're too scared. You're like, no. So, yeah, that's. It's not a good game to play. Try to catch all those, you know, avoid all those downdrafts.
- [15:53]
Matt Zigler
Go back at least. At least in theory here. Go back to that. The green blood example. And I love that story and how it makes for an easy, almost, I guess, strawman for the concentrated investing. If you were that person. If you were that person today, if we. We. You know, you're resetting the portfolio. If you just had a giant pile of cash and no actual investments today, what are some of the questions you would ask at the beginning of 2025 here, where we're doing this in the end of March, tariffs, politics, markets, parts of the market crashing, other parts holding up. Well, where do you think you would start looking if you had a pile of cash around that global neighborhood?
- [16:34]
Chris Mayer
Well, I think I would not really pay attention to that. I wouldn't be creating a portfolio that I expect to do well with tariffs or I wouldn't do that because that's not something that's going to probably last. I mean, that's going to change, right? There'll be tariffs maybe the last some years they'll go down, they'll go up, it'll go away. Next administration will have different ideas. And so I'm looking for things I can own for, you know, 10 years out more. And so I would be looking at the same kind of timeless things. Last time I, I would create a portfolio close to what I have. I mean, I. I'd have the vertical market software with Constellation and Topkis. I'd have the Swedish serial acquirers that I like so much. I'd have Brown and Brown in there, insurance broker. I'd own Heico with its business and great moat it is around it. Copart with, you know, also tremendous moat around that business. So those are businesses I know well and I've owned for a long time. I feel comfortable that they'll do well in a variety of different environments. And so I don't think the question in March 2025 would be that different than March of 2020 or March of 2010. I mean, it's the same principles and ideas that I would be looking for. You know, maybe, yeah, maybe the menu would change a little bit. Like if it was an extreme condition, like a March 2020 where you could get something super cheap that you could never get any time else. But I wouldn't play any kind of particular macro trend or idea like that. And that's very popular. That's all what the financial press writes about all the time. You know, five ways to play Trump's tariffs or whatever. You can write the headlines yourself.
- [18:17]
Bogomil Baranowski
Chris, your approach resonates with a certain client. And you and I spoke about it. You happen to manage family wealth in many cases. And the first capital you started with came from a family. And I'm intrigued by it because I manage money for families. And I realize that they resonate with a certain investment approach. They can wait, they have the patience, they have the capital. They're not in a rush. Can you talk about that? Because I think it's very important, especially when you manage other people's money. What kind of capital are you investing? Because that Capital may or may not allow you to do what you're trying to do.
- [18:48]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, that's, that's definitely true. That's a great point. Because if you're not, your capital's not aligned with what you're doing, you're gonna have problems. So yeah, it's, it's almost a little self selection. Cause you know, I have the book and so that, that does a lot of my, my pitch for me. People, when they come to me, they're already kind of bought into the idea, but still, you know, I have to have the conversation. And I have turned down quite a bit of money over the time from investors that I felt like didn't really sync up. And so, yeah, I've been very, very lucky that way. Like, I have a great group of partners who think a lot like me as far as owning. Looking at stock market investing as if you were just owning a business, these just happen to be publicly traded and you approach it in a very businesslike manner. So they understand that. They appreciate that. When I talk about investing alongside people who have skin in the game, you know, management teams that own parts of the business, they get that. They understand intuitively why that's important. They rent. They rent, most of them, you're right, it's family wealth. But how did they get it? They almost, they all, in my case is they all had businesses of their own that they either sold or they still have. And so that they approach the world with that businessman's mind. And they're naturally skeptical of people who come to them and try to predict where the stock market's going or has these ideas about where the world's headed. They're naturally skeptical of that. They like this kind of long term, just owning businesses, they appreciate that. So they can put up with the ups and downs like I've had. You know, I have had virtually no redemptions. I had one March of 2020 with a guy, got into some trouble and I let him out. And I had one other, due to death, this particular investor and you know, the heirs, not all they're held, so. But that's pretty typical, right? Someone told me it's like death, divorce, and maybe there's another D in there that leads to redemptions that you can't really avoid so much. But yeah, it's been a great, great group, A great group and critically important. I mean, if you have someone who's not aligned with that, then they're questioning you all the time and makes for an unpleasant experience and affects the returns of the partnership.
- [21:19]
Matt Zigler
Do you think that's a critical part of their DNA, especially the ones who have been with you the longest or get it in your sense, like actually owning a private business and understanding how that maps across the rest of life?
- [21:34]
Chris Mayer
I think so. I think that's, I think that's pretty important. I mean, I just noted just myself speaking with other investors or potential LPs, that, yeah, I connect much better with the ones who have a business of their own or they had a business and they sold it, and they just have a somewhat different mindset than someone who came into the market, you know, studying the stock market as a thing outside where they didn't have that connection to how it connects with individual businesses. So they, they tend to think of it more like a trader's game or, you know, so it's very different.
