We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP332: Long-Term Investing w/ Tom Gayner

Starting point is 00:00:00 You're listening to TIP. On today's episode, we sit down with legendary investor Tom Gainer, co-CEO of McHale Corporation. Mackell has been referred to as a baby Berkshire because it's structured similarly to Berkshire Holloway and has produced stellar results. Tom has been producing investment returns in the high teens for Michael Corporation for over 30 years and was kind enough to give us incredible insights into its investment strategies and philosophies.

Starting point is 00:00:27 This was a very fun and wide-racing discussion, so sit back and enjoy discussion with Tom Gaynor. You are listening to The Investors Podcast, where we study the financial markets and read the books that influence self-made billionaires the most. We keep you informed and prepared for the unexpected. Welcome to The Investors Podcast. I'm your host, Dick Broderson, and today I'm here with my co-host, Trey Lockerbie. We are honored to be joined today by Tom Gainer. Tom, thank you so much for making time to educate our community about investing. Thanks for having me. So Tom, the first thing I want to talk about today is your evolution as a value investor. You've been in the business over 30 years.

Starting point is 00:01:22 I know you started with the Benjamin Graham model, followed Warren Buffett very closely. Markell sort of adopted the Berkshire Hathaway structure, and you've been investing that portfolio for 30 years now. I'm just curious over that time, how has your strategy and philosophy evolved and how has it stayed the same? Again, thank you very much for having me. It's very flattering preparing for our chat today. I did listen to a number of episodes and you do a professional job and really bring on a lot of very interesting people, a lot of very intelligent people, and a lot of people who are talking about some very important, complicated, thoughtful topics, And I don't know how to do any of that.

Starting point is 00:02:01 So don't quite know how I scored an invitation, but thank you. And I suspect that the nature of our conversation will be a bit different than some of the things that some of your other guests have talked about on different topics. But thank you for having me. Over the course of the last 30 years, and that actually describes my time friend here at Markell. I was in the investment business for six years before that. And frankly, one of the ways I came to be interested in investing is, frankly, I can't

Starting point is 00:02:28 remember a time that I wasn't because my father had his office in our house and he was a CPA and a small town businessman. And as fathers and sons would talk about sports and football and baseball, we did that. But we also talked about investing because he was a businessman and adored my father. So I just sort of grew up around it. In the course of the last 30 years, my investing cell has changed somewhat. And I would hope that that would be the case for anybody who's been practicing a craft for 30 years. This is not a static world. It's dynamic and it changes. And I think there are some fundamental principles which endure and are timeless and last eternally. But there are the things that tactically change. And it's important to hold fast to the things that don't change,

Starting point is 00:03:16 but be flexible and adaptive to the things that do. Let's start there. You famously identified four pillars in your investment philosophy. Could you please elaborate on that? Sure, and that might be a helpful way of framing the things that have stayed the same and some of the things that have been different and adapted and dynamic as time has gone by. So I've written in the Mark Lange report and spoken for years that there are four fundamental lenses that I look at any equity investment, any ownership interests through. So I want to buy a business that's profitable, earns good returns on capital, and doesn't use too much leverage to do it. Number two, I want those businesses to be run by people who have equal measures of talent and integrity.

Starting point is 00:04:01 Number three, I want the business to have reinvestment opportunities and the ability to grow or pretty good capital discipline, meaning the ability to do good acquisitions or pay dividends or do share repurchases. And fourth, I want to do that at a relatively what I've called fair price. So that's the thumbnail sketch of what I'm looking to do. And that really has been consistent for decades. Now, let's go into each of those to think about the ways in which they represent internal principles and some things that would recognize the fact that things need to change. So buying a good business with good returns on capital that doesn't use too much leverage to do it.

Starting point is 00:04:41 Well, the one thing that is consistent through all time is the notion of not using too much leverage. Because if you have a business which has OK returns on capital, but uses leverage to magnify those and get better returns on equity. There's nothing wrong with that, but that introduces a degree of fragility to the business that concerns me. I'm not anywhere near as smart or as intelligent or on the edge of things,

Starting point is 00:05:07 as many of the guests you would have on this program. So what I want to do is create a margin of safety, margin of error, whatever you want to call it, so that if I'm wrong, I'm not going to lose money. And to be investing in a business that has a lot of leverage that introduces an area of fragility to things. It introduces the ability that you can have the cards pulled from your hand in the middle of playing your hand

Starting point is 00:05:30 and wipe out kind of risk that would really diminish, wipe out your returns at any particular instance. I want to stay away from them. That's been consistent for decades. Now, among the things that's tempting in today's world, as we live in a period of ultra-low interest rates, It's rational and logical to get cheap debt financing when you're looking at running a business. So I don't want to express that as an absolute. It's a relative term. The idea of using some leverage in today's world, the government's very much pushing you towards doing that,

Starting point is 00:06:07 and you probably should do some of it, but not too much of it. And it's a pretty gray line of an appropriate amount of leverages, but without tipping over into too much. structure also goes into that in the sense that if you have overnight line of credit kind of money that reprises regularly, that is a substantially and fundamentally different thing than having 30-year fixed-rate financing. So, for instance, a couple of my children have bought houses in the last couple of years at 30-year fixed rates, mortgages that create rent payments, mortgage payments that are lower than rent payments, I have encouraged them to incur dad

Starting point is 00:06:47 to buy a house and that's a very very different thing than having floating rate death so that's consistent good businesses by definition earned good returns on capital but the names of those businesses change over time so when i look back and think about a company that actually fits the test of being a good business today with the way that the world is changing and the way that the pace of change is accelerated and the force is unleashed by technological change there are businesses that were fine businesses five, 10, 20, 30 years ago that aren't anymore. So you always need to be on your toes and you always need to be thoughtful about what businesses are, in fact, that definition of good businesses or not, because returns on capital typically don't straight line.

Starting point is 00:07:32 They're either kind of getting better or they're getting worse. So the ability to have something that's not falling off a cliff strikes me as a fundamentally important thing. So I look at that, And that's really one of the reasons you go to work every day is because the names of those businesses change over time. You have to stay on your toes about that sort of thing. Point number two, managements with equal measures of talent and integrity. That's, again, enduring. As my father used to say, you can't do a good deal with a bad person. That doesn't change.

