<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Not your typical investment book
Review: "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits" was an investment book with a different focus. Fisher focused not on valuation aspects such as the ones Ben Graham would use or technical trends that other would use, but instead focused on seeking out stable companies with good management and other qualities. Fisher prefers growth companies exhibiting substantial income and revenue growth. He likes what I would call the intangibles of stock investment; exceptional management, marketing, sales, and many other segments of a company. The only knock on Fisher's work is that he assumes normal people have the time or resources to seek out the leaders of a company. He also assumes that if you don't seek out the leaders of a company that you aren't doing your due diligence. Either way this book did provide me with several new concepts that I knew were important to investing but hadn't really thought about. This book will cover topics that Lynch, Graham and the other investment writers haven't covered.
Rating: 
Summary: Easy to read book, some advice not practical
Review: Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits is one of the classic investment texts written for the lay person. Rather than just seeking value, Fisher realized that even a greatly "undervalued" company could prove a horrible investment. Sure, you might occasionally buy a stock for less than the company's cash-in-the-bank (back then, at least!). But what if the business is horribly run? It might not take long for the company to lose all that cash! Even if the company returns to "fair" value, that ends the potential profit from investing in such a business. Holding an average company, because it was once undervalued, but is no more, makes little sense. Fisher points out that the largest wealth via investing has been made in one of two ways. First, buying stocks when the markets crash and holding them until the markets recover. Secondly, with less risk and more potential return, you can also just invest in a small portfolio of companies which continue to strongly grow sales and earnings over the years. Then, if the company was correctly selected, you might never have to sell, while accruing a huge return on your initial investment. Fisher pioneered the school of growth stock investing. In Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits, Fisher explains how he selects a growth company. He lists fifteen points which a company must have to be considered a superior investment. Fisher's first point seems obvious: "Does the company have products or services with sufficient market potential to make possible a sizeable increase in sales for at least several years?" Fisher shows that some companies might have potential substantial sales increases for only a few years, but after that have limited potential due to some factor, such as market saturation. For example, Fisher mentions the growth in sales of TV's until the U.S. market was saturated. He also wisely suggests looking behind the products to seek other superior investments. While many TV manufacturers were competitive and it was difficult to tell which was best, Fisher points out that Corning Glass Works was, by far, the company most capable of producing the glass bulbs used in TVs. Fisher tries to clearly distinguish between companies which are "fortunate and able" and those which are "fortunate because they are able." The second kind, the superior investments, are highly innovative and create new products which have growth potential. Fisher uses Dow Chemical as one example of a "fortunate because they are able" company. The second point wants to know if management has the drive to innovate new products. A man ahead of his time, Fisher wonders about how much of a company's future sales might come from products not yet invented. A constant theme of Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits is examining what the company is doing to prepare for the future. Is the company spending wisely on Research and Development? Or, is the company just trying to maximize its current profit and reinvesting nothing for future growth? Fisher explains why answering that question is difficult in practice. What different companies account for under R&D is one problem. Another is that some companies are more successful than others at turning money spent on R&D into future marketable products. Today, we must assume this question is far more difficult to answer! In addition to questioning a company's R&D, Fisher wants to see a company with a strong sales organization and distribution efficiency. "It is the making of a sale that is the most basic single activity of any business," he writes. Yet, why don't investors focus upon such key factors instrumental to a company's future growth? Fisher points out that certain issues are not quantifiable. That is why many investors tend to focus upon financial issues which can be expressed in a simple ratio. How does the investor go about answering the "unquantifiable"? How does the investor know how well-managed the company is? Or, how does one evaluate the people factors, which Fisher says are the real strength of a superior growth company? Fisher suggests the "scuttlebutt" method. This involves talking to suppliers, customers, company employees, and people knowledgeable in the industry, and, eventually, company management. From this information, an investor can get a good feel for the quality of the company as a growth investment. Fisher teaches us how to learn to ask the correct, company-specific questions. Fisher acknowledges the "scuttlebutt" method is a lot of work. But, he asks, should it be easy to find such great companies, when finding only a few can easily lay the foundation for building huge future wealth? I tend to think the average individual investor will not use the "scuttlebutt" method. And, for most investors and most companies, even if the investor had the desire to use this method, it would not be practical. Yet, for investors seeking to make investments in smaller, local companies, the "scuttlebutt" method might be of value. For angel investors or mini-venture capitalists, reading "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits" is probably also worthwhile. The book also has some excellent thoughts about buying-and-holding a stock and when to sell a stock. Fisher's thoughts on diversification are also well worth reading, although I would recommend more diversification than Fisher claims is adequate. Overall, this is a great book for the individual investor. You will not be able to follow the "scuttlebutt" method in practice, for most investments, and, maybe, the complexity of today's companies and scientific research in many growth companies make Fisher's method less practical today than in the past, but there is much to learn about business and investing from this book. Peter Hupalo, Author of "Becoming An Investor: Building Wealth By Investing In Stocks, Bonds, And Mutual Funds"
Rating:
Summary: 1/2 Your Investment Library
Review: Fisher's book should be 1/2 your investment library; the otherhalf should be Ben Graham's ``The Intelligent Investor''. WarrenBuffet, the world's most successful investor, describes himself as ``85% Graham, 15% Fisher.'' Fisher explains the qualitative side to value investing, just as Graham explains the quantitative side. You really need both. If you follow Graham's advice insensitively, then you will find stocks which are selling cheap--because the company is truly in trouble. That's where Fisher comes in: you should examine low-priced companies from Fisher's perspective to find the ones which truly are bargains. ... Online discussions are no substitute for firsthand discussion with employees, competitors, etc. You simply can't meet enough people online; some companies' employees aren't even on the Internet. ... you will end up investing only in tech stocks--which I would consider extremely short-sighted. On the other hand, online discussion is considerably better than nothing. Don't neglect the information you can find online! This source of information will become increasingly important over time.