- [22:13]
Matt Zigler
Do you feel like you earned that in the same right from your own businesses, from like running the newsletters, doing the things that you did, or, or did you hone that DNA for yourself and learning to think like an owner?
- [22:25]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, and for me, it came different ways. Like I, I started off in corporate banking as, you know, so I did a lot of just making loans to just local businesses. So it would be the guy owned the, you know, rental equipment store, general contractor, auto body shop. And so these you kind of see, you know, that they're kind of locked in. They don't have the opportunity necessarily to slip their business so much, but every now and then they do and they, but they keep it and they have a certain sensibility, you know, running a business yourself like that. So there's that. And then, yeah, I ran, I was a, I ran my own newsletter for a while. So you get a sense there. I mean, if someone came to me and offered me however much for the business, you would, you know, I would have said no because I believed in what it, what it could done and achieved. And so, yeah, I think that all definitely colors your experiences. It's not just then an academic exercise, but you've tried to, you know, you've been a part of it. And that learning doesn't stop because I just recently finished my first year on the board of a publicly trade company in Sweden and again got, you know, a whole different perspective again about how, you know, there's a real business going on here behind the ticker and behind the conference calls and has challenges with people and different things that are going on. So I like that. I like how it keeps me one foot in that world. It's very different and totally changing the questions you would ask too, when you meet with other management teams and you know, what kind of questions you ask. I mean, sometimes like nowadays I don't even listen to the quarterly earning calls when they come on. I'll just, I'll just get a transcript and kind of skim over it for a few minutes because the, the questions of the analysts is just driving me crazy. I mean, and I appreciate what they're doing. They have, they have a certain role to play and they have models they have to fill out. But you know, everyone's always talking about this quarter and next quarter and at most you're talking what the rest of the year is going to look like. There's no attention on or questions about what the business might look like over a decade. Of course those guys aren't on the call. They're not worried about it.
- [24:34]
Bogomil Baranowski
I've been in meetings with managements where everybody had questions about the next quarter, this penny or that penny. And I was the only one asking about the longer term vision. And the CEO would say, can you stay over? Because you're the only one that asks an interesting question. And I thought, really, I'm in the back of the room, the only one with a question that the management actually wants to spend more time on.
- [24:54]
Chris Mayer
And yeah, I've had the sense sometimes when I've met with management teams that don't know me, I'll say, you know, that I have to kind of overcome a little bit of a prejudice. Like they just assume hedge fund manager coming in and they have certain assumptions about what I want to know. And at some point in the conversation I have to tell them, look, I'm not really interested. What are you going to do this quarter? I'm not interested in these questions. I'm more interested longer term. We own things for a decade out and blah, blah, blah. And then it changes and the conversation changes and they kind of settle.
- [25:27]
Bogomil Baranowski
Yeah, we need more investors like that. They're actually investors, owners of businesses. I think that could elevate the conversation. And also the managements would be more at ease.
- [25:37]
Chris Mayer
Definitely. And some of these managing teams, I know that, you know, I've come across somewhere, they don't even meet, they don't even want to meet with investors at all. You know, they just, because they know it was just such a waste of time. You know, they just spend time in meetings asking, you know, and get answering these questions and so they just write it off entirely. And I sympathize with that because most of the time it is a waste of their time to meet with investors. So it's a conundrum in our industry. I don't know what the exact answer is there, but I don't want my management team spending a lot of time answering investor questions either. No, but there has to be some where you dwell, it has to be some avenue where you can lay out your vision for the company, talk to your investors. And so, yeah, I mean, maybe Buffett's got it right with his annual meeting. You know, I know like Constellation Software, they just have an annual meeting. There's no quarterly calls. You can't, you know, Mark Leonard's not going to sit there and meet with you. And so, yeah, I don't know. But something our industry has to, has to deal with.
- [26:40]
Bogomil Baranowski
I want to bring up a quote from A Hundred Beggars. You have this quote that says the best shot you have at growing your wealth is to own stuff. You want to be an owner with real people trying to figure things out with real assets and real profits. Ownership of assets is your best long term protection against calamity. And that's the essence of what you're talking about. We want to own those businesses to grow wealth over time. Can you talk about that? Because I think we get lost sometimes. What is it that we're trying to do? You know, there are tickers and prices and portfolios and 30 stocks and 10 stocks. At the end of the day, we want to own stuff.
