A few years ago, the key executives of Disney summoned a study of their theme parks to figure out what kids found most absorbing.
Were they more enticed by Mickey and Minnie Mouse, or were they more in awe of Cinderella’s castle? Were they attracted more by the sweet-smelling snacks or colourful toys that were sold at the parks?
The study revealed that it wasn’t the Disney magic that captured the young children’s attention the most. Instead, it was their parents’ cell phones, especially when the parents were using them. And because the parents were always staring at their phones, the kids wanted to as well – even when they were surrounded by giant mice, spinning teacups, and the magic of pumpkin turning into a carriage.
Today, more of us are hooked to our devices, which in turn keep us hooked to work…and away from the more important things in life. An average American spends over two hours on his or her smartphone every day.
An average Indian smartphone user spends almost three hours every day on his or her device. We check them first thing in the morning, and often the last thing at night.
Now, what are the consequences of such an addiction towards cell phones?
There’s erosion in our ability to communicate in face-to-face dialogue and reduction in family conversation. Gone are the days of sitting together at a table and asking the simple question of ‘how are you?’ and ‘how was your day?’
Increasingly, more people are dying in road accidents caused by the focus on their cell phones instead of on the road and traffic. Then there are the grave consequences seen in our brain, eyes, and hands from the overuse of cell phones.
Talking about consequences, more people die taking selfies than by sharks. In 2014, for instance, 15 people died while taking a selfie worldwide; in 2015 this rose to 39, and in 2016 there were 73 deaths in the first eight months of the year (most of them in India). Sharks, on the other hand, kill 6 people annually on an average.
He or she was surely a wise man or a woman who said, “You are free to make whatever choice you want but you are not free from the consequences of the choice.”
Sadly, consequences are what we fail to put our attention to as we make decisions under uncertainties. It’s not that we are not aware of the consequences; it’s just that we fail to give them much importance because, like death, we keep believing that bad things won’t happen to us.
Of course, there is no point living a life or taking decisions only worrying about the future, it’s important to understand the consequences and how you would deal with them when you are starting out or indulging in something…like smoking, drinking, overusing cell phones, speculating in the stock market, or quitting your job to become a full-time investor .
The Most Important Question We Never Ask
The key thing in economics, whenever someone makes an assertion to you, is to always ask, “And then what?” Actually, it’s not such a bad idea to ask it about everything. But you should always ask, “And then what?” ~ Warren Buffett
I was recently reading an old interview of Peter Bernstein , author of the critically acclaimed history of financial risk, Against the Gods . Here is a key segment from the interview (emphasis is mine) where Bernstein was asked his most important lessons about risk from his book –
Two things. First, in 1703 the mathematician Gottfried von Leibniz told the scientist Jacob Bernoulli that nature does work in patterns, but “only for the most part.” The other part—the unpredictable part—tends to be where things matter the most. That’s where the action often is.
Second, Pascal’s Wager. In making decisions under conditions of uncertainty, the consequences of being wrong must carry more weight than the probabilities of being right. You begin with something that’s obvious. But because it’s hard to accept, you have to keep reminding yourself: We don’t know what’s going to happen with anything, ever. And so it’s inevitable that a certain percentage of our decisions will be wrong. There’s just no way we can always make the right decision.
That doesn’t mean you’re an idiot. But it does mean you must focus on how serious the consequences could be if you turn out to be wrong: Suppose this doesn’t do what I expect it to do. What’s going to be the impact on me? If it goes wrong, how wrong could it go and how much will it matter?
Pascal’s Wager doesn’t mean that you have to be convinced beyond doubt that you are right. But you have to think about the consequences of what you’re doing and establish that you can survive them if you’re wrong. Consequences are more important than probabilities.
…Risk-taking is an inevitable ingredient in investing, and in life, but never take a risk you do not have to take.
Nassim Taleb writes in The Black Swan –
The probabilities of very rare events are not computable; the effect of an event on us is considerably easier to ascertain (the rarer the event, the fuzzier the odds). We can have a clear idea of the consequences of an event, even if we do not know how likely it is to occur.
…This idea that in order to make a decision you need to focus on the consequences (which you can know) rather than the probability (which you can’t know) is the central idea of uncertainty. Much of my life is based on it.
