Let's Understand why Narrative is important in investing and how to create a Thesis that can help you to hold a stock in spite of the market environments
Time for a thread with international and Indian examples, Please retweet so that everyone can benefit 🧵🧵🧵🧵
1)The Bears argued that the Amazon was a book retailer and should be seen as one. Thus, it was overvalued compared to Barnes&Nobles. Later they compared it with Walmart and concluded it was more expensive relatively
For those who have been betting on the business for last 5-6 years. The thesis has always been very clear, that it is shedding the tag of a commodity business and adding products which are higher margin in nature. How to identify this?



More from Intrinsic Compounding
Sequent will teach many people about what Hyperbolic Discounting and Myopic Loss aversion means. 2 Mental models which an equity investor has to understand about. No other way. Disc: invested, not a reco
Having multiple facilities accredited with certifications from the best authorities from globe is a hidden moat in itself... 10-20% pop and then retracement should not shake confidence... Business focus and longevity should build conviction
— Harinder S Nanda (@harindersnanda) July 14, 2021
\U0001f436\U0001f431\U0001f434\U0001f42e\U0001f437\U0001f411@unseenvalue @soicfinance
More from Genericlearnings
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x