- [27:14]
Chris Mayer
I think also what I think of when you were reading that, you know, I think a lot of the asset allocation kind of mindset where especially for wealthy families, they'll want to have, you know, something in forestry or land or bonds or gold and, and those things have a role. But you should understand that the role there is, it's not really a creation of wealth over time that it consistently is. People own, own stuff, own businesses that are able to grow over time. That's where the real wealth comes. And they are inherently problem solvers. So yeah, there's going to be problems, but that's what businesses do. Overcome them, create new businesses. I mean, it's fascinating to study businesses and just look at how much they change over time. I mean, you know, I remember A.O. smith, for example, is a, is a publicly traded business now that makes water heaters and boilers and things. But when you started off making baby carriages, you know, and then there's other things they manufactured along the way. And so who would've predicted it? But you know, there's, there's consistently all kinds of examples like that in corporate history. But and then of course, the famous ones, when you look at something like Amazon, when, you know, early on they were just selling books and if that was all you were, you could imagine them as being and would never have made sense as an investment for you. So that's what, that's what owning great businesses can do for you. Just adjust, adapt, create new markets, new verticals. It's a great thing.
- [28:50]
Matt Zigler
I'm really fascinated by this idea of you having this Rolodex of questions in your brain as like Chris the banker, Chris the portfolio manager, now Chris the board member. And do you actually, do you segregate that at all in your brain? And do you think about when those different toolboxes get opened?
- [29:10]
Chris Mayer
I don't necessarily think about them as different buckets, but there's definitely, yeah, there are definitely some questions now from, from Chris the board member. You know, we asking management teams about, well, what about the board? You know, what kind of interactions do you have with the board? So I know for investors like to, you know, sometimes they'll say, oh look, you know, so and so's on the board, right? And as if, let's say, if it's a famous investor, a famous person, like, you know, that's a positive. But it really depends on the interaction. I mean, boards can be very different. They can be very passive or they can be very active and involved in setting things like incentives and strategies. And so I really asked a lot of questions around that now, like, what are your interactions with the board? Like, who's so and so? Do you ever talk to them? Yeah. They ever talk to you? Just to get a sense for how that business is governed. And then other things come up too. Like, I know as investors we often talk about the incentives at the executive, the C suite level. So everybody will say if they think about incentives at all, they'll think about the incentives for the CEO and cfo. But nowadays running, you know, having seen Technion behind the scenes, I think it's very important to look at the, that next level down. Like the people are actually running subsidiaries out there, you know, how are they, how are they incentivized? What's that job like? You know, do the people there, do they stay, Is there a lot of turnover there? You know, and get a sense for that because can really, really make a difference over time and also give you an idea of what kind of operational list there is in running that company. Some companies, they're just constantly, you know, dealing with HR issues and filling shoes and others they're very stable and they have a set group of people that kind of get it, grow with the company and they're able to make a lot of money and do well. So those are some questions that I asked that came right out of my, my board experience.
- [31:12]
Bogomil Baranowski
I'm very curious about the people you brought up, the CEO. And I've seen those examples in the last few years. When we're betting so big on a CEO coming and going, the stocks actually move. And I don't want to name any companies, but there were two companies that traded CEOs last year, and one went down because the CEO left and the other went up because they got that CEO. But then I'm thinking whatever those companies are offering, the people that show up every day, greet customers and, you know, see the suppliers and drive the trucks, whatever it is, they showed up the same way they did the day before. They're looking forward to hearing from the new CEO or the replacement CEO. But when I think about it, I get it that the CEO can make a big difference. But think about the other, you know, 50,000 people working for that company that are doing something and they will show up the next day and do the right thing.
- [32:02]
Chris Mayer
That's right. And you know, that's where you start getting into, well, how's the process of, you know, the business below that executive level? I mean, and it depends on the business. I mean, but I would say most businesses, the CEO, you know, stepping down is not such a big event as the market often makes it out to be. And of course there are exceptions, but hard to generalize that. But I say for most business, that's probably true.
- [32:38]
Bogomil Baranowski
Those businesses will outlast that CEO if you hold them for as long as you want to wait for the hundred beggar, you might have maybe even five or ten CEOs. Hopefully not, but you might have a few.
- [32:49]
Chris Mayer
Right. Well, the counter to that though is the old Buffet point he makes about the, you know, a CEO that is controlling where you reinvest your capital and you have a business that's 15% return over five years span of time, that CEO is going to determine where half the capital of that business goes. Not just half the capital over that five years, but half the capital the business has ever had. So a CEO can, in the capital allocation side, make a huge impact. So that's where it depends. Like if you're talking about a CEO that's running a restaurant chain or a grocery store, where the reinvestment opportunity, where the opportunities are. Reinvestment opportunities are relatively well defined and limited Maybe the impact is less. But if you're dealing with a company that involved in say acquisitions or where that investment reinvestment decisions can be much more impactful than that CEO can be more important.
