Friday, March 27, 2026

20 Years On!

20 years is a long time. This blog started in 2006. So it has been 20 years

This blog started in 2006. Fuck. It's been that long...

In that time frame, Blogger, this platform was bought out by Google, which thrive a bit.

But thereafter it was probably de-prioritized and all you see is ads now.

In the same timeframe, a baby becomes an adult, gets to drive, drink alcohol and vote in some countries.

In Singapore, if he is a boy, he goes to the army and handle weapons. If she is a girl, she graduates from high school, goes to university, probably has a boyfriend.

It is a fucking long time.

As a long term investor, I thought 20 years was the right time-frame to think about life and investments. Well, the world has become a lot more short-term.

Tiktok is about seconds. Youtube is in the minutes. Some podcasts go on for an hour or so. Movies have ironically gotten a bit longer at 2 plus hours, sometimes 3 hours. 

But years? Come on. Who thinks in terms of 20 years? Insurance agents?

In 2023, I moved my content onto substack, the new platform for long-form writing. But still, no one reads unless you know how to play the game well.

Substack winners are players who have mastered the art of writing for social media. They can grow their followers to the thousands in days. It is a skill in itself.

To give substack credit, there is a lot of wonderful content on substack. Mine is 8percentpa.substack.com. Please follow and subscribe.

The value investing world is so disconnected because we have to think in years, usually 3-5 years, sometimes 10-20 years but the world is so different today.

In the last 20 years, if you subscribed to pure value investing, you would not have bought Nvidia, Amazon, Tesla because it was impossible to justify using value investing methodologies.

But these were the stocks that outperformed the most.

We discussed a bunch of stocks here. Some were okay, some bombed. 

One went to zero. Hyflux.

I came to the conclusion that for most people, by that I mean 99% of human population, should just buy risk-free assets, like government bonds, if they have the means.

If you have a bit more appetite for investments, buy equity indices, like the S&P500. 

Don't bother to pick stocks. You will not win.

The investment game is like the Olympics. Only the best of the best human beings win.

But unlike the Olympics, anyone can open an Interactive Broker account and compete, thinking he or she can win.

No, you will not win. If you did, it was luck.

By winning, I mean, beating the S&P500 over 20 years. 

The S&P compounds 10% per year. So over 20 years, it will almost 4x the original capital, using the Rule of 72. 

If you did compound 4x your capital since 2006, you win. Was it luck or skill? Be honest.

The best investors barely beat this. It is just like the Olympics. Not physically but mentally.

The human body deteriorates after the age of 20 so it is hard for a 40-year-old to win Olympic medals.

Investment requires experience and wisdom so age becomes an advantage but still because it's the most intense mental Olympics, only the best of the best get the medals.

I found a good list here: https://fiscal.ai/super-investors/

Bill Ackman, Howard Marks, Li Lu, Stanley Drunkenmiller, Warren Buffett, you name them. 

The point is, this game is fucking difficult. 

If you have a day job, and you try to do this, beat the market, make outsized returns? Forget it.

Just buy the S&P500. Or the STI. Or if you are risk-adversed, T-bills. 

Don't risk your hard earned money trying to pick stocks.

Okay, if you want to buy DBS, eat dividends, make some extra. By all means.

Remember, that used to be Singtel. It's been replaced by DBS. 

Like the top badminton player, or top tennis star. The best blue chip gets replaced too!

Or in the global context. It was Apple, which is replaced by Nvidia.

So, buy the index. That's for folks who can tolerate some risk.

If you cannot afford to lose money, just put in the bank or buy T-bills. 

Don't risk hard earned money trying to invest.

Don't listen to insurance agents or well-meaning friends who made money buying Bitcoins.

The former is trying to earn your money, the latter got lucky and have no idea wtf they are talking about.

If after all this, you still want to go down the fucking rabbit hole and understand more about investing, follow or subscribe 8percentpa.substack.com

On this substack platform, we discuss activist investing. 

Activist investors try to beat the market by trying to take control of their investee companies.

Activists send people on the boards of companies to shake things up.

Warren Buffett bought Berkshire Hathaway in an activist setting in 1965.

Activist investors do beat the market although the long term positive impact is unclear.

Because after the activists take their money, the companies' share prices revert. So the verdict is unclear.

What's clear though is if you read this far, your attention span goes beyond Tiktok.

Our substack is irregularly updated but we are here for the long game.

