咋天阅读2小时，累计阅读150小时

昨日阅读4小时，累积阅读105小时

昨日阅读3小时，累积阅读271小时。

昨天阅读1小时，累计阅读367小时。

昨天阅读1小时，累计阅读625小时。

昨日阅读1小时。 总阅读时间125小时
The business of value investing – Six essential elements to buying companies like Warren Buffett- Charlie Tian 2009
https://bbs.pinggu.org/thread-695143-1-1.html (Page 87-95)
Develop a Search Strategy: Ignore the media & Imitation Is the Sincerest Form of Flattery
阅读到的有价值的内容段落摘录
The quest for the “next great stock” has become the holy grail of investing. The truth is there are no great stocks, only great investments. By making your investment decisions based on business fundamentals can increase the likelihood of paying a sensible price for a share in a company. A great business does not necessarily imply a great stock investment. Google is a fantastic business that generates tremendous profits. However, if you were buying Google at $700 a share and paying 42 times earnings, you weren’t making a great investment. Remember the other way to look at the price to earnings (P/E) ratio is by inverting it to get the earnings yield. So for Google, a P/E ratio of 42 means you are paying $42 for each dollar of earnings. The earnings yield is the return you get based on the price you pay. For $42 you are getting $1, implying a yield of 2.4 percent ($ 1/$42). When Google was trading at these valuations, ultra – safe U.S. Treasury bills yielded over 3 percent. In other words, investors were willing to take less return by paying more in hope of a continual rise the in share price. You have no margin of safety at such lofty valuations. The slightest hiccups and the share price begins to free fall. Stocks are merely pieces of paper that fluctuate in price every Monday through Friday. Great investments, however, arise when sound business fundamentals dictate the investment decision.
That’s why it’s imperative to have a sound grasp of what it is you are doing buying businesses and what that entails, you must approach the markets with an emotion-free, fundamentally based approach before beginning your search strategy. Searching the stock market without a sound investment philosophy is like trying to walk before learning to crawl: It’s a painful experience. There is only one Warren Buffett, and he devoted the time, passion, and intensity needed to go through the 10,000-page Moody’s Stock Manual page by page, looking at every single stock, in order to develop a mental model of the markets. If you are a serious investor looking to participate in the investing game for many years, be prepared to roll up your sleeves and look at hundreds of stocks continuously. Fortunately, investors today have many more resources that aid in the search process than were available during Buffett’s early years. Unfortunately, investors today have many more resources that also can lead to poor investment decisions. What I mean by this is that while it’s great to have more resources, too much information or data begins to add noise to the meaningful information that you really need. In order to have a good search strategy, it’s important to flip the concept around first. In other words, instead of directly delving into how to develop a good search strategy by suggesting the best places to look, let ’ s flip it around. It is far easier to develop a good search strategy if you first understand where not to look.
One fundamental difference between the markets and the media makes the media a poor guidepost in security selection. The media tends to focus on the current state of affairs while markets are anticipatory creatures. While the media focuses on the current outlook of the economy, it is highly likely that markets begin to turn up just when investors are being told to exit the game. As Warren Buffett likes to quip, “If you wait for robins, spring will be gone.” What the media failed to convey during its bleak assessment of the economy in the late 1970s was that equity valuations had reached decade lows and the stock market was as a cheap as it had been in a very long time. Over the past 100 years of market activity, the market historically has experienced cycles in which it advanced (bull market) or declined (bear markets).
While the media maintains its focus on the current situation, markets - and investors - tend to focus on the future. And when you have a situation like the 1970s, when equities were selling at some of the lowest valuations in decades, the markets can start advancing before the slightest hint of good news from the media.
阅读到的有价值信息的自我思考点评感想
Making investment decisions based on business fundamentals can increase the probability of paying a sensible price for a share in a company. A great business does not necessarily imply a great stock investment. Investors tends to take less return by paying more in hope of a continual rise the in share price. However when you have no margin of safety at such lofty valuations, the slightest hiccups and the share price begins to free fall. Great investments, however, arise when sound business fundamentals dictate the investment decision. We must approach the markets with an emotion-free, fundamentally based approach before beginning the search for investment. Searching the stock market without a sound investment philosophy and unbiased information of the market. Investors should rely on the media as one source of information. Similar to the analogy regarding the stock markets, let the media inform but not guide you in what to do. As investors, we need accurate and honest journalism. We are fortunate to have many excellent sources, including BusinessWeek. But investors must remember the role of the media: to provide news commentary, not investment guidance. The media is staffed by journalists, not market analysts.  By the time information reaches the front cover or front-page news, it’s already well known by the market. Annual issues proclaiming next year’s hottest mutual funds or hottest stocks are not new or original ideas. Investors are rewarded for finding value when everyone else is leaving the party. By the time the media gets hold of investment ideas, the smart money has already been there. Excitement is an investor’s worst enemy; it leads to paying high prices to participate with the herd mentality. An effective search strategy relies on knowing where not to look just as much as where to look. Let the media do its job of providing up-to-date news analysis on the state of the world; don’t rely on it to instruct you as to where to allocate your capital.