- [33:47]
Matt Zigler
How do you think that through this, you as board member, investor angle, how do you think about capital allocation specifically as something that the board can help support and shape incentives around?
- [34:02]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, I mean, I think the board ultimately will or should set the incentives. So the board has to consider, well, how do we want business, how do we want our capital to be allocated and have to come up some kind of framework, ideally working with the CEO and then we come to some sort of agreement, kind of broad parameters, what that should be. And it's much. And it's hard. You know, it's not so easy when you sit down and think about, well, how do we want to incentivize people, particularly when we talk about actual financial hurdles and numbers. Because once you put that number out there, you know, there's a lot of old games you can play to get over it. You don't want to set it too high, you don't want to set it too low. You don't want to have the wrong number. You want to have it be something that's important, that reflects the health of the business or something that you want. You know, I would say like two broad things. I would, I would say that every board should try to implement is number one, it should be like on a per share basis, whatever it is, there's none of these open ended, you know, rewarding people on profit growth without a per share consideration. And then second, there has to be some kind of consideration given to the return on capital or the amount of capital required. So if you have a profit hurdle, well, you know, there has to be some consideration given to how much capital is consumed to get to that profit level. And I'm not dogmatic about what the number is. You know, every business, you can custom tailor something that makes sense for that business. But those are the two broad considerations. But other than that, I will say it's hard, hard to come up with a really good incentive compensation scheme. I can see why many businesses have such mediocre compensation schemes because it's a hard thing to think through. And who wants to do that? It's as easy, well, let's look at our peers. We'll come up with some peer group and then we'll just do what everyone else is doing.
- [36:04]
Matt Zigler
If you, you can use an example if you want to use one. But I'm just curious as an investor, then when you take some of this information in and you're looking at a company and how they're structuring this, what's an example? Or philosophically, if not specifically, you're like this, this is it. This is really making a lot of sense. This is really working. I like to see this.
- [36:26]
Chris Mayer
Well, I mean, the first thing that comes to mind, you know, in Sweden, they have these serial acquirers. And one popular metric that was pioneered by Bergman and Bev was a. Is a measure called profit over working capital. And what's nice about that is if you think about you're running a subsidiary, you know, these guys who are running these subsidiaries, they're not financially, you know, sophisticated like we are. They're not sitting there. You've told them what the return on invested capital was. They're going to be. I don't know what that is. And they should know that they're running the business, you know, whether it's distributorship or something. But they know what their profit number is and they know what they have in receivables and they know what they have in inventory, and they get their payables. So they can kind of, you know, they can get. They understand how these levers work. If you tell them, well, we want you to keep your profit over your working capital, you know, at 45% or whatever the number is. I think that was a common number for them on distributors. You know, that's something they can, they can get the hang of that. And they know what that is. And I like that because it's. It's a rough approximation for return on capital for that business, at least at that level. So that's another thing I appreciate, like, you come in first as a financier and you're like, return on invested capital. That's the metric. But you have to understand, like, the people that are out there in the field that you're trying to incentivize, they have to be able to connect that to what they're doing. That's what makes it. That's what makes it tough. So you have to, like, work around, come up with something that's an approximation, but that's something that they understand and have some control over. Yeah, that's where the heart comes in, I think.
- [37:54]
Matt Zigler
Do you want to do that business banker gift stance again? Make a little. Make a gif of this so you can put it out with the episode.
- [38:03]
Bogomil Baranowski
At the same time, isn't it fascinating that the kind of CEO that we want to find is somebody that does it no longer for the money. You know, I know that there are not enough buffets in the world, but There are other CEOs that clearly are doing it because they love it. Right. So it's not about fine tuning the compensation to the, I don't know, EPS or cash flow or whatever metric. He or she will just show up. And I know the entire economy cannot run on people like that. We don't have enough of them, but if you find one like that.
- [38:33]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, in fact I would say that's true. Most of the CEOs that I've talked to in my companies, of course they're not, they're not motivated by that. So yeah, the incentive compensation schemes really not for them, but it's for other, other people around haven't yet who are hungry and haven't yet made their, you know, their nuts and are out there and they want, they want to do it. So you're absolutely right. I mean ideally you, you would have business, they love the business, they want the business to grow. And, and because I'm investing in companies that there's already a lot of skin in the game, they're going to participate in that anyway as owners. So that's not so important to them what their salary is or their bonus. That's not going to be the needle mover for them.
- [39:13]
Bogomil Baranowski
So pulling on that thread of skin in the game, a lot of companies pay with shares these days all kinds of stock based compensation. Right. And on the surface it looks like a good idea because more people are on the same page. The company does well, the stock does well, they do well, they feel invested. But now and then I come across companies where they spend half of their profits or more on stock based compensation. I'm not sure if I want to be a shareholder if I feel like I'm, I'm second class in this equation. Do you have a thought about that?
