"Long-termism: Focus, Persistence, Longevity"

This article is Lu Canwei's 61st original piece.

Click the blue 【Lu Canwei】 above to follow; remember to add a ⭐️ star mark~

Today, all of our generation saw a piece of news: Uncle Da has passed away.

There have been too many black swan events in the past two years. The last time I felt so shocked was with Kobe's departure. Just as we see in the news, how can a person who was doing well just disappear like that?

As the number of black swans increases, short-termism seems to have become a norm. People are grasping tighter to things that are visible in the short term. For instance, not long ago, the price of liquor surged, and Zhang Kun, who heavily invested in Moutai, even gained a fan club. However, with the recent selection of academicians, public opinion has been harsh, and Moutai has been falling consecutively. Zhang Kun has been heavily criticized. Another example is Cai Song Song, who was praised when chip stocks were rising but criticized when they fell.

However, if people could take a moment to search, they would find that when Zhang Kun took over the E Fund Small and Medium Cap in September 2012, there were no liquor stocks. By 2013, Moutai had already become the second-largest holding in E Fund Small and Medium Cap, with an entry price of 80 yuan per share, which is now 2400 yuan per share.

Many institutions have conducted research reports on Zhang Kun, mentioning that he prefers to buy stocks for the long term, with an extremely low turnover rate. Moreover, in the top ten holdings from 24 quarters ago, Moutai and Wuliangye were included, and they have been held for over five years. The performance over five years has consistently outperformed the market.

A few days ago, Mingbai Laoshi wrote a tweet about a course he teaches. A new user listened for less than five minutes and then started advising Mingbai Laoshi on how to be more efficient using his method. Mingbai Laoshi advised him to finish the course and then think about it, but in the end, the user still believed his method was more efficient.

We always make choices based on our own understanding, just like those who criticize Zhang Kun when the funds drop and attribute the gains and losses solely to Moutai, thinking it's just luck. They fail to see the underlying logic behind the fund's small gains when Moutai drops, the halting of subscriptions, and the series of dividend actions. They also don't understand why Mingbai Laoshi insists that users finish learning before discussing efficiency; our thinking is always limited to our own boundaries.

Sometimes I recommend books and notable figures to people around me for further learning, but sometimes I get responses like, "Don't blindly follow authority."

Everything has its underlying logic; existence is reasonable, though some argue that existence isn't necessarily reasonable. So how do we end up with such a split personality, even being accused of double standards at times?

A few days ago, I came across a sentence that said our theories often serve to explain our choices rather than genuinely guiding them.

This is why when we see prices rise, we think our purchase was correct because the trend's theoretical judgment was right, and when prices fall, it's obviously because the fund manager is incompetent.

But ultimately, it's because we lack true faith in what we face; what we see is not the endgame. This is why, during the process, any slight disturbance can shake us. Having faith alone is not enough; we also need to understand growth and evolution.

We all hope to find various quick fixes that can immediately solve our problems. For example, when our product isn't performing well, we start applying various methodologies, like implementing OKRs, having a sense of goals, creating an ultimate experience, or developing an MVP, only to end up exhausting ourselves. All overnight successes stem from our continuous, day-to-day practice, using the simplest methods, drilling down hard, and mastering the basics.

We see too many so-called cases of the few defeating the many and always think we can find a killer move for an overnight turnaround. This is also why "The Son-in-Law" has become so popular recently; it really is satisfying. But we are just ordinary people, and to achieve victory, we can only win by having more.

You might ask, "How can I win with more when I have no resources, no money, and no ability?"

The success of New China is also a case of the few defeating the many, but if you look closely, you'll find it involves a large number of small-scale victories over the few, such as the guerrilla warfare and tunnel warfare we often hear about.

Having read this, I believe you should have your answer by now. Next, you just need to do the following things:

Recommendations:

What did Charlie Munger say on February 24?

Let's talk about "success studies."

How to continuously do something: ten tips to help me stick to daily updates.

The power of words is precisely what can move people the most.

How much is knowledge worth?

Scan to follow 【Lu Canwei】, send "self-media materials" in the background to receive two benefits for free:

1. A self-media tool kit (worth 1999 yuan).

2. An electronic version of the "2020 Wealth Calendar," containing 365 money-making tips.

👇👇👇 Welcome to click and follow~