聽眾：

巴菲特先生、芒格先生，我是來自澳大利亞墨爾本的馬克·拉比諾夫。我想請教二位，在投資不同普通股時，如何判斷合適的安全邊際？比如對于一家占據(jù)主導地位、歷史悠久且穩(wěn)定的企業(yè)，你們會要求10%的安全邊際嗎？如果是這樣，對于較弱的企業(yè)，你們又會如何提高這個標準？謝謝。

巴菲特 ：

我們更青睞那些真正有把握的行業(yè)。因此，如果某個行業(yè)或企業(yè)的競爭態(tài)勢等存在較大不確定性，導致我們無法得出可靠估值，我們不會試圖通過要求更高的安全邊際來彌補。我們會轉(zhuǎn)向自己更理解的領(lǐng)域。比如當我們收購像See's糖果這樣的企業(yè)，或是投資可口可樂這樣的股票時，我們并不認為需要很大的安全邊際，因為我們相信自己的核心判斷不會出現(xiàn)重大偏差。

我們真正想做的是收購卓越的企業(yè)——即那些能夠長期維持高資本回報率，并且管理層值得信賴的公司。當我們找到具備這些特質(zhì)的企業(yè)時，并不需要給予太大折價。我們當然希望以四折的價格買入，但即便接近公允價值我們也會考慮。我們不愿全價購買，但接近的價格是可以接受的。

當我們真正發(fā)現(xiàn)優(yōu)質(zhì)企業(yè)時，就像看到一個人進門——你不需要知道他究竟是300磅還是325磅，你一眼就能看出他很胖，對吧？同樣，當我們在財務(wù)上確認一家企業(yè)'很胖'時，就不會糾結(jié)于精確估值。如果在這個例子中我們能以相當于270磅的價格買入，我們就很滿意了。

但如果我們發(fā)現(xiàn)某些企業(yè)的競爭格局使其難以預(yù)測5年、10年甚至20年后的前景——因為投資的本質(zhì)就是預(yù)見未來。你的回報不取決于過去，只源于未來。歷史的價值僅在于它能提供對未來的洞見，而有時歷史根本無法預(yù)示未來。

而在其他情況下，比如你提到的穩(wěn)定業(yè)務(wù)，歷史往往能提供很好的未來指引。這時你不需要很高的安全邊際，但總應(yīng)該感覺物超所值。我們確實曾以四分之一的價格收購過優(yōu)質(zhì)企業(yè)，不過這種機會不常出現(xiàn)——最近在韓國市場遇到過，但確實罕見。

但這意味著應(yīng)該空等10-15年期待機會重現(xiàn)嗎？這不是我們的做法。只要能以合理估值買入優(yōu)質(zhì)企業(yè)，我們就會持續(xù)投資。查理？

芒格：

是的，安全邊際的核心就是獲取高于支付價格的價值。這種價值可以多種形式存在。如果用1塊錢賭注能贏4塊錢，即使勝負概率各半，這也是一種價值選擇。這是高中代數(shù)知識。連高中數(shù)學都不會運用的人，應(yīng)該考慮其他活動了。

聽眾：

Mr. Buffett and Mr. Munger, I'm Mark Rabinov from Melbourne, Australia. I just wanted to ask you, how do you judge the right margin of safety to use when investing in various common stocks? For example, in a dominant, long-standing, stable business, would you demand a 10% margin of safety? And if so, how would you increase this in a weaker business? Thank you.

巴菲特：

And we favor the businesses where we really think we know the answer. And therefore, if a business gets to the point where we think the industry in which it operates, the competitive position or anything is so chancy that we can't really come up with a figure. We don't really try to compensate for that sort of thing by having some extra-large margin of safety. We really try to go on to something that we understand better. So if we buy something like See's candy as a business. Or Coca-Cola as a stock, we don't think we need a huge margin of safety because we don't think we're going to be wrong about our assumptions in any material way.

What we really want to do is buy a business that's a great business, which means a business is going to earn a high return on capital employed for a very long period of time. And where we think the management will treat us right. And we don't have to mark those down a lot when we find those factors. We'd love to find them when they're selling at 40 cents on the dollar, but we will buy those at much closer to a dollar on the dollar. We don't like to pay a dollar on the dollar, but we'll pay something close.

And if we really get to something, you know, when we see a great business, it's like if you see somebody walk in the door and you don't know whether they weigh 300 pounds or 325 pounds, you still know they're fat, right? And so if we see something where we know it's fat financially, we don't worry about being precise. And if we can come in in that particular example at the equivalent of 270 pounds, we'll feel good.

But if we find something where the competitive aspects are, it's just the nature of the business that you really can't see out 5 or 10 or 20 years. Because that's what investing is, is seeing out. You don't get paid for what's already happened. You only get paid for what's going to happen in the future. The past is only useful to you to the extent to which it gives you insights into the future. And sometimes the past doesn't give you any insights into the future.

And in other cases, like the stable business that you postulated, it probably does give you a pretty good guideline as to what's going to happen in the future. And you don't need a huge margin of safety. You should have something that you always should feel you're getting a little more than what it's worth. And there are times when we've been able to buy wonderful businesses at a quarter of what they're worth. But we haven't seen those times. Well, we saw it in Korea recently. But you don't see those sort of things very often.

And does that mean you should sit around and hope they come back for 10 or 15 years? That's not the way we do it. If we can buy good businesses at a reasonable valuation, we're going to keep doing it. Charlie?

芒格：

Yeah, that margin of safety concept boils down to getting more value than you're paying. And that value can exist in a lot of different forms. If you're paid 4 to 1 on something that's an even-money proposition, well, that's a value proposition, too. It's high school algebra. And people who don't know how to use high school algebra should take up some other activity.

(理財有風險，投資需謹慎。本內(nèi)容僅分享，不構(gòu)成任何投資建議，謝謝！)