- [39:43]
Chris Mayer
No. I mean I don't want to invest in companies that are passing out their shares like confetti either. You know, I just rather, rather I'd much prefer the companies that very rarely a few shares or, you know, I think Constellation Software has got a great incentive plan and they have the same number of shares outstanding now as they did when they went public. And, and their incentive comp is, you know, they pay a bonus but then some portion of that bonus is used to purchase shares on the open market. And that really creates, you know, some skin in the game, I think. You can't just give people things. They have to have at least some money. I'm all for like giving discounts or something like that or. But you have to have them have some skin come out of pocket somehow. Otherwise it's just all upside, no downside, and that doesn't really do any good. Now I understand there's something that people who I've had these debates with, some people push back and say in certain industries it's almost like you can't do it any other way. You know, if you're going to get talented people in the business, this is the way they're compensated. And so you just have to accept it. And I guess that's, you know, for some Silicon Valley type businesses that you're going to have to just accept it. And that's, that's the way it is. And you can see companies whose share accounts have expanded greatly over the years, but the stocks have still worked. So that's a different, a different game. But yeah, I'm kind of more old school on that. I prefer to. Companies value their shares very highly.
- [41:10]
Matt Zigler
What about. And I'm thinking about this almost from the legacy perspective. When you think about a CEO or you think about the constituents of a board as it exists at one point in time. And this ties all the way back to the client question about losing clients from divorces and deaths and the just natural course of event stuff. How important is it when you're looking at a company to think about how they think about their internal operating legacy and what they're setting up to pass forward beyond their careers, lifetimes, whatever else.
- [41:39]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, you mean kind of like almost like succession plans kind of things like next.
- [41:43]
Matt Zigler
And yeah, we can make it as simple as succession plans.
- [41:46]
Chris Mayer
How much do you think of that? Yeah, I mean. But yes, I think that's important. Like who. Management depth is something I've definitely explored with different companies I own. Just kind of get like, okay, if he had stepped down, if there's someone internally who can, who can step in and some teams are deep and some of the smaller cap names, this is maybe an unappreciated risk, is that sometimes, you know, they're not as deep on that, they don't have that deep bench. So when somebody at very senior level goes some may, the replacement is gonna have to come from the outside. So there's some risk in that and you just have to accept it. But yeah, we definitely have discussions around that and trying to think about, well, what, what the business would look like, you know, five, 10, 20 years out, even when we're all gone. Very forward thinking companies can do that. I wouldn't say that's very common actually, but something investors have to think about.
- [42:50]
Matt Zigler
Not to say that it's an edge per se, but trying to extend that thinking beyond, beyond when you might be a shareholder, beyond when this management team might be there. That's, that's, that's a pretty mind stretching exercise. Just think about what all these variable components look like and if it can survive all those moves. How, when do you feel like that really came into your own understanding that you're like, I'm actually implementing on this timescale.
- [43:18]
Bogomil Baranowski
Hmm.
- [43:19]
Chris Mayer
I don't know when exactly, but I do know. Like, I do know. I don't know why, why you're talking. That made me think of a meeting at once had with pair. I was the CEO at LyftCo, and one time he hopped up and gets on a whiteboard and starts sketching out, you know, boxes and he starts like laying out how far, thinking he was thinking about the problem of, well, who was going to be behind him and then after them. And, you know, he had, he had all kind of all mapped out how this person did this level. And then they move here and they move here and, you know, and this person is like 75% of the way there. But another, you know, five years they'll be here. I remember when I first met with him, like five years ago, I guess it was five years ago. 20. Yeah, 20, 21 or so. And I was asking him about, well, you know, do you have other capital allocators? Because it was just him doing acquisitions mostly. And he said, you gotta give me like, you know, give me like two or three more years and I'll have, I'll have more. And he did, you know, he had built this plan and they've got like, you know, half a dozen people are well, well along and people behind them that are still coming up. So I feel like that's an example what you're talking about. Like, that's an organization that's already like building it in their plan process. You know, how they're going to perpetuate their way of business, a way of doing things beyond the people who are there now.
- [44:42]
Matt Zigler
How rare is that? How often do you think it actually exists? That's extreme.
- [44:45]
Chris Mayer
I think that's pretty rare. Yeah, it's an impressive market quality when you run into it.
- [44:53]
Bogomil Baranowski
You and I spoke about how investing is not really about being right, but about being the least wrong. And when I'm thinking about making mistakes, I'm thinking of general semantics as a toolkit and I would love this audience to hear a little bit about general semantics. If you indulge us, what's it all about for somebody that has never heard of it, and maybe we'll dive into an idea or two behind it.
