That is why I like Charlie Munger's quotes.

Charlie T. Munger, 95 years old, was kind enough to give 2 hours long talk at Daily Journal Shareholder Meeting on 14 February 2019. His opening speech, for first 20 minutes, was high quality lecture for young people like us.

I like one comment from Charlie T. Munger from that day:

“My idea of being properly educated is being right when the professor is wrong. Anyone can just spit back what the professor is saying. It takes a really educated person to think for themselves.”

This comment is a music to my ears. More or less, I had similar thought when I visited the audiologist appointment last Tuesday to buy new hearing aids (replacing aging ones). There is reading test, whereby her folder was covered her lips upon reading each word (thereafter, i repeat the word). This was done to identify how suitable the brand of the hearing aid is for me. The first two brands are very familiar. She gave sensible analogy that someone may like Android phone and someone else may like iphone. It sound reasonable to me.

But, in the back of my mind, I am thinking something different whereby I need a hearing aid that let me to catch all kinds of sounds and get my brain to remember each 'new' sound and what each sound represents for. With some persistence and casual request, I got the third hearing aid brand and I like it. Because it has met my criteria. I am quite sure that the audiologist has the right concept but miss out the actual feeling and wants of the client. I believe that the client can question the choice without making things ugly with doctors/specialists.

My another favourite quote is as follows:

“To the man with only a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.”

This week, I learn that many/some experienced users are not willing to adopt the obvious method which is clearly outlined on the local authority's text. I even offer the real-life application method whereby a big telecom firm is doing this. Despite of two available examples, they choose the long and 'expensive' way to do so. To me, they are very clear to understand. However, to give them a benefit of doubt, the writing style may not be so clear-cut to them. Who knows! I simply realised they are doing as per above quote!

Many investors, I know, always use valuation models or qualitative analysis workout. Today, Forbes came up with an article. On it, this man don't use the above two. He just study the patents and appraise the company's intellectual capital's growth. Very convincing to me and it may not work for me since I don't understand complex terminology. I am glad that it is one another way to identify the quality companies for investment.

University graduates should read this article and think about the IP application. I was surprised and shocked that someone mentioned to me that we should spend IP and claim government grant, if possible. I disagree with that because the one, with very poor R&D capabilities, may get the grant, if meeting their application requirement, but will suffer wasteful spending in the event that IP don't assist the company to grow (at worse, stagnant). I advocate spending for what it need to help company to grow.

I truly admire Charlie Munger's clarity thinking and straight-to-the-point comments.