Starting point is 00:08:01 I don't care what industry you're talking about. I don't care what geography you're talking about. I don't care what time frame you're talking about. The idea of getting into business with somebody who doesn't share your, your basic values and is a person of similar integrity as to what you have, that strikes me as non-sustainable. It strikes me as somebody's going to win and somebody's going to lose. So I try to involve myself in win-win transactions and win-win relationships. And if you're dealing with somebody has an integrity challenge, issue, whatever, maybe it'll go well for him. But I think somewhere

Starting point is 00:08:33 along the line, it does it for me. So I just try to avoid those as much as possible. And that's been consistent over decades. I think the older you get and the more experiences you have, probably the better your skills are at making some of those judgments. And also maybe the more patience you have about being willing to forego what may seem attractive, but you have a little tinge in your bones or a little bit of just unease in your gut tells you something about this doesn't square up. It's easier to walk away from those things when you've been doing it for a long time and have done well enough that you're not as tempted by that sort of thing is perhaps you might have been when you were younger and less mature. The reinvestment side, again,

Starting point is 00:09:14 that ties to the notion about the good business and the good returns on capital. Because again, you can have a business, which is a wonderful history of indeed being able to reinvest the money that it is made. But the ability to reinvest the next dollar, it's not about the past, it's about the future. And you have to be thoughtful. and think about what are the conditions and circumstances for this business going forward. Do those incremental dollars earn better returns or worse returns? Because your returns as an investor will converge

Starting point is 00:09:47 towards what the incremental returns on the incremental dollars are over time. Now the fourth point, buying things at a fair price, that's probably the area where things have changed the most for me. So starting out, my original training was as an accountant, the original Ben Graham sort of security analysis and the time in which he wrote that book in the 1930s, right in the aftermath of following the Great Depression sort of security analysis, there were things you could

Starting point is 00:10:15 buy for less than the networking capital that the company's own. So it was a very straightforward sort of analysis and 100% appropriate at the time to think that way. And those were the original textbooks that I learned from and studied and it's an accountant's mindset and sort of of general nature to think that makes sense. It's also something that's external for yourself. So when you're looking and doing calculations and writing things down on a piece of paper or doing a spreadsheet, you're looking at something else and you're guiding yourself in large measure by what those numbers and formulas and ideas suggest. When you start to morph into the more qualitative aspects of things, you can't put them in a spreadsheet. You can't write them down.

Starting point is 00:11:03 You have to make an internal judgment about these qualitative factors that it's not verifiable. And you can't say definitively yes or no or put too precise a number to it. I think that is something that if you're young and you're doing that, you may be confident, but I think you're probably wrong. When you're older, you may have less confidence because you have scars. You've seen things. You know the mistakes that you've made, but you don't overestimate your ability to make those sort of judgments. And you know how important they are.

Starting point is 00:11:40 So you're willing to make them anyway and proceed with trepidation and humility. And that's just a softer skill. It's a skill that goes along with maturity in many ways. And I think that's the biggest single factor that has changed over the course of the 30 years that you speak of, where relying more and more on that aspect of things and approaching it quite differently than what would have been the case 30 years ago. Wow, there's a lot to impact there. I want to start with the price and determining the intrinsic value of something.

Starting point is 00:12:13 And you talked about this quantitative approach very early in your career and how that's evolved. I think a lot of our listeners can relate to that because a lot of our listeners, they have day jobs and they're sitting on maybe some savings they want to put to work, not necessarily interesting just anyone to run the money for them, looking to learn how to invest for themselves, which I think is great. But I think when you start out learning about Ben Graham and that sort of quantitative style, it's easy to find yourself going down the rabbit hole of stock screeners and looking at these ratios and then buying this basket of stocks just based on a few different

Starting point is 00:12:47 numbers. And you're kind of missing that qualitative approach. So lately I've been looking at it's sort of like a valuation sandwich where you can use the quantitative approach. use the screeners, filter down to a universe of stocks that's worth digging in more into, but then really doing the work on the qualitative stuff because that's what fills in the sandwich. That's what's in the middle. Understanding the story of the free cash flows, understanding where those might go. And then the final piece of the sandwich is the IRA calculation. So once you know where the free cash flows are going, running that calculation, and then seeing

Starting point is 00:13:20 where the price is related to your intrinsic value of it. Is that how you're looking at it? Is it a similar approach? Is it an 80% qualitative, 20% quantitative? How do you look at it? Well, I'm tempted to answer. It's 47.38% quantitative and somewhere between yellow and green for the balance. I mean, I understand what you're saying.

Starting point is 00:13:45 And you're exactly right. And those are the things that, I mean, easy overstates how hard that is. There's real work that needs to be done. and should continue to be done by me as well as anybody else pursuing that. And that work is necessary, but I don't think it is sufficient to draw conclusion. It's data that is helpful and points you in directions, and it's data that should be helpful in disproving things. So in terms of the scientific method, you think about things, you have a hypothesis,

Starting point is 00:14:14 and what you should be about as a scientist is working hard to disprove your hypothesis because you know you're wrong, so you need to adapt and adjust and get to the next hypothesis. So for someone to just assert that they do qualitative work without doing the sort of things you're talking about, that's a mistake. And that's not going to be a good answer either. Because if you develop a qualitative thesis, the types of things you're talking about should provide some quantitative evidence that at least you're not wrong. It doesn't tell you you're right, but it may tell you that you're probably wrong. And if you're probably wrong, then you should keep working and keep moving along. I think there are other dimensions

Starting point is 00:14:54 about what you just brought up. Again, so think about someone who's younger, somebody perhaps is day job, somebody who perhaps is starting out, and you're trying to attract some clients, and you're trying to get people to give you money to manage them on their behalf. Well, if you look at somebody richer and older who might be a potential client, they're going to ask you some questions about how you do things and why should I believe you? And what skill do you bring to the table versus all the other people who are pitching to manage money for me? And if you just sort of give some soft soap of your thoughtfulness and your understanding of psychology and sociology and human behavior, I think you will struggle to get clients. So I understand the challenges that

