Mohnish Pabrai blog

[cubsfan]

You brought it onto yourself big guy - calling others classless and arrogant. Take a look in the mirror egomaniac.

 

Some very, very decent people apologize when they should, but you're so sure of MP's motives, you dig the hole deeper.

 

Pathetic and self serving.

[Guest longinvestor]

Lots of people want to be the next Warren Buffett. Even Warren Buffett, from all accounts, had no idea he would get here. All he knew was he was going to make lots of money. Let someone first become the next Buffett before we hail them so. To finish first, you have to first finish.

 

 

[Tim Eriksen]

You brought it onto yourself big guy - calling others classless and arrogant. Take a look in the mirror egomaniac.

 

Some very, very decent people apologize when they should, but you're so sure of MP's motives, you dig the hole deeper.

 

Pathetic and self serving.

 

Please show me where I stated Pabrai's motives.  If I did I would sincerely apologize.  I can't read his mind, but can judge the appropriateness of his actions (what he wrote on LinkedIn and his "acknowledgement").  He misrepresented his degree.  He shamelessly attacked others.  Yes I said his attacking others and attributing it to envy was classless and arrogant.  It clearly was.  I stand by that completely.  Any objective person can see it was. 

 

I totally agree with you that decent people apologize when they should.  They also don't try to blame part of it on someone else.  Six year olds, politicians, and those not really contrite do that, but not grown up mature people.  If I attributed motives to him I will apologize.  I know I don't know his motives. 

 

   

[cubsfan]

There you go buddy, splitting hairs again, twisting your words to fit your own pathetic narrative.

 

Truth is, your ego is too big to admit you're wrong - unlike some others that showed real class and don't have an ounce of arrogance that you do.

 

Talk about a politician!  You sound just like Bill Clinton - "Define sex, Mr Prosecutor"

 

 

 

[Tim Eriksen]

There you go buddy, splitting hairs again, twisting your words to fit your own pathetic narrative.

 

Truth is, your ego is too big to admit you're wrong - unlike some others that showed real class and don't have an ounce of arrogance that you do.

 

Talk about a politician!  You sound just like Bill Clinton - "Define sex, Mr Prosecutor"

 

You are a piece of work, and sound like a spokesperson for Trump or Clinton defending the indefensible.  Yet somehow it is now about my ego, when this was all about Pabrai's misrepresentation, his arrogance to think people who pointed it out must have done so out of envy of him, and you attacking those who noted the misrepresentation and his arrogant response.  Not envying him does not mean I have a great ego.  Pointing out that his response was classless was not wrong.  Pointing out your actions was not wrong.  I didn't do it to make myself feel better.  This whole event doesn't affect that one iota.  I know what I am - only a sinner saved by grace.  (that comment ought to kill this thread)

 

The one thing I do think about is what is the worst thing:

1. Is it misrepresenting one's education?  Which is pretty bad.

2. Arrogantly assuming those who called him out on it did so out of envy?  Definitely worse.

3. Or shamelessly defending him by attacking the character of those who agree that what Pabrai did and how he responded was wrong?  Got to be close to #2 if not worse.

 

Good day.

[randomep]

My god Oscar - you are an unbelievable asshole.

 

I for one don't see Oscar being an asshole at all. Being not of Pabrai's intelligence, I wouldn't have been able to understand the post in the 15sec or so I give myself to read it. So Oscar did me a favor by cutting to the chase..... so to speak.

 

 

[cubsfan]

There you go buddy, splitting hairs again, twisting your words to fit your own pathetic narrative.

 

Truth is, your ego is too big to admit you're wrong - unlike some others that showed real class and don't have an ounce of arrogance that you do.

