只有这件事,业余比专业做得好

股神WARREN BUFFETT说过:世上只有一件事情,业余比专业做得好,那就是股票投资。

股神有没有搞错?专业的基金经理都是精通经济的有学之士,没有理由会输给业余的投资者。可是这却是千真万确的事情,因为精通经济不一定能把投资做好,要不然经济博士都是千万富翁了,谁还要去读医学,每个人都要抢着去读经济了。

基金经理的工作就是投资股票,投资股票就是投资生意。我们都知道投资生意的人才是老板,我们也知道做老板是不需要读过经济,也不需要读过工商管理课程的。

我们身边肯定都有很多大老板是没进过大学的,但是他们都好像很懂得做生意,他们手下竟然不乏很多大学生,他们公司的许多职位甚至规定非大学生不请。他们手下职员甚至还在苦读MBA课程,希望能够早日获得大老板提拔。

在大学里选修经济和工商系的学生应该是最懂得生意的人。你猜看他们将来会成为老板还是成为职员?

如果有人说:最有商业头脑的人就是经济博士,你会赞成吗?我看第一个反对的就是股神。悄悄告诉你,股神19岁那年申请进入哈佛商学院被拒。

既然投资生意跟学历无关,我们也就不难明白为什么基金经理投资股票不一定能比业余的投资者强。因为投资股票就是投资生意,也就是选择行业,选择公司,它靠的是观察力,想象力和投资经验。选择行业是老板的工作,执行业务却是职员的工作,读过MBA课程的大学生是最理想的职员,这也就是大老板要请大学生做职员的理由。

信托基金主要的任务就是选择行业来投资,它需要的是老板思想的人才,不是最佳执行业务的人才。结果他们却反其道而行,只选有MBA,Ph.D的专才来选股,怪不得股神要说股票投资这件事,业余比专业做得好。

Your Ad Here

3 Responses to “只有这件事,业余比专业做得好”

  1. lawrence Says:

    I fully agreed, 2 years ago when I invested in Pru-Dinamik fund since its launching, its NRV has been dipped below the initial lauching price ie below 50 sen up to date.

    That means they can’t even make a decent return equivalent to bank’s deposit rate But, they claim that they are profesional, so I asked them that are they professional without liabilities? becos, year in and year out, they are making 1.25% whereas he agent are making 5% upfroant,so what the investors get?

    I have contronted with them, they explain nonsense to you.
    I conclude that actually it is the scam whereby, no liabilities and accoutabilities for agent and fund managers.
    what sort of business is better than unit trust business in malaysia?

    Win or loss, they don’t have to be responsible and sleep soundly.

    When you attend the seminar organised by them, they always make presentation as if they are professional, economc outlook, political situation,etc but when you ask them to forecst their own fund, they always say that it is not their practiceto do so. What a nonsense isn’t it? If you can’t do your co’s own forecast on the return, how can you make forescast on the trend of the country? In otherwords, they just don’t want to be held responsible and accoutabilities for their actions.

    As a past unit trust holder, I just feel conned, it is better managed by ourselves. anyway, aim for a few counters such as Public Bank, Perlis Plantation, Ytlpower just to name a few, spend sometime follow the news, using dollar cost averaging, I think the returns will be much better than the nonsense fund managers in malaysia.

    Nowaday, you know these so called fund managers can’t even perfom in malaysia, yet dare to claim to launch the Asia Pacific fund(world funds). they are treating us as investors are so dam stupid.

    Well, fellow readers may not agreed with me, but 2 years to generat a negative return is equivalent to hiring a marketing executive who can’t perform eventhough 2 years has been given for his trial. Should we fire him or continue to give him a chance?

  2. oo Says:

    Thank you lawrence, to be the first person who gave comment on my website.

    在我还没有步入股市或信托基金之前,我有幸看到KLSE.8K的电子书,从此我只对股票有兴趣,之后我就看了很多有关股票的书籍。

    对于信托基金,我最不同意的一点,就是他们每年征收管理费,不论基金是亏或赚!

    所以我想,既然投资信托基金可能会亏钱,为何不投资出售信托基金公司的股票,他们不论基金亏或赚,都可以收管理费,这是一门包赚的生意,绝对投资得过!

  3. lawrence Says:

    Fellow readers, why malaysian unit trust don’t call themselves mutual fund . (In US, unit trust is called Mutual fund).

    well, the name itself already tells us that the function of unit trust in Malaysia in loopsided, only benefiting to fund houses and unit trust agents, that is the reson they are called unit trust.

    According to the OXford Dictionary, mutually benefit means share and exhange the benefit with all parties involved.

    However, just look at the Malaysian situation, by investing the unit trust , once you start to invest in unit trust, you have loss 6.5% (5% for the so called personal financial consultant and 1.5% yearly to the unit trust houses)

    The material information such as the projection of the returns of the fund will never be disclosed to you as investors because they don’t want to be held accoutabilities and responsible. Instead, they provide you with the examption clauses such as past performance of the fund should not be used as the yardstick for your futhure investment decision,etc

    The investors returns are unpredictable, not sure at all.

    Year in and year out, the 1.5% management fee for the fund houses are a sure thing with no risk.

    The upfront agent fee of 5% is a sure thing with no risk.

    Now, if we look at a fund house who manage funds of $1b, the mangement fees of 1.5% is equivalent to $15million yearly income.
    and it is the sure return and without risk.

    If they mess up the investors hard earned money, they will tell you that it is your fault for not reading the prospectus well before investing because they are so many unreasonable exempt clauses which are not benefitting the investors.

    Worst still, if you hold for long term just like my case which i disussed in my previous article. When i quried them after 2 years of my investment, why can’t they generate positive absolute returns. They claim that they have sent me the monthly fact sheets, bi-yearly and yearly reports and I should not make unnecessary quries of thier perfomance any more. In other words,they will turn around and tell you that they informed me of thier performce and it is up to you to make decision base on their reports.

    Fellow readers,if the fund house never make a positive absolute return since its launching, then, the investors will never have a chance to benefit from their investments regardless how long you are investing in.

    it is a sure win business for unit trust company in malaysia, the higher number of funds managed by them, the higher the returns and with no risk.

    Similarly, the agent(especially, the banks) the more 3 party funds they sale, the more upfront money they will get with no risk.

    What about, investors, “chi ka poh chong”, you take care of yourselves!!!

Leave a Reply