Saul's Bull Case

Let’s suppose that when you were 30 years old you bought 100 AMZN at the very top of the 2000 bubble, 12/10/1999 at 106 11/16, closing price (yes they were still using fractions back then). You paid $10,668.75. You went home and fell asleep Rip van Winkle style.

This morning you wake up with your AMZN worth $195,207.00 despite the two crashes which you slept through. A 17 bagger, CAGR 16.76%

It just so happens that Amazon is a sturdy survivor!

How about the S&P 500?

1,417.04 → 2,871.68 = a one bagger, CAGR 3.84%

Denny Schlesinger

Guess how Bezos got rich…

11 Likes

“Saul’s Bull case”…and you had to say “17 bagger”???

Here we go again with the bagger discussion :wink:

Actually, if I read Saul correctly, he would have likely dumped AMZN well before that ever transpired.

The revenue growth rate plummeted several times over the years:

https://revenuesandprofits.com/amazon-vs-walmart-revenues-pr…

https://www.statista.com/statistics/233761/year-on-year-reve…

So I would call this the “un-Saul” bull case.

The fact that he doesn’t own it speaks for itself.

1 Like

Actually, if I read Saul correctly, he would have likely dumped AMZN well before that ever transpired.

Not if he fell asleep Rip van Winkle style he wouldn’t have! As far as I know Saul does not trade in his sleep. I could be wrong… LOL

The fact that he doesn’t own it speaks for itself.

You’re too literal, get some imagination!

Denny Schlesinger

6 Likes

You’re too literal, get some imagination!

Denny Schlesinger

I always read your posts carefully Denny!

But interestingly, I thought your post was provocative in a direction opposite its title and dovetailing into your recent discussion with Saul on “baggers”.

Saul would have most certainly sold AMZN…several times…due to the falling revenue growth…heck maybe he once owned it and actually did sell it.

Let’s suppose that when you were 30 years old you bought 100 AMZN at the very top of the 2000 bubble, 12/10/1999. This morning you wake up with your AMZN worth $195,207.00 despite the two crashes which you slept through. A 17 bagger, CAGR 16.76%

Hi Denny, Actually from 12/10/99 I have a 43-bagger on my entire portfolio. That’s equivalent to 43 times what I had on that date. (I just looked it up.) I sold amazon, AOL and Yahoo in early 2000, and bought other stocks, and was up 19.4% in 2000 as a whole so it really was just an internet bubble, not a stock bubble that burst.

Best,

Saul

7 Likes

Hi Denny, Actually from 12/10/99 I have a 43-bagger on my entire portfolio. That’s equivalent to 43 times what I had on that date.

That’s a CAGR of 22.3% which is absolutely splendid!

Unfortunately my point got lost in the shuffle. I was trying to disprove AD who warns against buying at absurdly high prices. That’s why my example bought at the very top of the Amazon bubble. I was trying to show Amazon in the worst possible light.

People just don’t realize the immense power of compounding which is what growth is. Security Analisis was born in the age of bonds when growth was much more limited and they are still using these antiquated valuation methods.

Where one needs to be extra careful is not to buy duds or fly-by-nights. That’s why the business model is so important.

One last but important point, I’m glad you brought up your 43-bagger in 18 years which has a CAGR of 22.3%. Any investing method that produces 20% over time is absolutely tops. Since one will always have some losses, to get 20% you need some position to yield more. That’s where my synthetic ten bagger comes in, 25.9%. That’s the goal I set for my positions hoping I’ll end up beween 15 and 20% for the whole portfolio.

I think we have talked this subject to death! LOL

Denny Schlesinger

11 Likes