 

Talk about a politician!  You sound just like Bill Clinton - "Define sex, Mr Prosecutor"

 

You are a piece of work, and sound like a spokesperson for Trump or Clinton defending the indefensible.  Yet somehow it is now about my ego, when this was all about Pabrai's misrepresentation, his arrogance to think people who pointed it out must have done so out of envy of him, and you attacking those who noted the misrepresentation and his arrogant response.  Not envying him does not mean I have a great ego.  Pointing out that his response was classless was not wrong.  Pointing out your actions was not wrong.  I didn't do it to make myself feel better.  This whole event doesn't affect that one iota.  I know what I am - only a sinner saved by grace.  (that comment ought to kill this thread)

 

The one thing I do think about is what is the worst thing:

1. Is it misrepresenting one's education?  Which is pretty bad.

2. Arrogantly assuming those who called him out on it did so out of envy?  Definitely worse.

3. Or shamelessly defending him by attacking the character of those who agree that what Pabrai did and how he responded was wrong?  Got to be close to #2 if not worse.

 

Good day.

 

What a confusing mess - I'm not even sure what you just said big guy.

 

Your problem is your out of control ego, with your name calling after a perfectly reasonable explanation from MP.

You couldn't leave it alone. You couldn't let it die. You couldn't be decent about it. You showed absolutely no class.

 

Like you, I can only speculate on your self righteous motives. You knew MP wouldn't come back, so you continue to

throw low blows - but you just can't stand it when they are directed at you.

 

KMA

[jobyts]

Since MP said he is not coming back to this discussion and all of us have expressed our view points before and after MP's response, let us put the linkedin topic to rest.

[LC]

We truly can be a dramatic group over here @ COBF  ;D

[tombgrt]

Here are two ways that one could have responded to this thread:

 

1) I posted on my LinkedIn profile that I have a Harvard MBA and people pointed out that I do not have that degree.  I attended a program at HBS for many years that I believe is similar in scope to the MBA program, but I do not have that degree.  It was an honest mistake and I have corrected it.  Thanks to those who pointed it out, as it potentially saved me future embarrassment.”

 

2) I posted on my LinkedIn profile that I have a Harvard MBA and people pointed out that I do not have that degree.  I actually attended program that is BETTER than a Harvard MBA.  I merely wrote “Harvard MBA” to be humble.  People who pointed out that I do not have a Harvard MBA are full of envy, taking potshots, and smearing me.  Anyone who disagrees with me is irrational.  I will now throw in a gratuitous self-reference to Warren Buffett for kicks.

 

The decision to respond in the spirit of #2 instead of #1 perhaps explains why people pointed out the misrepresentation.  It is not a gracious response, and it displays a large ego that is resistant to feedback or criticism, even when justified.

 

 

I think this response is spot-on. Pabrai's response is filled with unjustified rhetorical devices, logical fallacies, and name checking. It really takes some hubris to namecheck Warren Buffett after having to correct inaccurate info on your LinkedIn profile.

 

On a larger note, I think one of the reasons Pabrai is so controversial on this board is that he is one of the most self promotional value investors this side of Bill Ackman. This constant self promotion is one reason why his name is batted around out of all proportion to his AUM.

 

 

The real lesson seems to be that even when you do something wrong, you can attribute envy to those who pointed it out, and your fan boys will believe you and fight for you to the death.  They will even make fools out of themselves by casting aspersions on those who pointed out the misrepresentation.  They will call them names like ass and pig.  All the while living the delusion that they are in the right and doing something noble. 

 

This whole things has been like following a political discussion.   

 

 

+++++++ Spot on.

 

 

 

 

Your problem is your out of control ego, with your name calling after a perfectly reasonable explanation from MP.

You couldn't leave it alone. You couldn't let it die. You couldn't be decent about it. You showed absolutely no class.

 

 

I love the hypocrisy here after Pabrai started and ended his reply with this:

 

I have strong reservations about responding to mostly anonymous folks on message boards like this. Much of the smear is driven by envy – one of the worst human vices per Munger. You feel bad and don’t even get anything in return. The response to this post is gonna be irrational, but here goes:

 

....