An attempt for the author to see if he can beat the market one more time, at the PA* level.

We write about investment ideas and activist stocks that we own.


We also discuss free cashflow compounders, markets and portfolio management tips periodically.

So, see you there!

*PA stands for Personal Account.

This post is not written by AI.
 

Thursday, January 01, 2026

New Activist Investment Idea!

 This post first appeared on 8percentpa.substack.com

This company might be a giveaway with the sub-title above and loyal followers of this substack. In order to mask it a little, we are not revealing the currency below. This is a European activist stock and the company has to turn things around for share price to rally.

Financials (Dec 26)

  • Net Sales: 8bn, OP: 0.8bn, Net Income: 0.4bn
  • EBITDA: 0.8bn, Free Cashflow (FCF): 0.4bn
  • Dividend: 4.5, Dividend Yield: 3.2%
  • Net Cash*: c.5bn, Market Cap: c.7bn
*Net Cash: Cash + 50% of Inventory - Short-term debt - Long-term debt

Financial Ratios

  • ROE: 7% (currently 3%), ROA: 5% (currently 1%)
  • GPM: 80%, OPM: 5-10% (currently 3%)
  • EV/EBITDA: 11.5x, EV/FCF: 14.4
  • PER: 18.1x, PBR: 0.7x
  • FCF Yield: 5.5%

As mentioned, an activist recently launched a campaign against this stock and tried to get onto the board of directors but was rebuffed. Since then, interested market participants and fellow substackers wrote a lot about this name and we have no shortage of deep research.

1. Background and Business

We have written extensive about Swatch. Please check the link below: 

https://8percentpa.blogspot.com/search/label/Swatch

To reiterate, Swatch is a Swiss luxury watch and jewellery conglomerate that owns the following brands as well as production sites for watch movement manufacturing and retail distribution chains. While most readers would know Swatch, few would associate the company with iconic luxury brands like Omega and Harry Winston. In fact, its billion dollar brands or potential billon dollar brands are Breguet, Blancpain, Glashutte, Longine, Rado, Tissot and needless to say, the top three megabrands: Omega, Harry Winston and Swatch itself.

Here's the investment thesis:

Swatch is an activist play trading as a net net with its cash and inventory almost as big as its market cap. Its second generation founding family needs to turn things around or face more public scrutiny. The turnaround story includes revitalizing its megabrands, improving investor relations and reinvesting in mechanical watch innovation.

Activist Angle

What's new and important in 2025 is that activist Greenwood Investors, owning 0.5% of the company has launched a public campaign against Swatch’s management. In the last AGM held in May, the activist Steven Wood receive 60% of the votes but was blocked by the family to join the board. Sensing potential to change things, other activists are definitely looking at the name.

Management is also under pressure to turn things around since the under-performance has caused its market cap to drop to single digit billions while its peers are 10-30x bigger. Otherwise, someone might privatize them.

Positives

Iconic brands: Swatch owns three megabrands, Omega, Harry Winston and Breguet which could be even bigger should management focus on them. Omega consistent ranked top 3 in the world of watches in terms of volume sold. This is the brand that was worn to the moon and its secured its legacy.


Harry Winston is also consistently rank amongst the top jewellery brands while Breguet is a horological powerhouse founded in 1775 by Abraham-Louis Breguet. The brand's history is essentially a history of watchmaking itself. The founder invented and perfected numerous technologies that are still fundamental to mechanical watches today.

Privatization: With the stock trading at net net (current assets - current liabilities > market cap), the stock is ridiculously cheap for a jewellery / watchmaker and both activists and management knows this. Privatization either by management or third party would see share price popping 20-40% depending on the premium offered.

With that, let’s move on to the risks.

Risks

China: A big part of Swatch’s earnings recovery hinges on China and should business in the Middle Kingdom continue to deteriorate, it would be much more difficult for Swatch to engineer a turnaround. Mitigating factor: Swatch commented that it is seeing early signs of recovery in China and expects good results in 2H2025.

Management: Swatch is currently helmed by the founder’s son and daughter who have little regard for shareholders. The article below revealed their stances well. As such, management might then take it private should it become unreasonably cheap. While investors buying Swatch now would enjoy the pop, ultimately, it’s not great because long-term shareholders are being taken out cheaply.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/various/activist-takes-on-swatch-maverick-as-omega-empire-falters/89342463

The rest of the post is on 8percentpa.substack.com