Rating:
Summary: A Must for Every Investor's Library
Review: I first read this book over ten years ago, and like the other reviewers, I too found it a difficult read. When I first read it, I thought the advice was somewhat impractical for the small time investor (try to imagine calling Bill Gates asking him what he thought of Steve Jobs' company). Graham's security analysis was much easier for the little guy investor to apply. Yet Fisher's techniques were and are used by the big time investors ( most notably Peter Lynch, and though I don't think he gives Fisher enough credit, Warren Buffett). Even the rankings of "Top CEOs" by Forbes, Businessweek, Fortune etc. was based on Graham's security analysis. Then came the corporate scandals of the 1990's, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and Elliott Spitzer of New York and now the little guy investor can apply Fisher's theory of investing. Fortune Magazine's CEO ranking has as much to do about corporate governance as it does with security analysis. There are websites devoted entirely to corporate governance. The Institutional Shareholder Service was created solely to act as a corporate governance watchdog. I recently re-read Common Stocks. It's still a difficult read and you can't read it in one day or even in one week. It's a book that you have to read and re-read to get the most out of it. The most useful chapters for an investor are Chapter 3 "What to Buy: the fifteen points to look for in a common stock", Chapter 8 "Five Don'ts for Investors, and Chapter 9 " Five More Don'ts for Investors." Fisher's Common Stocks and Graham's the Intelligent Investor are the two basic building blocks that every investor must master to be succesful in the stock market.
Rating:
Summary: The best Investment book ever written
Review: Phillip Fisher is the father of qualitative analysis. This book changed my life like no other. It has made me settle down as an investor and think as a businessman, and put all notions of trading aside. From reading Fisher, I now understand that one should only invest in a small number of stocks, but these stocks must be perfect in all aspects. He shows one what signs to look for in a company and how to analyze it . From reading Mr. Fishers book I have put all my money in Coca Cola, and have been well rewarded. Mr Warren Buffett who read this book in the 1960's found it to be one of the best investment books ever written. I myself consider it my family bible. Life as an investor was pure hell until I read this book, and after reading it I feel that nothing can stop me from becoming very wealthy. All I have to do is follow the steps that are in this book. Thank You Mr. Fisher. MYCROFT
Rating:
Summary: One of the two best books on investment ever written
Review: There are only two books you will ever need to read to become a good investor. One of them is Graham's "The Intelligent Investor" (or better, Graham and Dodd's "Security Analysis"). The other is Philip Fisher's "Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits". It is telling that the man who combines the investment philosophies of both Graham and Fisher is widely acclaimed as the most brilliant investor alive today, Warren Buffet. This is a book that you shouldn't just read once. It's a book you should read again and again. This is a book that you should read in cycles. Once you finish, you should read it again. It's short enough that you can read a chapter each night. This is a book that you should read until you can recite it word for word. If you understand the principles in this book, and adhere stringently to Fisher's 15-point checklist for buying stocks, avoid his 10 don'ts, and purchase stocks at the right time, as he suggested how to do, you will almost certainly be investing in good companies. If you then apply Graham's tests of value, you can avoid paying too much for those good companies. It is possible to have a good company but a bad stock (IBM is a great company today, and passes all of Fisher's criteria, but could you really justify buying it say $1,000 per share?). When you do find companies that are good companies, but have bad stocks, keep an eye on them. What I mean by "bad stock" is that the stock -- in your opinion -- is priced too highly, even considering the company's excellent growth prospects (in other words, there is euphoria about it on Wallstreet that goes beyond reason). Eventually, the market will realize that, even for that great company, it was paying too much. The stock price will drop, and then, whenever everyone else is running from the company in fear of doom, you can scoop it up (assuming that it i still a good company). Just as it is possible to have a good company but a bad stock, it is also possible to have a bad company but a good stock. You should not buy a stock just because it is cheap in PE, PEG, PS, or Price:book ratio. It is possible that the management may be so terrible that the company, in a few years time, may very well justify such current undervaluation. Even if the management is competent, it is still possible that the company' performance may justify that low price in a few year's time. When a stock is greatly undervalued by these measures, and has passed most of Fisher's criteria, then it is a great buy, because the market will eventually realize that management is brilliant and the stock should be priced higher. Now, many have objected that Fisher's methods take a lot of time. Clearly, they do. So do Graham's. Certainly, using both methods in combination with one another will take a lot of time (you can use Graham's criteria first, or Fisher's, then apply the other set of criteria). If you don't have the interest or time to pursue this, then you should not be investing in invidiaul stocks yourself. Rather, you should find an advisor who does utilize these rules, or a