- [45:16]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, well, general semantics is a name given, kind of a discipline. You call it set of critical thinking tools. And it was created by, or at least, yeah, I would say created by a guy named Alfred Krasinski in the 1930s. And I. If I had to summarize, I'd say, like, it's a difficult thing to summarize, but I would say in general, it deals with challenging the assumptions behind our abstraction, so our. Our words, our symbols, and challenging the common assumptions behind those things. And it gives you a number of little tricks and tools so that it becomes almost second nature to you, and it will greatly. Yeah, I found it tremendously helpful. This is why I've written a couple books about it. And, yeah, I use it all the time.
- [46:13]
Bogomil Baranowski
The one example I want to bring up that really stayed with me after we spoke was English without absolutes. How often we use the words always, never, nobody, everybody. Can you tell the audience what's that about?
- [46:25]
Chris Mayer
Yeah. So part of general semantics is that there are certain words that raise a flag for you to at least stop and consider. So anytime you hear those absolutes, anytime anybody says always or never, or, you know, everyone or nobody, there's a whole list of them, and I have a bunch of them in the book. But anytime you hear that word and those words, you're just meant to just stop and pause for a minute. Like, really, everyone? It can be very common. It can be just something like people say stocks, and a lot of times I'll talk people, be casual. Oh, you know, stocks are so expensive these days, you know, And I always think, well, all stock. Every stock, you know, which stocks. So these kind of questions just come naturally to when you start thinking about those kinds of questions. But it's. It gets deeper than that even, because then there, you know, one of the tools Brzeg uses, for example, is just the dating, you know, date system, and where you say, like, you know, Matt Zigler today thinks he likes vanilla ice cream. So love it.
- [47:34]
Matt Zigler
Love that.
- [47:35]
Chris Mayer
There you go. So that's, you know, Matt Ziegler in 2025, here in March, you know, 26 or whatever it is. And. But he might not think that a year from now. We might ask him the question. He may have different answer.
- [47:46]
Matt Zigler
Rocky, Rocky.
- [47:47]
Chris Mayer
There you go. Or if you asked him that 10 years ago, he might have had a different answer. So you start to see people as not one thing that's the same all the time, but they have opinions at certain dates. And you can do that with your own thoughts, too. Like today, I think these things, and so I'm comfortable saying them. And then if I were to change my mind a year from now, well, that's what I thought then, and that's what I think now. And it makes it easier for you to let go of certain ideas and change your ideas you're not so wedded to. But really, general semantics, I mean, gives you a rich, rich treasury of tools and ideas, and you don't have to use them all, but you can just take a few things, and I think it greatly aid your own critical thinking.
- [48:28]
Matt Zigler
Talk about that a little bit more in the journaling sense. We've talked about this before, like writing stuff down, the act of thinking, or, you know, spending time to actually carve out your thoughts about something without needing to necessarily do something about it, but capturing those. What have you learned about the journaling process for you?
- [48:49]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, I'm a big fan of journaling, both financially and just keeping my own journal, because, yeah, I love getting those ideas and thoughts down. And then when you look at them later, you know, you see how much you change over time. And I've been keeping a journal since 2005, and it's amazing. Sometimes you just kind of go back and read some of the earlier ones, and you're just like. You feel like a completely different person. You're like, you know, I thought that, you know. Yes, you did. You did think that. Without that written record, it's easy to kind of lie to yourself about it. You know, you just rationalize it. You say, well, you know, this happened, that I didn't really think that. Well, you did. And with investing, it's also very helpful. I mean, with all your ideas, I keep track of what I thought at different times. And. And in that particular exercise, you can also see how things that seem really important at the time become much less so. And it doesn't even take that long. I mean, it could be a quarter. You know, it can be very short amount of time. I'll look back and say, boy, you know, I thought that was important. I barely ever think about it or whatever. You know, there's all kinds of lessons that way. So, yeah, I'm a big fan of keeping some sort of written record of what you're thinking. And that's your. Then you really learn it. I mean, it's One thing to say, yeah, you change, you change opinions, but I think when you keep a journal, it's really in your face and surprising ways.
- [50:15]
Matt Zigler
Kind of feels like journaling is investing in future humility almost.
- [50:19]
Chris Mayer
Yeah. And then I find myself addressing my future self. Future self. And you look at this, you'll know I was an idiot, I was wrong.
- [50:27]
Bogomil Baranowski
And so, yeah, related to that. I want to ask you about cause and effect and you share a story from Alan Watts about a cat. Can you retell the story ahead of the.