昨日阅读：1h<br>
累积阅读：40h<br>
连续打卡：18天<br>
昨天，读完了米什金中文版的《货币金融学》，准备开始读英文版的。还学了逻辑推理的内容，之前一直很抵触这部分知识，但是知道其在做阅读理解题时的重要性后就开始重视了，再难啃的骨头也要把它一口一口地啃下来。最近有点迷茫，可能是并行处理的任务有点多，再加上想一步到位的焦虑。也许，一步一步地坚持和重复巩固，才是破解此时难题的办法。

如何解释联想的复兴？你看过的可能都是假象 | 深网

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/oRGs_GoItAgUWV3LXkUjfQ

人人车

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/WpNQAH94JF9y_32wVPu5vQ

微信看一看的「好看」，怎么变成了 KPI 检阅栏

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/VYvvR9f-4DrTA_tYDzpB9Q

昨日阅读1小时，2019年累计阅读55小时。继续分享《薛兆丰经济学讲义》
性价比相当才是优质
优质的第二层经济学含义是指，为了提高产品的质量所要付出的边际成本应该跟它得到的边际收益相等。当提高产品质量的边际成本等于边际收益时，我们说它达到了优质的标准。
我们这里讲的，不是质量绝对的高或低，而是讲，在提高质量的过程中，边际收益应该等于边际成本。通俗来说就是，不是质量越高越好，也不是价格越低越好，而是性价比越高越好。一分价钱一分货，对用户而言是值得的，这才是好的。
1976年，经济学家弗里德曼在康奈尔大学有过一次演讲，当时有位年轻的学生站起来挑战他，问了他一个不容易回答的问题。这位年轻的学生名字叫迈克尔·摩尔（Michael Moore），现在是一位非主流影片的导演。
摩尔说：某个汽车公司生产的一款汽车，设计有点问题，如果汽车发生追尾，汽车的油箱就会爆炸，很容易造成车里人的伤亡。这时如果汽车公司在油箱旁边加一块挡板，这块挡板只需要16元，就能大大降低伤亡的数字。汽车公司知道这个情况，但他们算过一笔账，如果每辆汽车都加一块16元的挡板，成本就会增加很多，超过了他们对意外的赔偿，所以他们宁愿赔偿那些伤亡者，也不愿加这块挡板。
摩尔举这个例子是想说明，市场经济有它的问题，因为生命是无价的，而有些厂商为了追求利润置人命于不顾，这是不道德的。摩尔问弗里德曼如何评价这家汽车公司的做法。
弗里德曼当时的回答非常准确，他说：
驾驶坦克可以避免你说的事故，但显然你并不主张汽车公司停止生产汽车，而只向市场提供坦克。为什么？因为坦克太贵了。只要你承认这个事实，那么你就和汽车公司一样，是在“成本”和“生命”之间权衡和取舍。你们都在进行计算，而只是计算的结果未必相同而已，可见你也并不认可“生命无价”的说法。
实际上，汽车制造商要不要给汽车加一块挡板，表面上看是制造商自己的决定，但其实最终是消费者的决定。我们要明白，要提高汽车的安全性能，加一块挡板是可以的，换一种材质、刹车设计、安全气囊都是可以的。但这里加一点，那里加一点，汽车的总价就上升了。这些加起来，都会成为汽车的成本，由消费者承担。
