Riding The Wealth Elevator

Imagine for a moment — You are riding an elevator.  This elevator goes up and down like all other elevators, but there’s no display telling you which direction the elevator will go next.  No blinking numbers indicating direction either.  Similarly, you don’t know how many floors are in the building, or even what floor you are on.  It’s a blind ride.

What makes this elevator so unusual, is that it moves in response to how many riders get on or off.  When more riders get on-board, the elevator tends to rise  When riders get off, the elevator begins to fall.

This is what I like to call: Riding the Wealth Elevator.


Riding The Elevator

As you might have guessed by now, this little story about the elevator is actually about investing in publicly traded stocks.  Most people want to ride that elevator (stocks) as high as they can, gaining wealth.  They will happily jump on the elevator when it appears to be rising.

The only problem is, as soon as the elevator starts to show even the slightest sign of falling, riders begin jumping off in droves!  Due to the unique properties of this elevator, these “exiting riders” actually exacerbate the decline (of the stock) when they sell and jump off.  These declines can spook other investors, causing them to sell in-turn.

This is why some profitable companies like GE can see their stock drop like a rock after a few bad years, and others (which haven’t a cent in earnings) can rise 300% in a single year!

ge stock
GE’s stock has cratered in recent years.  Investors have fled the stock because a complete turnaround of the business seems unlikely.

What’s not clear is if the riders who jumped-off were premature.  Will the elevator will begin rising again?  Or, will it continue falling to the basement?

This wealth elevator ride is analogous to “momentum investing”, which has been very popular lately.  Stocks like Tesla and GameStop have attracted a ton of new investors looking for quick returns from stock market momentum.  As long as other investors (riders) reman confident, rising prices can become something of a self-fulfilling prophecy for a stock.  Due to the growing demand for shares, prices can skyrocket very quickly.

The higher a stock price becomes however, the more likely it is investors will start “cashing-in” their gains, hastening the decline.

Investor perceptions around the movement of a stock (or even the entire stock market) can have even greater effects on the stock’s performance, than even it’s business fundamentals!

Even if you don’t buy into all this “momentum investing” stuff, it’s at least worth understanding how a stock’s performance can be affected by the Wealth Elevator.


The Lifecycle Of A Business

To understand how to succeed in a world where investor perception matters, I think it’s important to first understand the lifecycle of a business.  Yes, stocks do have lifecycles, just like living organisms!

That lifecycle typically follows a pattern, with the following stages:

Startup — In this phase there is rapid organic growth (30%+ yoy growth), but little profitability.  The business is typically not self funding, and usually looks to venture investors (or an IPO) to provide cash for expanding.

Expansion — In the profitable expansion phase, the business becomes self-funding and cash flow positive.  Fast organic growth continues albeit at a slower pace (15-25% yoy).

Maturity — When a business reaches maturity it has difficulty finding profitable places to invest excess cash.  Often times it begins buying back shares, or paying a dividend in order to return capital to shareholders.  Organic growth is minimal at this stage (5-10% yoy).  The prospects for future growth in the original business are small.  The best hope for the future is typically an acquisition of another business.

Decline  — The decline phase is typically marked by declining revenues of the original business.  Revenue declines can be slow (taking many years) or can be quite fast.  If there were failed acquisitions made during the maturity stage, the business will begin writing them off, reporting large losses.  Despite accounting losses, the business may remain cash flow positive and continue to pay dividends and buy back shares.

Dissolution — At some point, the revenue declines begin to increase, and profitability dries up.  When this happens the business is usually dissolved — Inventories, buildings, and equipment are sold, employees are laid off, and any remaining capital is returned to shareholders.

Displayed graphically over time, the business lifecycle looks something like this:

Revenue, growth rates, and profitability are the key indicators to look for in determining where a stock sits in the business lifecycle.   These attributes will attract or repel investors like no other!  They also determine how much of a premium investors are willing to pay to own that stock.

For example:  Growth investors are almost always willing to pay a large premium if a stock is growing quickly.  This is premium typically happens in the Startup or Expansion stage of a stock’s lifecycle.  Think Tesla or Netflix here.  These are fast growers in exciting new industries.  Investors are often willing to pay *incredible* premiums to own these stocks.

Once a stock reaches the Maturity phase however, growth investors begin jumping-off and a few (albiet smaller group) of investors called “value investors” tend to jump on.  Value investors are also much more careful about the price they’re willing to pay for a stock, so typically there is little-to-no premium on the stock price.

Generally speaking, any stock in the Declining phase I recommend you avoid.  These are difficult waters to succeed in, and the stocks are treated like garbage.  Yes, they’re extremely cheap, but nobody really wants to own them.  How will you get your money out if you decide to invest?  If you invest in stocks like these, be willing to ride them all the way down to zero (until dissolution).