- [50:39]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, it's one of my favorites about that because, you know, the way we think about cause and effect, you know, especially with investors, we always think, you know, this happened, this happened, and then that happened. And so it was one caused the other. But Alan Watts example on this gets you to think a little differently. He says, you know, imagine if you're looking through like a hole in a fence and you see a cat's head go by, and then you see the tail go by. And then a little while later, you see a cat's head go by and you see the tail go by later. So cause and effect thing is, okay, the head causes the tail, but that's kind of a weird thing because, you know, what's, what's happening really is it's just all one thing. It's all one movement. And so that's the way I think about cause effects, the way I think about the market, too. It's. It's really all one thing. I mean, everything is connected to everything else. Everything is the way it is because everything else is the way it is. And so you can't just change one thing and then have this effect over here. It doesn't work that way. It's just much more complicated and connected. And I find that to be a very helpful mental model to use.
- [51:46]
Bogomil Baranowski
That's why policies are so hard to develop and implement, because people try to think in a very simplistic way, we're going to increase taxes, that's what's going to happen. We're going to cut the tariffs. That's what's going to happen. But the secondary and tertiary effects of it are unpredictable. And then the effects start to interact with each other and you can come out with a result that you would never imagine. Hopefully more good than bad, but it's something worth paying attention to.
- [52:14]
Matt Zigler
Yeah.
- [52:14]
Chris Mayer
I always think of Charlie Munger, you know, when he used to say, if you're not confused, you don't really understand what's going on. You know, this is the truth. I mean, Once you see the complexity of it, you're just like, there's just no way you're going to figure that out. So again, that's another reason why, you know, when Matt asked earlier about, well, you know, like March today, you're looking at certain investment questions. What would you think? Tariffs and all that. I mean, it's like such a puzzle. I'm just very humble about my ability to figure out what that is. And so I just fall back on those more essential eternal principles and stick as closely as I can to those.
- [52:52]
Matt Zigler
It kind of feels like with, with your written works and so with Hundred Baggers, with the, the Time binding and the general semantics books, you kind of looked back at what are some really good old principles that feel essential, that feel timeless, and then how can I update them for today, make sure they're up to date and then map them in the future? Do you have any, like, is there a common thread between why you looked back to some older works to help inspire your current works?
- [53:22]
Chris Mayer
That's a good question. Yeah, you know, I don't know. It's a pattern with me. Maybe it's some sort of hardwired thing because it's happened a couple times, like hundred Baggers. You know, I pulled out the Phelps's book, which came out in 1972, and with General Semantics, when I wrote how do youo Know, I wasn't the first one to try to apply that to Wall Street. There was a book that came out and I think it was 1958. It was originally called General Semantics on Wall Street. I always like the follow on to that is that that was the title only for one year. And then after that it was Winning on Wall street, which probably meant the book wasn't selling very well, so they came out with another one. But maybe there were such scars there that took 50 years more before someone else came along and decided to give it a crack. So, yeah, I have this, for whatever reason, I have this attraction to kind of the, you know, the forgotten ideas and kind of bringing back some of these old ideas that we've lost but.
- [54:17]
Matt Zigler
Kind of forgotten and not dead. Right. Isn't that some of the opinion?
- [54:20]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, I mean, you know, like, for example, with General semantics, there's, there's the Institute of General Semantics still, still around and kicking, which Brzezinski founded in the 1930s and it's been in operation continuously since, but it's not very well known, of course, but they keep the flame alive and every once in a while someone comes along and they bring More national attention to it. I mean Neil Postman was, he was a big general semantics guy. I don't know if you know who he is, but he wrote Amusing Ourselves to Death. And these were more popular books in.
- [54:55]
Matt Zigler
The 80s and technopoly and Amusing Ourselves.
- [54:58]
Chris Mayer
Technopolis, another great one.
- [55:00]
Matt Zigler
Books of my life.
- [55:01]
Chris Mayer
They're great books. Yeah, big books. So, you know, that's an example. Every once in a while somebody will bring a lot of attention to it. But yeah, those, those. There are people out there keeping the flame, so. Keeping the flame alive.
- [55:15]
Matt Zigler
Well, let's ask a couple of these favorite standard closing questions. The one I want to ask you first is what's one thing you believe about investing today that the majority of your peers would disagree with?
- [55:31]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, well, I mean mine is much more hands off style investing. So I don't believe in the trimming and adding and trading around your positions, which all of my peers seem to love to do. You know, when stocks get expensive in their mind, they cut it back. And when they seem to find something they think is more expensive, they add to it. So there's a lot of activity going around the periphery of the portfolio. And I don't do any of that. I would buy something and just leave it. And I've sometimes, and I should say that grows directly out of the work that I did for a hundred baggers. I mean I saw repeatedly again and again stocks, these great businesses that they would look very expensive for a time, but the market's making them expensive on the expectation of something good happening. And if you just left it alone, you, you would have done just fine. Even from sometimes from peaks peak to peak, which you know, were surprising. So I, it doesn't mean that you only buy things once and don't because you know, if I have capital inflows or whatever, yeah, sure, I'm going add to some favorites that are down or whatever, but I'm much less active. And I think people would disagree with that a lot. They feel like as a money manager they have the ability and they ought to as part of their job determine when something gets very expensive and they should cut it back and when something becomes very compelling, they should add more capital to it. And the way I look at it is that if you really sit down and work out the math on that after taxes, the amount of time you have to be right, it's a very high bar. It's not so easy. And so the way I look at it is that these truly great businesses are so hard to find, very hard to replace. You're probably just better off just leaving alone. So that's one area I think.