mutual fund manager who does, and have him manage your money, if you want those kind of exceptional returns. In this case, you will still have to investigate the person managing your money, to make sure they're up to you're criteria, and stay on top of it, to make sure they continue to be. If you don't want to do that -- if you don't want to put in that effort -- then you should settle for ordinary returns, as Graham says. Invest in an index fund. However, you should consider that there are not many stocks that will meet both Graham's stringent criteria, and Fisher's extremely stringent criteria. Of the tens of thousands of stocks, maybe 1,000 of them meet Graham's criteria. Of Those 1,000, maybe 50-100 meet Fisher's criteria. But, consider that you should only have to do this once, and thereafter only have to keep tabs on the companies (because you should have done it right the first time). Isn't several hours worth of work each night -- even for months -- worth finding a stock that will experience many hundreds of percent increase over 10 years? To save yourself time, apply Graham's criteria first to eliminate fad stocks (dot-com), and other stocks that are priced too high. This will greatly cut down on your candidates. Then look at what's left and categorize it. Discard stocks from industries which you -- based on sound analysis -- believe aren't promising. Also discard those from industries which you don't understand. Of the remaining stocks, apply Fisher's criteria. To operate efficiently, apply his 15th criteria first: If there is any serious questions as to the management's trustworthiness to investors, don't even consider buying stock of the company, and don't waste any more time on it. After reading these two books, you should know what criteria a company is to meet if it is a good investment, both Fisher's qualitative, and Graham's quantitative, criteria. You should apply the criteria that are easiest and quickest to filter through first. Then go through the criteria, progressively from more to less stringent. There's no point in wasting your time finding out about how great a company fairs on Fisher's first 14 criteria, only to find that it flatlines on the criteria of absolute importance (the integrity of management).
Rating: 
Summary: good but overrated
Review: This is one of the most overrated business books of all times! The first time I read it, it was a torture. Then I picked it up for a second read because I figured that maybe I didn't quite get it the first time. How can so many people, including Warren Buffet, like it if it wasn't a good book? The second time I read it only confirmed my initial impressions. It is not too bad but it is clearly overrated.
Fisher's investment philosophy, the way I understood it, boils down to the following: Common stocks of good companies are worth buying at any price. Just find a good business with excellent growth prospects and buy the stock. The price will take care of itself.
This is the kind of approach that inflated the stocks of the so called nifty fifty in the early 1970s. Since Fisher's book was already a best seller by that time, I suspect that he was partially responsible for what has happened to the stocks of the nifty fifty.
Now, maybe I didn't quite get it. Maybe Fisher didn't really mean that a good business can justify any stock price, no matter how high. Then again, I read the book twice and if I couldn't get it then he didn't make it obvious enough. Only in the last part of the book (Conservative Investors Sleep Well) he suggests that value does matter. Unfortunately for many early readers, that part of the book was not written and added until long after the nifty fifty burst.
His approach toward finding future stars is not likely to work unless you do it during a bull market. Then again, almost any other investment strategy will make money in a bull market, even technical analysis. New technology developments and the state of future competition are too difficult to predict by any method. One of the few stars he ever found out was Motorola. It was a lucky shot because when he first found out the company, it was manufacturing TVs, not cell phones and pagers. Ironically, the company was soon kicked out of the television sets business for which Fisher chose them.
I don't know why Warren Buffet ever said that he liked Fisher's investment philosophy. I don't thing he is scuttlebutting for the future Intels and Microsofts.
Last but not least, the book is very poorly written. Fisher has absolutely no talent for a writer. His writing style is tortures for the reader. His editor probably gave up editing after the first few pages, crossed his fingers and sent the book to the printing press. Editing the book would have been equal to rewriting it. I don't think any editor would've had the patience and the time to do it.
To be fair, I like some aspects of Fisher's investment philosophy. He advocates long term commitment to strong businesses with good potentials. And, he wouldn't commit unless he had done a thorough investigation of the company. There are some other gems in the book such as his discussion of stock purchase timing but the reader has to dig them out from a pile of trivia. Three stars are well deserved.
Rating:
Summary: quite a few nuggets, but impractical at times
Review: when "scuttlebutt" is one of the leading litmus tests before investing, you're dealing w/ a program that is impractical for average individual investors. but the book is quite valuable for its focus on long run investing, its 15 rules for investors (and moreso, the rules for investors to NOT follow), and its stress on conservatism in practice is very helpful. ultimately, this book is less about security selection than it is in investing philosophy---which it excels at. that's why buffett loved it, and you may too.
<< 1 >>
| 