消费者接受不接受呢？消费者愿意把他们最后一元钱放到安全性能上呢，还是汽车的功能上？还是放到汽车外形的美观上？不同的消费者有不同的选择，结果在汽车市场上，我们见到各种各样的汽车，有些是以安全性能著称的，有些是以舒适性著称的，有些是以耗能低、省油著称的。如果我们说生命是无价的，安全性是我们不惜一切代价都应该追求的目标，那我们就再也不会在马路上见到我们今天见到的那些汽车了，马路上跑的只有坦克。
弗里德曼强调的就是我们这里所说的优质的第二层含义。对消费者来说，并不是质量越高越好，也不是价格越低越好，而是价格和品质要相当，成本和收益要相当。这才是他们最看中的品质。
我的学习：
1、在性价比的理念里，找到了中国哲学思想——平衡。对于客户来讲，质量与价格成正比就很好，期待低价买到高质，将会被骗到，高价买到低质量的东西，就不划算了。
2、在经济学里，价格是顾客愿意付出的成本，需求不一样，对东西要求不同，例如出去旅游，碰巧遇到下雨，我们买个一次性雨衣挡一下就行了，不必要买很好的雨衣，如果太好，还要考虑带回去的成本。
3、性价比是一个相对值，这个很好。我们一般生活中，会用绝对值考虑问题，价格高了就不要，寻求低价。我们追求性价比才是合理的。

昨日阅读3小时，累计阅读647小时

学习2小时，累计50.5小时

TED。所谓断舍离
https://open.163.com/movie/2016/3/3/4/MBGUMB8AC_MBGUMNC34.html?recomend=2
断舍离是这几年比较火的一个字眼儿，曾经看过一篇文章，一个人的断舍离做到家里空荡荡的很大的客厅，连个沙发都没有，都是席地而坐。还放了与之前那种“温馨的拥挤”的照片，的确是没少扔东西。我一直想效仿。但有时又觉得无法取舍。而今天看到的TED除了一堆描述心境上的改变，我倒是觉得他断舍离的方法比较不错，首先打包所有的东西，做好标记后，在接下来的一个月里又重新从打包箱里拿出来到的东西就留下，没用到的东西统统舍弃。
有人说 想提高生活品质就是学会扔东西。而对于我这个恋旧的人来说，逛街的时候眼睛“少冒光”就是变相的断舍离了吧哈哈哈

昨日读0.5小时  累计 177.5小时

阅读1小时，累计阅读237小时

昨天阅读2小时，总共阅读838小时

昨日阅读1小时，累积阅读25小时

昨天阅读1个小时，累积阅读38个小时。

Courses in international economics usually introduce students to the impossible trinity, also known as the trilemma of open-economy macroeconomics: namely, that a fixed exchange rate, free cross-border capital flows, and discretionary monetary policy are incompatible. Why? Because, in the presence of free capital flows under a fixed exchange rate, private currency preferences (rather than policymakers) determine the size of the central bank balance sheet and hence the domestic interest rate.