 

This explanation is not gonna jive with those filled with envy. People have been taking potshots at Buffett for decades. If they can take potshots at Warren, then of course they are gonna take 100x those potshots at flawed mortals like me. I have grave misgivings about this long post (or any post), but decided to go ahead anyway. I won’t be responding. Nothing further to add on the subject from my side.

 

 

What a character.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[gary17]

lol

life is too short to worry about education.  i’ve gone to school for a long time too and i think it’s all bullshit anyways haha

 

maybe it was an honest mistake maybe not. who cares.  let’s get back to finding the next amazon at $30 !!!!!!

[cobafdek]

I think we all agree there was an error on the resume.  And I think we all agree we can't determine somebody else's inner thoughts and motivations with 100% accuracy.  A devious lie intending to deceive can look exactly like an inadvertent clerical error.

 

In Pabrai's favor is the enormous goodwill and reputation he has built up over the years.  Think of it as a moral bank account.  He's got a huge one.  This episode will result in some withdrawals, but will not deplete it by much.  He has lost some credibility, but only a little.  Over time, it should be relatively easy for him to restore it to it's original balance.

 

If he had embezzled funds from his investors, obviously the moral bank account would be completely depleted forever.  This event is nothing like that.

 

Tim Eriksen's suggested response would have been the preferred one.  Pabrai's explanation was credible, but taking a swipe at his critics and detractors means people will make larger withdrawals from the moral ledger than they otherwise would have.  Calling out envy in others, and other potshots, would have been brought up by Pabrai's loyal friends, and should have been best left to them.

 

Time and future behavior will determine whether this episode will remain a minor blip in Pabrai's career.  It probably will.  Is it the first sign that he was an evil character all along, and is now explicitly going rogue?  I doubt it.  Is it the first sign of a subclinical brain tumor, which would make him not morally responsible for the error?  Possible, but again, I doubt it.

[Cigarbutt]

Disclosure: not in a position to voice an opinion on the merits of the apparently irreconcilable positions.

Still, followed the discussion in order to learn.

 

-Sometimes, some feel they "deserve" an explanation.

-Sometimes, sorry seems to be the hardest word.

-Often, it boils down to the type of relationship, if any.

 

"It's a sad sad situation

And it's gettin' more and more absurd"

 

At some point, voting with your feet may be the most sensible option.

[cmpnd15]

I was sad reading this thread yesterday, and wish I had not stumbled on it.

 

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -Karl Popper

 

"No rational argument will have a rational effect on a man who does not want to adopt a rational attitude." -Karl Popper

 

I believe no one is entirely irrational, everyone is "bounded rational", they are rational based on what they know or their cognitive limitations,

 

"Bounded rationality is the idea that when individuals make decisions, their rationality is limited by the tractability of the decision problem, the cognitive limitations of their minds, and the time available to make the decision. "- Herbert A. Simon

[mattee2264]

 

  I don't think it can really be excused as an innocent error. I find it hard to believe an assistant could have come up with HBS MBA all by himself. Mohnish must have misrepresented the degree to his assistant (probably using the same kind of justifications in his reply on here). I cannot see how else the assistant could have conflated the executive education with an MBA.

 

  While I believe there is nothing magical about a HBS MBA many people do use education as a signal when hiring employees or in this case choosing an investment manager. Mohnish may well have gotten more out of his executive degree but most people would regard it as a poor substitute for the MBA. And LinkedIn is very much in the public domain and this is the modern day equivalent of lying on your CV. And integrity and honesty are very important qualities you would want in someone managing money on behalf of others. So it is right that questions about Mohnish's motives were raised.

 

And smearing is when you attempt to damage someone's reputation by false accusations or slander. Here someone accused Mohnish of misrepresentation on his LinkedIn profile and that accusation is entirely justified and Mohnish should have acknowledged it as such, thanked whoever pointed it out, and admitted he was at fault, made a public announcement of the correction, and learnt from the experience. As Mohnish likes referencing Buffett maybe his reply and the misrepresentation would indicate he cares too much about his outer scorecard.