Starting point is 00:15:41 are involved. Fortunately, and my path would be suggestive of how this can work, there's an element of that quantitative sort of thing which you're speaking of that can and should be done, and did that continue to do that, and some of it worked well enough, early enough, that I gained credibility from some people who had some money to manage and then could build a track record over time such that you have some documentation, some trail of evidence that suggest that this person does have a good sense for this sort of thing or not. And it takes time to do that. And if I was starting over right now, maybe I'd go to dental school. I don't know. I appreciate and understand the challenge that's involved in bidding things started. It actually

Starting point is 00:16:28 ties to something else that you pointed towards talking about the notion of frugality and living beneath your means. And if I could bring that up now rather than later, it ties to that. because by definition, if you're living below your means, in one sense, you're already rich. You have whatever lifestyle and needs you have. You've acted and behaved in such a way that costs you less than the money you have coming in. So that means you have excess cash flow to invest. And whether that's $10,000 a month or $10,000 a month or God knows what, as long as that number is positive, you have the opportunity and the ability

Starting point is 00:17:07 to start making capital allocation decisions, to start making investment decisions, and building that sort of track record, and you'll create that trail of evidence, even with small sums. But it's very important, among many other reasons in living, that's one of them. It creates all sorts of behavioral advantages. So in other words, by living within your means, you can become a micro-Michael, having free cash flow that you can reinvest and compound in other ways. Exactly. It can be a micronaut, but it's extremely.

Starting point is 00:17:37 important that you'd be able to do that because there's no way you will ever get the track and the sense of confidence and the craftsmanship that just comes from actually doing it day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. All right. I want you guys to imagine spending three days in Oslo at the height of the summer. You got long days of daylight, incredible food, floating saunas on the Oslo Fjord, and every conversation you have is with people who are actually shaping the future. That's what the Oslo Freedom Forum is. From June 1st through the 3rd, 2026, the Oslo Freedom Forum is entering its 18th year bringing together activists, technologists, journalists, investors, and builders

Starting point is 00:18:23 from all over the world, many of them operating on the front lines of history. This is where you hear firsthand stories from people using Bitcoin to survive currency collapse, using AI to expose human rights abuses and building technology under censorship and authoritarian pressures. These aren't abstract ideas. These are tools real people are using right now. You'll be in the room with about 2,000 extraordinary individuals, dissidents, founders, philanthropists, policymakers, the kind of people you don't just listen to but end up having dinner with. Over three days, you'll experience powerful mainstage talks, hands-on workshops on freedom tech, and financial sovereignty, immersive art installations, and conversations that continue long after the sessions end.

Starting point is 00:19:09 And it's all happening in Oslo in June. If this sounds like your kind of room, well, you're in luck because you can attend in person. Standard and patron passes are available at Osloof Freedom Forum.com with patron passes offering deep access, private events, and small group time with the speakers. The Oslo Freedom Forum isn't just a conference. It's a place where ideas meet reality and where the future is being. built by people living it. If you run a business, you've probably had the same thought lately. How do we make AI useful in the real world? Because the upside is huge, but guessing your way into it is a risky move.

Starting point is 00:19:46 With NetSuite by Oracle, you can put AI to work today. NetSuite is the number one AI Cloud ERP, trusted by over 43,000 businesses. It pulls your financials, inventory, commerce, HR, and CRM into one unified system. And that connected data is what makes your AI smarter. It can automate routine work, surface actionable insights, and help you cut costs while making fast AI-powered decisions with confidence. And now with the NetSuite AI connector, you can use the AI of your choice to connect directly to your real business data.

Starting point is 00:20:20 This isn't some add-on, it's AI built into the system that runs your business. And whether your company does millions or even hundreds of millions, NetSuite helps you stay ahead. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get their free business guide, demystifying AI at netsuite.com slash study. The guide is free to you at net suite.com slash study. NetSuite.com slash study. When I started my own side business, it suddenly felt like I had to become 10 different people overnight wearing many different hats. Starting something from scratch can feel exciting, but also incredibly overwhelming and lonely. That's why having the right tools matters. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform

Starting point is 00:21:07 behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. from brands just getting started to household names. It gives you everything you need in one place, from inventory to payments to analytics. So you're not juggling a bunch of different platforms. You can build a beautiful online store with hundreds of ready-to-use templates, and Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions and even enhance your product photography. Plus, if you ever get stuck, they've got award-winning 24-7 customer support. Start your business today with the industry's best business partner, Shopify, and start hearing...

Starting point is 00:21:45 Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.com slash WSB. Go to Shopify.com slash WSB. That's Shopify.com slash WSb. be. All right, back to the show. So I love that you just brought up the term craftsmanship, because I think that's an underappreciated term as it relates to asset allocation. So, for example, I heard you mentioned in an interview that to become a great investor, yes, it's important to understand the numbers, but you might want to also be able to write a poem. And that really resonated with me, having come from the music industry before starting my own

Starting point is 00:22:26 company and learning about business and accounting and then investing. I still take with me that bit of craftsmanship into my investing. And I was fascinated to hear you describe it the same way. I'm delighted to hear of your background as a musician. And I'll tell you some stories about that if I may. So my father, who was an accountant by training, he was a child of the depression and he graduated from a junior college in 1936. He was in Carlinville, Illinois, actually got a job in Streeter, Illinois, with Owens, Illinois glass business that was there. So again, 1936, junior college went to a very interesting school called Blackburn, which still exists. Tuition room and board at the time was $25 a year, which even in the Depression is a good deal.

Starting point is 00:23:17 And it was a work college where they had a farm, they raised animals, they did the carpentry, the painting, the electrical work, they cook the food themselves. as students to make it possible to provide an education. But one of the things he did to string together sort of basic existence was he worked as a musician, and he played the clarinet, and Southern Illinois and Central Illinois kind of had some, call it, speak easy, that sort of unlicensed bars, whatever you want to call it. And he worked and helped put food on the table, got married right out of school as a musician. And he played the clarinet his whole life. and he played Dixie Land Jazz, did it for fun.