A Case Study: The Multiples Of Microsoft

The lesson I’m trying to impart in this post, is that investing is more than just a game of calculating the sum of discounted cashflows.  It’s also about understanding how other investors perceive a stock, and what kind of premium they’ll pay to be an owner of it.

Microsoft offers a great example of how this idea works in the real world.  It makes for a great case study in understanding how the wealth elevator works.

First, let’s go back to the 1980’s and 1990’s.  At the time, Microsoft was a high flying technology stock and PC’s were the king of the tech world.  Investors were paying PE multiples in the 50’s and 60’s in the late 90’s to own a part of Bill Gate’s software business.

Microsoft was growing rapidly, and it was good times for investors jumping on-board MSFT stock because it just kept going up.

Those good times came to an end in late 2000 when the “Dot Com bubble” finally popped.  Sales of PC’s began to slow in the resulting recession, and the invention of tablets and smartphone caused PC sales to further stagnate.

Consequently, Microsoft’s PE multiple compressed significantly in the following years… eventually falling to an all-time low PE of 9.06 in March of 2009.  This was a tough time to be a MSFT investor, despite the dividend it began paying in 2003 (further signaling its maturity).

MSFT PE ratio
Microsoft’s PE ratio over the years has varied wildly.

Even though earnings, and dividends continuously rose from 2001-2013, investors had little confidence in Microsoft.  It was considered a “mature” business, and possibly one that was starting to decline.  As a result, Microsoft’s stock stagnated for 12 long years.

The stock price remained flat from 2001 to 20013.

msft stock

As you can see from the more recent years on the chart, Wall Street’s crystal ball turned-out to be totally wrong about Microsoft.  Those who got off the elevator during the stagnation period managed to miss out on some of MSFT’s biggest stock moves ever.

Why did this happen?  What changed investor perceptions?  A new Cloud business, a change of CEO’s, and a world-wide pandemic completely altered investor perceptions around Microsoft stock.

These days, Microsoft is a back in the Expansion business phase.  Revenues are growing rapidly, and investors are willing to pay a PE multiple of 36 to own Microsoft again.  That’s not quite the highs we saw back during the dot-com bubble, but it’s clearly enough of a premium to show that Wall Street got it wrong.

Turnarounds of this magnitude are rare, but they do happen.


The Lessons Of The Wealth Elevator

If there’s one important lesson to be learned from the story of the Wealth Elevator it’s this — Investor sentiment can change dramatically over the course of a stocks life.  Investors should know that buying stocks is more than a simple calculation of “buying low” and “selling high”.

Investing can be as much about understanding what’s “in fashion” with other investors (and what they’re willing to pay a premium for), as it is about metrics and fundamental indicators.

In recent years, investors seem willing to pay premiums for any ‘technology’ stock that’s growing rapidly.  They’re dumping the mature slow-growth stocks (the so called “value stocks”).  Value has underperformed rather badly during this time period.

Maybe it has something to do with growing expectations of faster inflation?  Perhaps these high flying tech stocks are thought to perform better in an inflationary environment?

Your guess is as good as mine!  Just remember this — It’s just as easy to get caught on the wealth elevator when it’s falling.

Be on the lookout for riders getting off!  Good luck out there! 🙂


[Image Credit: Flickr]

22 thoughts on “Riding The Wealth Elevator

  • February 14, 2021 at 10:46 AM

    I think this an approachable, understandable metaphor for the incalculable part of stock investing: human sentiment and emotion. The elevator analogy is excellent, Tako!

    And boy has $MSFT been a crazy ride in the past decade. I’m really curious about what’s in store for the company long term.

    Will Windows continue to become more of a free service that ties users into an ecosystem where they really make money (Office subscriptions, etc.?). Will they pivot further towards business and away from consumers? I don’t know. But it’s interesting to watch for a guy that remembers writing BAT command files before Windows 3.1 was out (as a kid!).

    Thanks for the fun post Tako!

  • February 14, 2021 at 8:14 PM

    Love the analogy Mr. Tako! That MSFT chart is one crazy chart! Who knew MSFT would turn itself around and capture most of its re-occuring revenues from clouds rather than the good old ways of selling copies of Windows?

    One thing I’ve learned is that good “mature” companies will keep revolutionize itself and pivot to become a growing company again and again.

    • February 14, 2021 at 10:29 PM

      Yeah glad to see Microsoft as the example because it shows that the theoretical business lifecycle gets trickier when market dynamics change, new innovation happens to restart the growth engine, etc. interesting post especially now during one of the hardest markets to figure out in my lifetime. Heck I don’t even like to write about current events but find myself writing about investing during this challenging market. Be well 🙂

    • February 17, 2021 at 11:09 AM

      It’s actually surprisingly rare that companies manage to continually re-invent themselves. I.e. the Innovators Dilemma.