While many students learn that a country can only have two of the three elements of the open-economy trilemma, few learn that there also exists a financial trilemma. That is, financial stability, cross-border financial integration, and national financial policies are incompatible as well. The logic behind this second trilemma is that increases in financial integration reduce the incentives for national policymakers to act in ways that preserve financial stability globally. Put differently, as the benefits from financial stability policies spread beyond borders, the willingness to bear the costs of stabilizing the system at the national level decline. This has the important implication that, if we are to sustain increasing financial integration, then we will need greater international coordination among national financial regulators. While this conclusion applies widely, nowhere is it more true than inside the euro area, where policymakers would like a fully integrated financial market, but still protect national champions (including financial intermediaries as well as exchanges).
We credit Dirk Schoenmaker as the most effective expositor of the financial trilemma. In the simple Schoenmaker model, the problem arises from comparing the benefit (B) and cost (C) of stabilizing a bank in a crisis. Stabilization benefits the economy by avoiding a trigger for financial contagion and, as a result, helps to sustain the supply of credit and economic activity. The costs are those imposed on taxpayers when the public sector recapitalizes weak banks, as occurred with most of the bailouts in the 2007-2009 crisis. (Long-run costs of bailouts—such as the banks’ increased incentive to take systemic risk—are outside the simple model, but could presumably be included for a regulator with a long horizon.)

昨日阅读1小时，累积阅读122小时

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读1006小时

昨日阅读2小时，累计阅读1107小时。

今天学习和阅读约5小时，累计阅读约1780小时。
学习和投资心得：
怎样投资消费股：
无论是中国还是美国，消费股都是牛股的集中营，广义的消费行业比较宽泛，我们这里讨论是生活消费品行业，一般是指食品饮料行业、家庭和个人用品行业以及烟草行业，这些行业的产品形态基本保持不变，行业整体进入成熟期，龙头公司业绩稳定增长，是长期投资的理想标的。在雪球上，有很多“股神”都是通过长期持有消费行业龙头股实现财富倍增的，比如很多人就持有贵州茅台。具体来说，消费品行业具有以下特点：
1.我们每个人都可以直接感知，我们本身就是消费者
2.需求稳定，行业稳定增长，无周期性3.产品形态基本保持不变，容易长期积累形成优势4.行业竞争格局稳定，每个细分领域由少数寡头把控。从好生意角度看，所谓好生意即潜在消费者规模巨大，终生、高频消费，市场需求稳定，显然这些特性消费行业都具备。从护城河的角度看，企业的竞争优势可以分为四种类别：
1.特许经营权；
2.转换成本；
3.网络效应；
4.规模经济
消费品龙头公司具备特许经营权和规模经济的护城河，前者如$贵州茅台(SH600519)$ ，后者如$伊利股份(SH600887)$ 。成功的消费品公司的特点1.强大的品牌品牌力强大，成心智垄断，具有定价权
2.主业简单、集中，形成规模经济几家企业占据市场非常的大份额，几乎垄断整个市场，规模优势降低成本
3.充足的现金流
好的消费品公司，一手交钱一手交货，甚至货还没交就有钱进来，几乎没有应收账款；生产成本低廉，产品售价高，长期累积巨额现金。
4.对渠道掌控力强由于强大的品牌力，形成对销售渠道的掌控，甚至可以占用上下游的资金，如茅台、格力。消费行业的增长路径：价格和销量要么提高价格，要么提高销量，两者同时提高再好不过。
提高价格要具有绝对的定价权，提高销量需要开拓市场，提升规模。总结1.消费行业符合好生意的特征，潜在消费者规模巨大，终生、高频消费，市场需求稳定，行业发展空间巨大；2.消费行业产品形态长期基本保持不变，经过长期竞争中胜出的龙头公司具备强大的护城河，具有定价权和巨大的规模。3.强者愈强，持续的竞争优势转换为定价能力和获利能力，龙头公司积累了强大的利润和现金流，进一步巩固自己的地位。投资策略1.个股我选股的思路是“三好公司”：好行业（生意）、好公司、好价格，缺一不可。行业是个好行业，我们需要选择具有强大品牌、具备规模优势，现金流充足的龙头公司。但需要动态观察。比如一家消费龙头公司各方面都很好，但是更换管理层后，喜欢瞎折腾，盲目多元化，员工激励机制不行等，这就是不好的；再比如一些科技公司，比如苹果，曾经颠覆了传统手机行业，近期销量低迷股价大跌，它未来会不会也被颠覆呢？关于好价格，消费龙头股长期价格保持合理偏高的位置，买入机会需要等待市场错误定价时，当然我们需要鉴别的是，市场是否真的定价错误了，防止落入价值陷阱。