Starting point is 00:23:57 And I think the mathematical structure that underlies music is, A, it's profound, and B, it applies everywhere else. I too played the clarinet, not as well as my dad. I do claim to be a professional musician because at the apex of my career, I was paid one time playing a pit band of an orchestra for show while in college, made $25. But the definition of being a professional is that you get paid to do it. So I worked as a professional musician myself, and I have the family heritage and lifestyle of having seen that. And the best music instruction I ever had in my life was a guy who I used to take some piano lessons from. And I was never good at the reading of the music and playing off of written music more

Starting point is 00:24:44 it was improvisation and feel. But I was not a talented or gifted musician because I was limited. I should have spent more time and effort and discipline on the fundamental attributes of the music rather than just play what you feel. And that particular teacher, we never looked at a note. Everything was about math and music theory and intervals and describing, you know, the chord progressions in mathematical terms. And that clicked with my mind. So feeling, understanding, knowing those patterns, and seeing that there's underlying math whenever you're listening to, a piece of music, but yet there's a sound that makes you feel something. And I don't know,

Starting point is 00:25:26 but you, maybe if I studied it more, maybe if I was a better mathematician or a more diligent student, I would understand how to describe mathematically the way I feel when I listen to certain pieces of music, but I don't know how to do that. But I know it's real and the effects of things that can be described mathematically do have some sort of non-mathematical, emotional dimension to them. And I think music is just a great example of that. I like to say that a portfolio is like an album where you don't want a bad song on the album. And that the whole process between putting together an investment portfolio and an album is very similar in that you're distilling down information. So you're taking all the sounds

Starting point is 00:26:09 possible, all the lyrics, distilling them down into something great. Similarly, thousands of stocks, whittling it down, distilling down the information into a portfolio that will outperform. Do you see it the same way? I think that's a fabulous analogy. You can think about it as an orchestra, a piece of music, an album, whatever you want. It's very rare. I don't think there's any piece of music. I mean, there are some pieces of music that you'll listen to today that you listen to five years ago, ten years ago, 30 years ago. And they're just sort of these enduring songs, albums, things that they're just lifetime pieces for you. I'd be willing to bet that none of them involve one instrument or one voice.

Starting point is 00:26:50 It's an ensemble of some sort. Even a solo act typically has a guitar accompanied with a rhythm section, a band, whatever. A couple years ago, in the Mark Kellan, your report, I wrote about Bruce Springsteen, the East Street band, and the conclusion that he had come to about the reason that band had endured and been successful over time is because he came to the acceptance of how important everyone else around him was, And they came to the acceptance of how important he was. But the ensemble creation of all that is a loose analogy for a portfolio that has multiple components, multiple pieces, multiple things that knit it together, has a congealed and embedded sound

Starting point is 00:27:33 that's attached to it, and is able to endure the fact that sometimes you lose the music soon along the way, and a new one comes in every once in a while. The Philadelphia Orchestra has been around for a long time. I don't know who plays second violin at the Philadelphia Orchestra, but somebody does. And somebody did 10 years ago, 30 years ago, 50 years ago, 100 years ago, the Philadelphia Orchestra still goes on. So there's all of those pieces which balance out into the production of that ensemble, that music. And it's similar to a portfolio where it's not a single stock, it's not a single idea. It is a collection.

Starting point is 00:28:10 It is an amalgamation. It's an ensemble that comes together that works. Shifting gears, Tom, I notice that you compensate your managers on a five-year rolling average. I find the way you think about your organization very inspiring because it's clearly another piece to the puzzle of asset allocation that all CEOs must consider. Could you talk a bit more about how you evaluate your managers and ensure that they have the right incentives at all times? Well, I think that the five-year compensation calculation, which we do have here at Markell,

Starting point is 00:28:43 is a very valuable mechanism and tool to try to make sure that we're thinking as long-term as possible. And, of course, I've been here long enough that there's been a lot of rolling five-year averages. Every year one rolls on and one rolls off. So I've been here long enough that that really stretches beyond five years towards whatever my lifespan is. So it seems like a square deal for me. It seems like a square deal for our shareholders. And then if things go well for Markle, I get paid. If things don't, I don't get paid.

Starting point is 00:29:15 And it's measured over a long enough period of time that you can see whether there was real value added or not. So I joke that if I ever get fired from this job, the next job I wanted to do is to be a maker of 12-year-old Scotch whiskey so that it would be at least 11 and 3 quarters years before somebody knows if I actually know what I'm doing or not. But think about that. If your job really is to make 12-year-old Scotch whiskey, there is a discipline, and there is a process, and there is a craftsmanship and a time-tested way that would suggest that these are reasonable ways in which to make 12-year-old aged whiskey. So it's not like you just play around for 11 and 3 quarters of years and then show up and try to do something. That's not going to work. But if that is really what you're trying to do is to make great 12-year whiskey, there are steps that you should do, and you need to be operating in a culture and environment where you're not going to be second-guessed or micromanaged or pulled off the task midstream, because it really will take that amount of time before people could discern whether you were good at what you did or not.

Starting point is 00:30:23 And I think that is one of the unique features of Marquell's who've tried very much to build the culture where people just have it in their bones and in their way of doing things. and we're trying to build something that has an indefinite time frame that lasts forever. And the way to do that is to think as much as possible, like an owner, like you were trying to hand off a business to the next generation of your family or your closest friends that you really care deeply about. And you want to hand it off to them in a better way and in a better spot than the way it was when you got there. And as long as you can embed that in the people and the systems and the culture of things, I think you'll do very, very well. I don't know if you heard the Charlie Munger interview that took place earlier this week at Caltech. And he talked about, you know, in the investing world, it's more important to not be stupid than it is to be really smart.

Starting point is 00:31:12 So I can see ways in which business breaks that sensation of long-term values and long-term thinking pretty clearly. Easy stories, stuffing inventory channels, doing unnatural acts to meet this quarter's budget, all of those sorts of things. You don't have to go far to find war stories about that, but you can just continue to orient yourself towards, look, if I take care of this customer, if I make them happy, if I do the very best I can for them, and I make a reasonable rate of return for doing so, that will compound the marvelous things over time. And there's absolutely nothing that should stop it. And if nothing stops it, and positive compounding continues to occur, that produces epic results over time. I want to go back to that 2019 shareholder letter. There's this ominous sentence in there that says, barring any major catastrophe, we expect the same returns in 2020. And we both know 2020 has just been this unbelievable year, full of uncertainty.