  • February 15, 2021 at 3:21 AM

    Hi Mr Tako,

    Nice post as well. Regarding turnarounds, do you see the energy companies related to petroleum production, mainly the European ones (Total, BP, Shell, etc) being able to reinvent themselves in the energy sector for the near future? Total even rebranded to TotalEnergies.

    I think that last year, with all the frenzy around clean energy, made the stocks related to it very expensive. Meanwhile, the companies that the core of the business is the oil production were heavenly punished by the market, being sold at discount. Some of those are moving to clean energy and may have a promising future while transitioning from oil to renewables.

    And about the Tobacco business, any thought? I read around about migration to the cannabis business, but I do not know if it would be enough.

    Happy to hear from you.

    All the best.

    • February 17, 2021 at 11:14 AM

      I think a few energy companies will be able to reinvent themselves, but only a handful. It’s a surprisingly difficult task to reinvent oneself.

      As far as tobacco businesses, there does seem to be a future around the smokeless products… but again, it’s not clear if that will be as good a business in the long run.

  • February 15, 2021 at 4:11 AM

    Hi Mr Tako,

    Great post and nice example with $MSFT.

    One has to wonder if a company like $IBM, that has been in long term revenue decline for 7+ years, would ever be able to pull off a turnaround like $MSFT.

    I wonder also if investors buying $TSLA or $AMZN today will be happy with their returns over the next ten years. Time will tellI suppose.

    Stay well out there!


    • February 17, 2021 at 11:17 AM

      There’s a few fundamental differences between IBM and Microsoft. For one, MSFT revenues have never gone down. Not a single year one year period I could find.

      IBM of course has, and this creates additional difficulties to maintain profitability. Employees have to be laid-off, severance has to be paid, expertise is lost from fired workers, and so on. It’s very hard to maintain business quality when you’re axing employees to stay profitable.

  • February 15, 2021 at 11:39 AM

    Great analogy Tako, one of your better posts and you have some darn good ones – I wish I had thought of that!

  • February 15, 2021 at 8:27 PM

    Great post. It’s all about the business cycle. And more and more we are seeing some business’ avoid the decline stage by entering new markets or building out new product lines like Microsoft. This is also something Amazon really has a knack for. They continue to crush it in multiple ways.

    • February 17, 2021 at 11:18 AM

      Yes, Amazon is surprisingly good at this. Amazingly so.

  • February 16, 2021 at 5:52 AM

    you raise an interesting problem with stocks, namely that for the share prices to rise you need enough buyers. I’ve noticed that in some unloved shares, they are so illiquid that even though earnings are increasing no-one ever buys. You then have a period of 5+ years where you are gaining the benefit of the increased earnings but no share price appreciation. If the only compensation you’re receiving is growth in dividends, it may not be enough.

    It seems to me that you shouldn’t invest in illiquid stocks, unless you’re able to obtain enough to actually effect control over the cash flows.

    Have you experienced any shares where you know the company is good, earnings compounding, but it is so unloved the share price hasn’t moved in 5 years? I start to doubt myself at that point, thinking perhaps there’s something else going on…

    • February 17, 2021 at 11:21 AM

      I’ve never seen it. Maybe your time horizon for value realization is too short? Some very illiquid stocks I know of have been *excellent* compounders over the past 20 years.

      That value realization isn’t always smooth, but if it can truly be seen, good investors will find it.

  • February 16, 2021 at 6:37 AM

    Nothing like a simple yet memorable analogy to drive a point home. This goes to show that staying the course does not always mean buy and hold forever. Staying the course means have a plan and stick to it.

  • February 16, 2021 at 5:11 PM

    It’s fascinating how quickly Microsoft was able to rebound and take advantage of the new technology in Cloud. It shows that big companies have the massive potential to always be growing as long as they are embracing new technology that is coming up every single day.

    There will always be innovative inventions in the coming years and decades.

  • October 22, 2021 at 8:05 AM

    Yeah, these big innovative tech companies are well, good at innovating. And a lot of these big tech has the resources to generate and restart new business cycles so that they can keep growing and taking over the world.

    Amazon now has Amazon Video, amongst a bunch of other services.
    Microsoft has had Azure for a while. They got into Xbox a while back. And probably cooking up something new.
    Google’s gotten into phones, and the cloud, and AI.
    Facebook’s now trying to get into the metaverse (but I don’t know how much of a product-market fit there is in this one – though even if they fail I’m sure they’ll survive vs. if they were a small business).
    AMD used to suck a lot despite having a bunch of good luck thrown their way. They lost a lots of share price due to poor execution. But then Zen came along and their stock went from $2->$90. A friend used to tell me that the workers there would complain about the stock price was very low when Rory was CEO, all the time. Guess they’re not complaining anymore.

    But I think tech is great – they have the resources to restart the innovation engine and start growing again, even if the company’s big. Tech is also really good because their margins are generally extremely high compared to other services/products. But who will be the next FB/MSFT/AMD? That, I’ve no clue.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge
Mr. Tako Escapes