 

This takes nothing away from Mohnish's incredible investing record (which I doubt he would have achieved with an actual Harvard MBA). But as a fiduciary he fell short.

 

 

[Read the Footnotes]

 

Mohnish may well have gotten more out of his executive degree but most people would regard it as a poor substitute for the MBA.

 

 

Mattee2264, I wanted to correct a detail regarding the language you used. My guess is that you were using the word "degree" loosely to mean "experience", but I wanted to be clear that Harvard Business School only grants degrees for their PhD programs and their two year full-time residential MBA program. HBS does not offer any degree granting executive programs. Here's a passage from their website.

 

"HBS Executive Education offers only non-degree programs. Certificates of attendance are awarded to participants upon completion of the program. However, participants who complete extended-length programs—the Advanced Management Program, General Management Program, Owner/President Management program, Senior Executive Leadership Program—India, and Senior Executive Leadership Program—Middle East —will become Harvard alumni." [bolding in original document.]

 

https://www.exed.hbs.edu/admissions/Pages/default.aspx

 

This passage doesn't mention a YPO program, but colleges and universities commonly offer similar "alumni" benefits to participants in summer programs. These programs are typically open enrollment, money making programs offered in the summer when the schools would otherwise be losing money on empty buildings and infrastructure. If you spend enough money they will let you have access to the library and maybe even a free Google Apps for Education email account. These benefits essentially costs the college nothing. The benefits might have some value to some participants as a networking opportunity, but generally has little value beyond that. The details vary from institution in terms of benefits and the requirements to get some benefits. In Harvard's case it appears that as long as you spend a minimum of $80,000, they will confer some benefits of the type typically only given to alumni of the degree programs. In some cases when you get the benefit, it won't be identical, but will clearly differentiate that the status is alumni of a non-degree program.

 

Another interesting thing about these programs. They are typically the most profitable hours on campus of the entire year. Not only are they earning money on buildings and infrastructure that would normally be sitting idle, but participants pay cash, and the rate is extremely high relative to the costs and resources devoted to a normal degree program. A single week of a summer program can end up representing a large recognizable portion of revenue and even more of "profits" for the entire year. These high profit weeks help to underwrite many money losing programs for these non-profit institutions.

 

Another interesting aside. Most all of these programs are open enrollment. The only selectivity for most of them is self-selection. Anyone who has the money and the free time will typically be accepted. There are exceptions to this rule, but from what I have seen the only proof I would accept even from elite degree granting institutions is the ability to find someone who has been turned down. When you find an elite program, you will find tons of people who have been turned down from one of these programs. When you can not easily find people who have been turned down or deferred to the next year, then I would encourage you to consider it an open enrollment program with unlimited enrollment that is there to make money for the college. Be careful with this because they have all kinds of ways of making programs sound elite or selective without actually lying. Personally, I do not think that the value of the programs should be judged by selectivity anyway, but if that is important to you for some reason, keep your eyes open.

 

Also, there are two other reasons institutions confer alumni status on participants who take multiple courses. First, it inspires participants to shoot for finishing the whole program, thereby driving up the total tuition spent per person. It's a little like running the marathon so that you can get the t-shirt at the end, but as little sense as it makes, it does work to increase enrollment and retention for marathons and summer programs. Second, once someone has that alumni status, they are now a target for alumni giving. People who were able to spend $80,000 for a couple weeks on campus are exactly the type of people the alumni giving people want to have in their network.

 

Another interesting phenomenon with executive education and degree programs. They are very diversifying for the institution. Executive education will tank in a recession when companies stop spending on professional development. Degree programs actually swell during a recession as people head back to school to get additional training since the opportunity cost is lower during a recession. You can see huge swings in selectivity of these types of programs based on where you are in business cycle.