Starting point is 00:32:18 How have you navigated your portfolio through this year? What has been the biggest change to your strategy? Thank you for reading the letter and thank you for pointing that out. They say hindsight is always 2020. In this case, 2020, I hope we put that in the rearview mirror in so many ways, in ways way more profound than business or what happens at Markell. I'm talking about our society and our world. I hope we can get this in the rearview mirror and learn some important and profound lessons

Starting point is 00:32:47 that will make life a better place. So that said, one of the positive features about 2020 is here we are, and we're in December and almost at the end of the year, and we're still here. While there have been epic, unforeseen challenges this year, the whole point of Markell was to be resilient. And the first order of business for any biological creature is to not die, survival. Because again, compounding cannot take place if the chain is interrupted. So, yeah, we took some gut punches in terms of insured losses in the first quarter. and Markal Ventures collection of businesses.

Starting point is 00:33:27 There were a lot of businesses where we were deeply surprised and were dealing with unprecedented business conditions that we had to figure it out. Obviously, investment markets had a lot of volatility to them. But that said, we operated with enough margin of safety and with enough margin of error that even though these things took place that none of us had anticipated or specifically planned for or prepared. for or had a good strategic plan about, it was okay. We've lived to fight another day and answer the bell for the next round of the fight. And we went out and tried to take care of our people, tried to take care of our customers and operate in a prudent and reasonable way. And as the year has

Starting point is 00:34:10 gone by, things have recovered quite nicely in any of the dimensions you want to talk about, specific to the business of Markell, whether that's the insurance company results, whether it's the collection of the Markle Ventures results, whether it's what's happening on the investment side, And all of that doesn't guarantee smooth sailing into 2021. But I certainly appreciate and think that this has been a real acid test and a real battlefield test of the fundamental architecture of the three engines we talk about here at Mark L where we try to run a good insurance business. We try to run good industrial and service businesses. We try to invest the money thoughtfully. And if we do all of that and don't, again, use something like too much leverage, which would create fragility into the system.

Starting point is 00:34:55 Some years you compound at higher rates, some years you compound at lower rates. But as long as the train keeps moving forward, that's the definition of compounding. Well, in the year like 2020, it's easy to find yourself in triad mode where you're just showing up existing positions. And therefore, I'm also curious to know what happened back in March 2020, where all those stocks went on sale. Did you have enough bandwidth to focus on new potential investments? Well, I think there are several layers behind your question and several

Starting point is 00:35:25 layers in having a thoughtful answer to that. One is there's an important distinction between strategy and tactics. So in terms of the fundamental strategy of Markell and the three engines, and running a profitable insurance business, running a profitable industrial and service collection of businesses, and investing thoughtfully, that's strategy. And that hasn't changed one iota. And I don't anticipate any changes in that basic strategic level of design and architecture for Markell going forward. Now, tactically, any given day, you're presented with opportunities that are within that strategic framework. Yes, tactically, with perfect hindsight, I hate to use the word 2020 again, but with perfect hindsight, there are things that I would have

Starting point is 00:36:12 done differently in March or April or May than what we did. And I think I will be justly and appropriately criticized for making some tactical errors through that time. But I felt my first and foremost responsibility was to be a steward of the capital and a long-term steward of the future of the Markell Corporation. So in looking at what possible rewards existed with different things and what possible risk were associated with different things, I chose to err on the side of caution. And at this point, again, tactically, there are some other actions that could have been taken, which would have resulted in better results this year. But they increased the likelihood of persistency for Markell and that we would be able to make subsequent tactical decisions

Starting point is 00:37:00 in July and in August and in 2021 and in 2025 and in 2030. And that's what I thought was more important to do. I'd also add, again, this just gets to layers and it ties to the notion of what you talked about when you're starting in the business and being quantitative and wanting to hit some home runs to attract attention and attract clients and get a pot of money to make. manage. IRL math highlights that sort of thing because there's a time to mention that the quicker your money comes back, the better your IRA is. Buffett once gave an example, and this is a 15 or 20 year old example, where he said, you know, there's two bonds out there. One of them, and their

Starting point is 00:37:41 government bonds. One of them pays 8 percent, and one of them pays 6 percent. And you know how old the example is when you're talking about government bonds paid 8 and 6, and the audience wasn't just shocked and said, what country are you from? What are you talking about? Those were real interest rates that existed 20 years ago. And he said, so which one should you buy? And he said, you don't have enough information to answer that question because what you really need to answer that question comprehensively is a few more things. One, the 8% bond is a current coupon bond. So every six months, you're going to get a coupon payment on your 8% bond. Your 6% bond is a zero coupon bond. So the coupons are reinvested by definition at that 6% rate.

Starting point is 00:38:28 Now, you don't know what's going to happen to interest rates. As it turns out, and again, Buffett in his foxy way, whether he meant to or not, kind of predicted the future pretty doggone well. The reinvestment rates, if you were buying government bonds, continue to go down, they've fallen off a cliff. So frankly, the answer to that question posed 20 years ago, use an investor would have been better off buying the bond that had a 6% coupon than an 8% coupon. And that just doesn't seem normal or natural or intuitively correct. But what it speaks to is the persistency of the return

Starting point is 00:39:03 for a long period of time at a reasonable rate. And there's a lot of retirees and people who have behaved very prudently who are faced with real challenges by the fact that there was this glitzy return to a retiree of 8% on a government bond. But that That really wasn't the good investment to make. The better investment to make was the 6% that compounded for the next 30 years because it was a zero coupon bond. Another way of thinking about that, that's Aesop's fable, the tortoise and the hare. So it is so tempting to think that hares are better investors than tortoises. I suspect in many times they're way better traders, way better traders than tortoises.

