Author Archives: Patrick Crook

The Naive Question

If we weren’t already doing it this way, is this the way we would start?

This is Paul DePodesta of Moneyball fame asking what he calls “the naive question.” It’s a great question. Very often in business we do things a certain way because that’s the way everybody else does it. That’s the way they’ve always done it. To do it any other way would be crazy (even if it makes more sense).

This is one of the reasons that innovation is hard. Not only do you have to come up with something new, but then you have to convince people to go against the grain. You have to convince them that, just because everyone else isn’t already doing it doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea.

The forward pass in football started out as a novelty. Edison’s electric incandescent lamp research was derided as “a completely idiotic idea” by the chief engineer of the British Post Office. The Wright brothers were accused of perpetrating a fraud for years after the first flight at Kitty Hawk, despite scores of public demonstrations and photographic evidence. Scientific American, the New York Herald, the US Army and countless American scientists refused to believe a heavier than air craft could fly until Teddy Roosevelt ordered public trials in 1908.

Arthur C. Clarke wrote about the four stages of any new idea as follows:

  1. It’s nonsense.
  2. It may be real but it’s not important.
  3. I always said it was important.
  4. I thought of it first!

As investors, one of the hardest and most important things we can do is keep an open mind. Consider data and common sense and weigh them more heavily than tradition and convention.

Game Theory

Originally published 1/29/09

Remember the “battle of wits” between Vizzini and Westley in The Princess Bride?

Man in black:  [turning his back, and adding the poison to one of the goblets]  Alright, where is the poison?  The battle of wits has begun.  It ends when you decide and we both drink – and find out who is right, and who is dead. Continue reading

8 Ways I’ve Been Wrong In The Last 24 Hours

  1. Thought the Beavers would beat the Cougs last night.
  2. Overslept by four minutes this morning – I wake up at the exact same time every day, so it was a surprise.
  3. Thought my back had healed enough to pitch batting practice yesterday.
  4. Went to put my vehicle through the car wash this morning, but it was closed for, what looks like, major remodeling. I literally drive past it every day and didn’t notice until today.
  5. Every morning I make a decision to take one of two routes when leaving the parking lot after dropping my son off at school. Today’s route was backed up by traffic for much longer than the other route (which you can see while waiting).
  6. Emailed the wrong form to a client and then immediately resent the correct one after noting the error a nanosecond after clicking the send button.
  7. Took a sales call this morning even though I knew who was calling and knew it would be a waste of time. Not sure why I still do that sometimes.
  8. Switched cars with my wife about an hour ago and forgot to grab my wallet.

Obviously, the last 24 hours has been fairly uneventful. These mistakes are trivial, really not even worth noting. However, they leave a clue that points to a bigger problem. If all of us can make these kinds of common errors involving daily, routine occurrences, why should we expect decisions made on big, unfamiliar, infrequent things to be any more accurate?

For example, let’s say that you are planning for your retirement and you make an assumption that your money will earn x% for the next twenty years. What if you are wrong? Not just a little off, but spectacularly wrong?  Or, let’s say you are absolutely convinced that the economy will do x and this will cause the market to do y. Could you be wrong? Could you be right about one part of it and still wrong about the other? Yes, of course you could.

We are regularly wrong about the biggest, most momentous decisions in life. The divorce rate is near 50%. Accidental pregnancies happen all the time. People are often swindled by longtime friends and even family members. We hire the wrong people. Borrow ungodly sums of money for college degrees of questionable value. The list is endless.

Humility is valuable. A decision, especially with regard to forecasting an investment or a market, should come with an explicit acknowledgement that you can’t know the future. You should expect to be wrong with a high degree of regularity. Since being wrong is unavoidable, we have to plan for ways to live with it. Plan for ways of limiting the damage of being wrong while maximizing the benefit of being right.

“And then there’s the greatest error of all, which is that I had delusions of grandeur.”

If it’s true that people learn more from their mistakes than their successes, then Victor Niederhoffer has endured a fantastic amount of learning over the last fifteen years. Kathryn Schulz, author of Being Wrong: Adventures in the Margin of Error, published a fascinating interview with Mr. Niederhoffer where he discusses his very public failures and their ensuing consequences. His willingness to dispassionately judge the how and why of what went wrong offers a lesson that all investors can benefit from. Read the whole thing here.

Belt & Suspenders

Originally published 12/05/2008

Today (12/05/08), in Zurich, there is a hedge fund conference in session.  A gathering of scores of very smart investment minds against a backdrop of epic market turmoil is bound to produce some interesting quotes.  I kind of like this one from the CEO of a hedge fund consultancy: In response to a question regarding how he would adjust risk management systems in light of recent events, he responded; Continue reading