- [57:32]
Bogomil Baranowski
I'm hearing, the coffee can portfolio approach from you.
- [57:35]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, if you put. It's very, very similar to that. Yeah, it, yeah, definitely.
- [57:47]
Matt Zigler
One more question for you. Based on your experience in markets so far, if you could teach one lesson to the average investor out there, what would that lesson be?
- [57:58]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, well, in a word, I would say it's patience. You know, patience. I know, like when I was learning investing in all of my 20s and 30s, I was much more jittery about things like, you know, company reports, a bad quarter, stock starts falling. You know, I get, get really antsy if you want to get out of it, you know, and, and I think if you could, if there's one thing I could pass on, it would be, it would be that just, you know, when you buy something, be a little, be more careful about what you buy. Be sure you think that you won't own it for a long time and then let it, leave it alone. You know, be willing to suffer through some ups and downs and not everything's going to work out, so you're going to have to buy, you know, more than one thing. But if you want, you know, 10 stocks, give them a chance. Be patient. And part of that, you know, that embeds a lot of other things too, when you say you have to be a patient like that, because it means you have to tune out a lot of things. You have to, you have to tune out the. I mean, a good part of financial media and Wall street is geared towards making you do things. I mean, they want transactions, they want you to move that money around. That's how they make their money. They take a little bit off those movements. They want to say the latest fund or this or that or. And the resist that is a big part of it and that, you know, being patient, big part of being patient, being able to tune out all that. And not so easy. But that would be. If I could tell the average investor one thing, that would definitely be it.
- [59:31]
Matt Zigler
There's that beautiful through line in this where it's. And as I've explained you and suggested your work to people in the past, I said, Chris knows how to be persistently patient. He's going to tell you that in 80 different ways.
- [59:42]
Chris Mayer
That's right.
- [59:42]
Matt Zigler
You need to hear at least 75 of them.
- [59:45]
Chris Mayer
That's right. I would say, like, when I think about my books, I'm starting to repeat myself, but in a lot of different ways, you know, different stories, different ways but.
- [59:55]
Matt Zigler
Thing you write the same article, you know.
- [59:57]
Chris Mayer
Yeah.
- [59:57]
Matt Zigler
Three articles, a million.
- [59:58]
Chris Mayer
Brilliant. I have one idea I'm just playing on.
- [60:04]
Bogomil Baranowski
The one big lesson I walked away from your books is that it just takes time. You know, when you even identify the hundred potential hundred bagger, you can't escape it. It will take time and it will take sometimes, you know, decades. And you show those charts and charts and studies and examples. The one thing in common, all of them that have. It took time. You can't. There's no shortcut.
- [60:28]
Chris Mayer
Yeah, you're planting seeds and you can't. Just like you can't rush nature. You have to give it time.
- [60:37]
Matt Zigler
Chris, if people want to spend more time with you, where should they look you up on the Internet?
- [60:42]
Chris Mayer
Well, you can search. You can if you put in Woodlock House, my name, my firm will come right up there. So you can certainly contact me there. My books are listed there, blog posts, other things. And I'm also on X Chris W. Mayer, so you can find me there as well.
- [61:00]
Matt Zigler
And Bogomil, my co host with the Comos, tell the people they want to connect and see more of your talking billion stuff. Where should they look? We'll put links to all this in the show notes here too.
- [61:09]
Bogomil Baranowski
Well, they can search my name. There are not too many people with my name and they'll find talking billions and my firm. So yeah, just.
- [61:17]
Chris Mayer
That's good.
- [61:18]
Matt Zigler
Timeless wisdom if ever there was some. I want to thank both of you for joining me today. You're watching Excess Returns Like Comment, subscribe all the things below. Thank you guys so much. This has been a ball.
- [61:29]
Bogomil Baranowski
Chris, thank you.
- [61:30]
Chris Mayer
Great conversation as always. Thanks so much for tuning in to this episode. If you found this discussion interesting and valuable, Please subscribe on YouTube or your favorite podcast platform or leave a review, view or a comment. We appreciate it.
- [61:42]
Bogomil Baranowski
No information on this podcast should be construed as investment advice. Securities discussed in the podcast may be holdings of the participants or their clients.