Starting point is 00:39:49 but oftentimes they're not as good at an investor as what the tortoise is. And what the tortoise really does is earn a durable return over a long period of time. And that's the game on play. That's what I think I have some skills at. I know I'm not fast like the hair, but I think I can be steady and enduring like the tortoise. And trying to find what it is that you're good at. And again, this is the distinction between some of the people that, you know,

Starting point is 00:40:15 I've heard on your podcast. They are way better at being fast than I am. So if I try to compete with them at that sort of stuff, I'm going to lose. They're going to beat me. But there's not that many people who really do it the way I do it. So I don't need the same skills as what they need. And by the way, it has, and I hope and trust, although it's not certain, will continue to produce very good returns for Markell and the people associated with it and really run the business, which really means taking care of people, whether that's our customers or. whether it's our employees, for this institution to continue to grow in the way that it has

Starting point is 00:40:55 and provide livings for so many people and provide valuable products and services, that's fun. That's encouraging, that's uplifting, and that's what I'm trying to do. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. No, it's not your imagination. Risk and regulation are ramping up, and customers now expect proof of security just to do business. That's why Vantza is a game change. VANTA automates your compliance process and brings compliance, risk, and customer trust together on one AI-powered platform.

Starting point is 00:41:28 So whether you're prepping for a stock two or running an enterprise GRC program, VANTA keeps you secure and keeps your deals moving. Instead of chasing spreadsheets and screenshots, VANTA gives you continuous automation across more than 35 security and privacy frameworks. Companies like Ramp and Ryder spend 82% less time on audits with Vantta. That's not just faster compliance, it's more time for growth. If I were running a startup or scaling a team today, this is exactly the type of platform I'd want in place.

Starting point is 00:41:59 Get started at vanta.com slash billionaires. That's vanta.com slash billionaires. Ever wanted to explore the world of online trading but haven't dared try? The futures market is more active now than ever before, and plus 500 futures is the perfect place to start. Plus 500 gives you access to a wide range of instruments, the S&P 500, Nasdaq, Bitcoin, gas, and much more. Explore equity indices, energy, metals, 4X, crypto, and beyond. With a simple and intuitive platform, you can trade from anywhere, right from your phone. Deposit with a minimum of $100 and experience the fast, accessible futures trading you've been waiting for. See a trading opportunity. You'll be able to

Starting point is 00:42:46 trade it in just two clicks once your account is open. Not sure if you're ready, not a problem. Plus 500 gives you an unlimited, risk-free demo account with charts and analytic tools for you to practice on. With over 20 years of experience, Plus 500 is your gateway to the markets. Visit plus500.com to learn more. Trading in futures involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone. Not all applicants will qualify. Plus 500, it's trading with a lot. Plus. Billion dollar investors don't typically park their cash in high-yield savings accounts. Instead, they often use one of the premier passive income strategies for institutional investors, private credit. Now, the same passive income strategy is available to investors of all sizes

Starting point is 00:43:35 thanks to the Fundrise income fund, which has more than $600 million invested in a 7.97% distribution rate. With traditional savings yields falling, it's no wonder private credit has grown to be a trillion dollar asset class in the last few years. Visit fundrise.com slash WSB to invest in the Fundrise income fund in just minutes. The fund's total return in 2025 was 8%, and the average annual total return since inception is 7.8%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, current distribution rate as of 1231, 2025. carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges, and expenses.

Starting point is 00:44:18 This and other information can be found in the income funds prospectus at fundrise.com slash income. This is a paid advertisement. All right. Back to the show. Well, as Buffett likes to say, no one likes to get rich slowly. And I'm glad you brought up Buffett because he and Munger are very outspoken about not liking companies reporting EBTA.

Starting point is 00:44:40 And in your 2019 letter, you point out that Markell Ventures uses EBITA and referred to it as the least worst proxy to describe the sense of economic profitability. Could you please elaborate on your thoughts on EBITA as a reporting metric and why you consider it to be the least worst metric? A couple of points. I'm not opposed to getting rich quickly. I just don't know how to do it. So therefore, I've embraced the idea of doing so slowly because I think I have a chance of doing that. So point number one. To your comments about EBDA, again, yes, Buffett and Munger have written extensively.

Starting point is 00:45:16 Munger is normally more colorful way, has spoken in very derogatory terms about EBDA. And he's not wrong, but you have to dig one layer deeper. So if anybody's using EBITDA, a couple things. One, that is the language that exists in the world of businesses being bought and sold, especially in and out of the public markets. So because the community of people who own these businesses is talked to by people who use language, it's important for me to at least understand and recognize that language and how it works. Here's a long story, but I hope it makes the point. I don't know if the name Anatoly Dobrenin means anything to you.

Starting point is 00:45:59 He was the Russian ambassador to the U.S., and I think he was in that job 30, 40 years. So he might have started with somebody like Johnson and through Nixon and Ford and maybe went up to Clinton. I don't know, but he was in that job for a long time. And what made him especially skilled and talented at his job was he was in the West for a long enough period of time that he truly understood Western ways and Western language, Western values, and Western culture. But he was Russian as well. and he truly understood in new Russian ways, Russian language, Russian culture, such that he was able to communicate and be a bridge between those two worlds. That's the definition of what an ambassador's job is. So I take with humility and understanding the way in which Buffett and Munger

Starting point is 00:46:53 would criticize the word Ibidat, because it is used in a world that's not their world. Okay, But I think as an ambassador and somebody who needs to be able to communicate with that world, I need to understand the language and the terms. Point number one. Point number two, Ibaata is a word that in and of itself just doesn't tell you enough. It is a tool, and that tool can be used well and productively or not well. And the nature of the business that you're describing sort of gives you a pretty good sensation of what sort of shades of gray you should attach to someone using the word,

Starting point is 00:47:29 If you were talking about a steel mill, and that steel mill cost a billion dollars to build 10 years ago, and you're depreciating against that historical billion dollar cost, which is what GAAP accounting would cause you to do, and then 20 years from now, you're going to need to build a new steel mill. It's not going to cost you a billion dollars to do it then. It's going to cost you $10 billion to make up a number. Well, you really should have been depreciated against the replacement cost, which is 20, not the historical cost, which is one. So if you're using EBIDA to describe the earnings and the cash flow generation of a business like that, you're kidding people. You're probably kidding yourself. So that's where EBITDA really falls off the rails, and it is not a good description at all. I'm looking at your get up there with the microphone and the headphones, and it brings to mind the picture of a radio station.