Warren Buffett has written a lot about consequences in his letters, because he seemingly has the “And then what?” question on top of his mind while making decisions –
1959 – Most of you know I have been very apprehensive about general stock market levels for several years. To date, this caution has been unnecessary. By previous standards, the present level of “blue chip” security prices contains a substantial speculative component with a corresponding risk of loss. Perhaps other standards of valuation are evolving which will permanently replace the old standard. I don’t think so. I may very well be wrong; however, I would rather sustain the penalties resulting from over-conservatism than face the consequences of error, perhaps with permanent capital loss, resulting from the adoption of a “New Era” philosophy where trees really do grow to the sky.
1968 – I make no effort to predict the course of general business or the stock market. Period. However, currently there are practices snowballing in the security markets and business world which, while devoid of short term predictive value, bother me as to possible long term consequences.
1997 – In this respect, as in others, we try to “reverse engineer” our future at Berkshire, bearing in mind Charlie’s dictum: “All I want to know is where I’m going to die so I’ll never go there.” (Inverting really works: Try singing country western songs backwards and you will quickly regain your house, your car and your wife.) If we can’t tolerate a possible consequence, remote though it may be, we steer clear of planting its seeds.
2005 – Every day, in countless ways, the competitive position of each of our businesses grows either weaker or stronger. If we are delighting customers, eliminating unnecessary costs and improving our products and services, we gain strength. But if we treat customers with indifference or tolerate bloat, our businesses will wither. On a daily basis, the effects of our actions are imperceptible; cumulatively, though, their consequences are enormous.
These insights from Bernstein, Taleb, and Buffett help me realize that – while not constantly worrying about the future – I should probably do more to balance my optimism about my investing, work, and life with occasional reminders that risk is real and things may not work out at all like I expect.
And Then What?
When you are an investor in businesses, it’s important to always consider secondary and long-term effects of an action. This is akin to second-level thinking that Howard Marks writes about in his seminal book The Most Important Thing .
Asking “And then what?” to every data point or analysis that is thrown at you is of extreme importance. Especially when you are looking at a commodity business or one earning substandard returns, it’s important to question every capital investment or cost saving that the company is making…because the benefits would rarely flow to the business or its shareholders, but always to the consumer. For example, this is what Charlie Munger has to say about the textile business and the failure of business owners to ask the “And then what?” question –
…all of the advantages from great improvements are going to flow through to the customers … the people who sell the machinery – and, by and large, even the internal bureaucrats urging you to buy the equipment – show you projections with the amount you’ll save at current prices with the new technology. However, they don’t do the second step of the analysis – which is to determine how much is going to stay home and how much is just going to flow through to the customer.
I’ve never seen a single projection incorporating that second step in my life. And I see them all the time. Rather, they always read: “This capital outlay will save you so much money that it will pay for itself in three years.” So you keep buying things that will pay for themselves in three years. And after 20 years of doing it, somehow you’ve earned a return of only about 4% per annum. That’s the textile business.
And it isn’t that the machines weren’t better. It’s just that the savings didn’t go to you. The cost reductions came through all right. But the benefit of the cost reductions didn’t go to the guy who bought the equipment.
Investors who overpay for stocks fail to ask the “And then what?” question. They forget that when they are overpaying for an investment, they automatically lose some of the implied return on that investment. If the investment loses money, they lose even more when they pay too much to own it.
Investors who buy sub-standard businesses fail to ask the “And then what?” question. For instance, when they are buying leveraged businesses, they fail to consider that most such businesses don’t have the staying power in the face of adversity.
Investors who partner managers with low integrity fail to ask the “And then what?” question too. They forget what Thomas Phelps wrote in his book 100 to 1 in the Stock Market – “Remember that a man who will steal for you, will steal from you.”
And not just investors, even managers fail to ask this question, especially when the times are good. I am sure the guys at Tata Steel didn’t ask “And then what?” when they were paying more than they could have afforded to buy Corus in 2007. Those at Suzlon seem to have never asked this question at all.
Fund manager Bill Ackman failed to ask this question when he was doubling down on his stake in the scam-tainted Valeant Pharmaceuticals . And as Warren Buffett has confessed at so many times, he failed to ask this question while throwing good money after bad money on the textile business of Berkshire in the 1960s.
Asking “And then what?” is all about looking past a news event or action and understanding what that event or action might mean for the bigger picture. Of course, not all events and actions will destroy your core assumptions, but looking at things wearing the “And then what?” glasses would keep you from making hurried investing decisions based on your emotions, which are often an investor’s worst enemy.
Whether you are looking to invest in a business, or invest in a new relationship or career, never forget to ask the “And then what?” question.
It’s a life saver, believe me!