[skanjete]

Does the blog still exist?

I can't find it anymore. Or has it moved to another address?

 

 

[augustabound]

Does the blog still exist?

I can't find it anymore. Or has it moved to another address?

http://www.chaiwithpabrai.com/blog

[JayGatsby]

New article from Pabrai on spinoffs: https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2017/11/21/spin-gold-from-spinoffs-a-portfolio-of-5-castoffs-trounces-the-sp-500/#70df6d483e44

 

[skanjete]

Does the blog still exist?

I can't find it anymore. Or has it moved to another address?

http://www.chaiwithpabrai.com/blog

 

Thanks a lot!

[stahleyp]

Not bad:

 

http://www.valuewalk.com/2018/01/pabrai-funds-returns/

 

I wonder how close this gets him to his 26% goal?

 

By the way, does anyone have his letter they'd share?

[Tim Eriksen]

Not bad:

 

http://www.valuewalk.com/2018/01/pabrai-funds-returns/

 

I wonder how close this gets him to his 26% goal?

 

By the way, does anyone have his letter they'd share?

It puts PIF2 at 15.9% annualized since October 2000.  Approximately 20% before fees.

[randomep]

Not bad:

 

http://www.valuewalk.com/2018/01/pabrai-funds-returns/

 

I wonder how close this gets him to his 26% goal?

 

By the way, does anyone have his letter they'd share?

 

OMG, how can they write such a shoddy article!  It says from oct 2003-2018 the s&p500 returned 250% cumulative. Which makes the funds 310% look great over the same period. I punched in the number and that sounds about right. BUT the S&P500 TR returned 340%, comon, you cannot compare a fund against an index without dividends.

 

I think the debate had been going on for a while that Pabrai's funds have not beaten the markets if you strip out those years when it was a $2M fund.  And it sure as heck seems like to me that more likely than not, his fund will lag the S&P500 tr in the future.

 

I mean the fund is like VIX on drugs.  The 3 highest years when the index was up, he trounced the index. The 3 lowest years for the index he lagged.  I think he forgot the meaning of the word hedge.

 

[Parsad]

Not bad:

 

http://www.valuewalk.com/2018/01/pabrai-funds-returns/

 

I wonder how close this gets him to his 26% goal?

 

By the way, does anyone have his letter they'd share?

 

OMG, how can they write such a shoddy article!  It says from oct 2003-2018 the s&p500 returned 250% cumulative. Which makes the funds 310% look great over the same period. I punched in the number and that sounds about right. BUT the S&P500 TR returned 340%, comon, you cannot compare a fund against an index without dividends.

 

I think the debate had been going on for a while that Pabrai's funds have not beaten the markets if you strip out those years when it was a $2M fund.  And it sure as heck seems like to me that more likely than not, his fund will lag the S&P500 tr in the future.

 

I mean the fund is like VIX on drugs.  The 3 highest years when the index was up, he trounced the index. The 3 lowest years for the index he lagged.  I think he forgot the meaning of the word hedge.

 

The basic premise of Buffett & Munger's beliefs is that volatility is not the same thing as risk. 

 

I think the first time Pabrai got trounced in 2008, you could have equated the volatility with risk, because there was significant exposure to correlated risks in financials.  The second time the fund suffered, I don't think you could make the same correlation...it was just undervalued and he took a hit with one stock.

 

So while the opinion always seems to still be out on Pabrai, I would not be surprised to see him out of the fund business in less than 10 years.  At that point, his own personal stake would have climbed from the present $120M or so to $350M-500M.  He may just decide that he wants to travel the lecture circuit and manage his own money. 

 

Nothing Pabrai said to me...but after 25 years of results, those that think you are an asshole and a fraud will still think that!

 

Cheers!

[racemize]

Well that's what Munger did, although a lot sooner than Pabrai, if he does take that path.

 

Also, he's beating S&P 500 1, 3, 5, 10 and since inception at this point.