今日阅读一小时，Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness，36%->38%,累积阅读时间34小时。

昨天阅读1小时，累计阅读346小时。
昨天继续学习了经济学中信息经济学，美国经济学家乔治·阿克洛夫（George Akerlof）因为提出逆向选择而获得诺贝尔奖，阿克洛夫认为在经济活动当中，一些人比另外一些人知道得更多。阿克洛夫因为在20世纪70年代发表的一篇论文《柠檬市场》而起发了信息经济学的研究领域。经济学家给柠檬问题起了一个技术性的名称“逆向选择”（adverse selection），然后发现这个现象到处都存在。以医疗保险来举例，只有个人知道自己的身体状况，所以健康的人不太会买保险，而不健康的人会倾向买保险，而保险应该是大家分担风险，保险公司无法有效分辨，因此就收取较高的保险费用。当重要的特性不被购买者或销售者所知，就会发生逆向选择，就像一位购买者不知道一辆车是好是坏，或者保险推销员对一名潜在客户的健康状况知之甚少。“道德风险”（moral hazard）也会造成市场机制无法完全运作，在你购买手机丢失险之后，你可能对手机放哪儿就不那么上心了，因为你知道如果手机丢在公交车上，还可以重新获得一部新的。保险公司知道这一点，但是没有办法向你核实。结果就是，他们不想给你完全的保险，从而要求你承担一部分的损失。于是，市场再一次失败了。信息经济学的另一位先驱，迈克尔·斯彭斯（Michael Spence）研究人们如何通过彼此间发“信号”来解决信息缺乏的问题。比如说，企业想要雇佣效率最高的人，但是人的能力很难衡量。人们就自己的能力发出信号的一个办法是获得教育资格证书。约瑟夫·施蒂格利茨（Joseph Stiglitz）在MIT时受教于阿克洛夫，他认为外国领导人对于借贷人是否有能力偿还贷款考虑不足。借贷是在信息匮乏的基础上完成的，结果就是许多借款人没有能力偿还。道德风险让事情变得更糟糕，因为放贷人盼望着ZF能够在事情变糟的时候伸手救援，因此对于谁来借钱缺乏警惕。他认为这些人完全忽视了利伯维尔场政策的风险，让资金流毫无限制地在新兴国家进进出出，而放贷人对于借钱的人是谁却没有掌握足够的信息，最终导致金融危机，例如亚洲金融风暴。当阿克洛夫和施蒂格利茨开辟新的信息经济学领域的时候，许多经济学家认为市场在大部分时间里总是能够良好运转的。他们相信亚当·斯密的“看不见的手”，认为市场的买卖行为会引导社会资源的最佳利用。因为信息问题导致的市场失灵并不一定意味着人是愚蠢或者非理性的。

今天阅读1小时，持续每天阅读累计133小时。

昨日阅读1小时，累计阅读191小时。

百度Q4营收同比增长22%，AI引擎功不可没

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/N5E6n6I2XpmbvPppC6C4Tw

浮出水面的新安防巨头：科大讯飞

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/vJQh37uQHsV_T15MvAigTw

浪潮云和它价值30亿的工业互联网野心

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/-FM1lud-2blkAzgXzNv7cA

专访旷视副总裁彭广平：智慧物流这张“图”，我们怎么画？

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/IchXOVIrNX61pNHK3dSvzg