01 The Power of Retained Earnings
In 1924, Edgar Lawrence Smith, an obscure economist and financial advisor, wrote Common Stocks as Long term Investments, a slim book that changed the investment world. Indeed, writing the book changed Smith himself, forcing him to reassess his own investment beliefs.
Going in, he planned to argue that stocks would perform better than bonds during inflationary periods and that bonds would deliver superior returns during deflationary times. That seemed sensible enough. But Smith was in for a shock.
His book began, therefore, with a confession: “These studies are the record of a failure – the failure of facts to sustain a preconceived theory.” Luckily for investors, that failure led Smith to think more deeply about how stocks should be evaluated.
For the crux of Smith’s insight, I will quote an early reviewer of his book, none other than John Maynard Keynes: “I have kept until last what is perhaps Mr. Smith’s most important, and is certainly his most novel, point. Well-managed industrial companies do not, as a rule, distribute to the the whole of their earned profits.
In good years, if not in all years, they retain a part of their profits and put them back into the business. Thus there is an element of compound interest （Keynes’ italics） operating in favour of a sound industrial investment. Over a period of years, the real value of the property of a sound industrial is increasing at compound interest, quite apart from the dividends paid out to the .”
And with that sprinkling of holy water, Smith was no longer obscure.
It’s difficult to understand why retained earnings were unappreciated by investors before Smith’s book was published. After all, it was no secret that mind-boggling wealth had earlier been amassed by such titans as Carnegie,
Rockefeller and Ford, all of whom had retained a huge portion of their business earnings to fund growth and produce ever-greater profits. Throughout America, also, there had long been small-time capitalists who became rich following the same playbook.
Nevertheless, when business ownership was sliced into small pieces – “stocks” – buyers in the pre-Smith years usually thought of their shares as a short-term gamble on market movements. Even at their best, stocks were considered speculations. Gentlemen preferred bonds.
Though investors were slow to wise up, the math of retaining and reinvesting earnings is now well understood. Today, school children learn what Keynes termed “novel”: combining savings with compound interest works wonders.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
01 留存收益的威力
1924年，一位当时默默无闻的经济学家及财务顾问 埃德加·劳伦斯·史密斯（Edgar Lawrence Smith）有一部著作《用普通股进行长期投资》（Common Stocks as Long Term Investments）面市。
这本篇幅不长的作品改变了投资界。实际上，写这本书也改变了史密斯本人，并迫使他重新评估自己的投资理念。
史密斯当时计划说明，在通货膨胀的时期，投资股票会比债券的业绩好，债券会在通缩的时期带来更高的回报。这种观点看来是合理的，可Smith当时入手了一只股票。
因此，他在书中这样坦言：这些研究是失败的纪录，失败在于，现实没能支持一个预设的理论。对投资者来说，这又是幸运的。因为失败让史密斯更深入地思考，应该怎样评估股票。
史密斯最宝贵的见解是什么？我要援引他那本书早年的评论者说过的话，这人非（英国经济学家）凯恩斯莫属。
凯恩斯曾说：“我坚持到底的也许是史密斯先生最重要的、无疑也是他最新颖的观点。通常，管理得当的工业企业不会将所有获利都分配给股东。即使不是任何时候，他们也会在好的年景留存一部分利润，投入到业务中。因此，复利的因素（这是凯恩斯自己标出的斜体字）在支持合理的工业投资。经过一些年，在完全剔除向股东支付的股息后，合理的工业资产会因为复利增长真实价值。”
有了这样的点拨，Smith在众人眼中再也不是籍籍无名之辈。
在Smith的那本书出版以前，人们很难理解留存利润为什么不受投资者欢迎。毕竟，在那以前，卡内基、洛克菲勒和福特这样的大佬已经积累了惊人的财富。所有这些人都留出了很大一部分企业收益，用来支持业务增长，创造更高的利润。在整个美国，也早就有同时代的资本家遵循同样的法则致富。
尽管如此，企业的所有权仍然被分割各位很小的部分、也就是股票。在史密斯横空出世前，股票买家往往把自己持有的股票视为对市场波动的短线赌博。股票充其量就是投机，有教养的绅士更青睐债券。
投资者并不是很快就弄懂了怎么计算留存收益和将这些收益再投资，不过现在已经理解得很透彻了。
今天，学校里的孩子都可以学到凯恩斯所说的新颖见解：将储蓄与复利结合，能创造奇迹。
用户评论