Starting point is 00:48:21 And if you think about a radio station, and I actually worked as a DJ at a radio station when I was a teenager, And I remember sort of looking like you look right now with the setup and the microphone. If you're talking about a radio station, EBITDA is a very accurate tool to describe the cash flow generation of a radio station, especially if you're the person who bought it within the last couple of years. Because you paid some price that was related to and derived from the cash flow characteristics of the business. and the cash flow requirements, the capital spending requirements on a radio station, they're not zero, but they're not very much. I mean, you need to modestly update and keep your equipment up to date, but relative to the amount of money that the station makes,

Starting point is 00:49:07 it's not the capital expenditures that make it good. It's the show, it's the talent, it's the energy, it's the programming, whatever, which is current period expense, not capitalized expense. So, depending on which kind of business you're looking at, EBITDA is either a horrible description of what's really going on or a pretty good one. And if you look at the array of Markle Ventures businesses, I would say we are much more radio station like than steel mill like. And you don't just have to take my word for it. You can look at years of the financial reports, the public financial disclosures, and look at what the capital expenditures are, which is captured in depreciation, the G.

Starting point is 00:49:51 of EBAA. So adjusting for amortization and backing out the purchase price, I think is legitimate, and that's really what EBITDA does. And the D, in our case, is de minimis. If you were to look at a business and you see the D number being big rather than small, then EBAA, however big D is, that is exactly inversely proportionate to how accurate EBIT is at conveying the underleg economics of the business. So you just have to dig a little deeper and think about it. Tom, going back to one of your four investment philosophy principles, you want to invest in a company that is run by management with integrity. How do you qualify such a qualitative fact? It's a spectacular question, and it has both quantitative and qualitative aspects to it.

Starting point is 00:50:41 So quantitatively, if you look at a company and a management team, it has produced pretty good results, and they've done it over a period of years. That is a very good tell and marker that it's being run well, because when customers are doing more business with you every year, there's more revenues and proportionate profitability. That is a marketplace stamp of approval that, hey, this company is doing something for me. As I wrote, a great company is a company that does things for their customers rather than to their customers. And if you're serving your customers and doing things for them, that increases the odds that they'll come back and want to do business with you again and refer other people to you and your reputation will help you in the marketplace.

Starting point is 00:51:26 And a lot of that really does tie to that aspect of integrity. There's other aspects of it that are really a matter of quantitative feel. And I don't think you should not trust your own judgments about whether you think people running these businesses are good people or not so good people and what are their motivations and styles and trust your gut a little bit. Trust your visceral reactions to how you feel about people when you encounter them. And again, a business that has not been successful, it is not put reasonable, not perfect numbers, but not reasonable numbers on the books for a long period of time, is one that one of the reasons for that is maybe they don't have that fundamental value that

Starting point is 00:52:08 you're looking for. So, okay, move on. Look at something else. Right. And I've heard you talk about leverage and how that might be a key indicator for determining how much integrity the management has. Can you elaborate on that? I will. And indeed. And I'm going to give credit to Shelby Davis as I do this. So in the very earliest years when we were starting to buy the Markell Ventures businesses and move outside the realms of insurance and buy these businesses that we had not had firsthand experience operating before. I remember being with Shelby and it was in Omaha during one of the Berkshire meetings and the convening and running into people and just having a meal with people or having

Starting point is 00:52:50 a drink with people or running into somebody in a hallway or a bar that we did. And he and I were talking about this new strategic initiative of Markell to indeed look at what Berkshire had done and go from passive minority stakes and businesses to controlling stakes and owning businesses. And I was sort of asking him about his experience, who's older and wiser guy than I was, and trying to hone in on exactly that point about integrity. And his response, as Shelby often could, just put his finger right on it, he said, well, if you want to buy a business that's not run by crooks, buy one where they don't have any debt. And so I leaned in and asked him about that.

Starting point is 00:53:36 He says, think about it. When you're financing a business with debt, you are borrowing money, somebody else's money, to run your business. If you're financing business with equity, well, that's your money. Now, crooks don't want to steal their own money. They want to steal somebody else's money. So it's actually a tell, not perfect, but it is a tell that generally speaking, businesses which are finance largely with equity, tend to have a different character and nature of people running them than businesses that are financed with a lot of debt. Because the risk reward for the managers is

Starting point is 00:54:17 different when you have a heavily debt finance business than when you have a heavily equity finance business. If it's equity and it's yours and it's your family's assets, and if you lose that money, I mean, you've lost everything. You've lost your livelihood, you've lost your business, you've lost your reputation and it is awful. If you run a business and it's externally financed and it's not really your equity capital in the game, it's not great, but you can move on. And there's countless examples of that. And given the fact that I feel like I've attached myself and my reputation to this business, I want partners and colleagues who feel the same way about it.

Starting point is 00:55:01 I don't want to attach myself for people who might run things into a wall not care as deeply and as much as I do. I'm not saying we won't make mistakes. We do make mistakes. We make them regularly. And I pray that we never get into a period where we don't make any mistakes because that means we're not doing enough. We need to be willing to take risk and try things. But let's be thoughtful and prudent. As our former chair and Alan Kirshner used to say, let's make some new mistakes. It's not make the same ones. With that said, I would like to speak about Warren Buffett again, because he has countless times been asked about macro, and yes, he sometimes gives a few hints here and there about some of his

Starting point is 00:55:42 macro beliefs, but most often he drives home the point of being oblivious to the macro environment. A good business should be able to not only survive but prospered during almost any kind of macro environment. That is his thesis. But giving today's extreme environment, we just talked about that for a very important. instance, the debt levels are an extreme level and is getting worse every day. Does macro weigh into your investment strategy at all? It weighs that Buffett, again, he talks about sort of the quadrants and think about the one axis how important something is and on the other axis,

Starting point is 00:56:18 how knowable it is. So the macroeconomic environment is on that axis of things that are really, really important, but it's not knowable. So he tries to spend his times on things that are knowable and important. The macroeconomic environment is amazingly challenging right now. Charlie Munger in his interview earlier this week in Caltech just talked about these are unprecedented conditions in the world of finance. I mean, there is no human history that speaks to and captures what's going on in finance right now. So there can be macroeconomic forces. that are incredibly important. It may cause some specific investment decisions we make to not work out.

Starting point is 00:57:01 I get that and I understand that. But as it's frustrating or it's challenging or as sort of excess stomach acid producing as it might be, I can't control it. And I don't know how to really use those forces to my advantage. So I try to acknowledge these forces and make sure they don't destroy me. I joked recently. I said, I looked at some of the things. If those stocks were countries, they'd be Switzerland.

Starting point is 00:57:29 And if you think about Switzerland, yeah, they don't win wars, but they don't lose wars because they don't fight wars. I'm trying to make sure that the things I own are not caught up and disrupted. And I'm willing to not be the disruptee as long as I'm not to disrupt it. And to think about the things that, again, we've joked in this time of the notion of 12-year-old Scotch whiskey. But one of our long-term holdings has been Diageo, and they are the makers. of Johnny Walker Whiskey, and you look at Johnny Walker Black, I point out that bottle, and I say, look at the label, look closely at the label. One of the things you'll see on it is since 1820. Wow. Well, what kind of things have happened since 1820? I don't know, make your own list.

Starting point is 00:58:13 Civil War, jet engines, telephones, the internet, washing machines, penicillin, make whatever list you want. Modern society, a lot has been done since 1820, and yet that brand still exists. exist. And I don't know if you know the backstory of Johnny Walker, but Scotch whiskey, not unlike, you know, in its day, the tax authorities, the governmental role created a moonshine industry in Scotland, just as the case here. And Johnny Walker himself was a pharmacist, and he was trusted in his community. He had integrity. So just like if you buy bad moonshine and you're drinking and you could go blind, the reason people bought whiskey from Johnny Walker is because they trusted it. He had integrity. That brand was of value, and the brand still is of value today.

Starting point is 00:59:04 And the fundamental reason it is because you as a consumer, trust it. You know what you're getting. So if you're an investor and in 1820, you know Johnny Walker and you know his worth and skills and integrity and thoughtfulness and long-term orientation as a human being. And he has this business as he's starting up. you could not have predicted the macroeconomic things that have happened since 1820. You didn't know that it was going to be so worried. You didn't know that were going to be jet airplanes. You didn't know they were going to be telephones.

Starting point is 00:59:37 You didn't know if there were smart phones. So all of those things happened. And they altered the landscape in many, many, many, many ways. But you could have made some judgment about. Was this a good thoughtful guy or not? Well, that was the important decision. And by the way, sometimes you're going to be wrong. And this gets back to the math and the dynamic.

Starting point is 00:59:55 of having a portfolio, the things that you were wrong about if there was Johnny Walker and 15 other people that you decided to back at that particular time, and 14 of them faded away and proved not to be as able and as good as what Johnny Walker was and what he did, it's okay. All of those 14 things could have gone to zero. Complete epic, utter wipeouts. The amount of money you've made by being able to compound with something over an long period of time, swamps the amount of money you lost where you got it wrong. So it's a very asymmetric risk reward. To invest in something you think is enduring offers tremendous returns, especially compared to the small stuff, you're staking to try to get there. I am very, very, very, very lucky in that I invest within the

Starting point is 01:00:46 context of the Markle Corporation. And if you look at the history of our business with very rare exceptions, and there's been exceptions in periods of times, this has been a profitable business all the way along, especially when you start looking at any annual year. Generally speaking, this business has produced an underwriting profit and our industrial and services businesses have produced positive cash flow as well. But that gives me is cash flow. And that cash flow invested in a reasonable, persistent dollar cost averaging way enables you to sort of buff out the times you were wrong. I might have bought something and been wrong immediately for the first six months because the business cycle went in a different direction or made that particular investment

Starting point is 01:01:34 goes through a tough patch. But if I'm buying more six months from now and six months after that and six months after that, it smooths itself out and a dollar cost averages such that if I'm more right about the fundamental nature of whether that's a good business or not, the passage of time plus cash flow enables the real returns to take place. And it comes from the judgment about the business itself. So going back to the 1986 initial shareholder letter from Markell Corp, it talks about using a strategy of specialization and diversification. And I'm curious about the diversification piece because diversification is known as a decent prudent strategy for mitigating risk, but even Buffett would say that risk comes from not knowing what you're doing and those who

Starting point is 01:02:22 don't know what they're doing should diversify. So naturally, he suggests that most retail investors should just stick with index funds. And I'm curious if you agree with him on that. I think index funds are one of those examples in investing where a great idea gets done to the point where it gets overdone and ultimately becomes a bad idea. I don't know where we are in that spectrum when it comes to indexing, but I suspect we are somewhere along that path. So indexing in its early days when John Vogel pioneered it, I think it made all the sense in the world, and he was exactly right. But where we are now, you have a lot of money, quote, unquote, invested in things without a fulsome understanding of what it is one actually owns,

Starting point is 01:03:04 why you actually own it and whether fundamentally you would think that's something you want to do or not. And it just seems to me that that is probably a bridge too far. And there is value in trying to understand, comprehend, and think about whether you want to be associated with a business or not. Not to mention the risk of liquidity too, right? Because if everyone's in an index fund and something goes south at the market and every one of those people are trying to sell their index fund. What happens to the index fund price? I think you can answer your own question. I think I'm going to agree with that. Well, Tom, we cannot thank you enough for coming on the show. I know our listeners are going to get an incredible amount of value from this wide-ranging discussion with all the wisdom

Starting point is 01:03:49 and insight that you brought. I encourage people to go check out Markell Corporation, read the shareholder letters. This is a wonderful company with high integrity. And I know I really enjoyed it. So I really hope we can do this again soon. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. I appreciate the opportunity and we'll do the best we can. All right. So as we're letting Tom Go, just one more quick thing. Please remember to subscribe to our podcast feed. We know a lot of you are listening to this episode but are not subscribing. Please make sure to do so. At every weekend, you'll learn more about investing from amazing guests like Tom Gaynor. All right, that was all that Trey and I had for you for this week's release of The Ambassador's podcast. Preston, I will be back next weekend with a new interview with insightful guest. Thank you for listening to TIP. To access our show notes, courses or forums, go to theinvestorspodcast.com. This show is for entertainment purposes only.

Starting point is 01:04:42 Before making any decisions, consult a professional. This show is copyrighted by the Investors Podcast Network. Written permissions must be granted before syndication or rebroadcasting.

We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP332: Long-Term Investing w/ Tom Gayner

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.