Loading video player...
Mohnish traces bubble history from 1920s automobiles to 1960s tronics to 2000 dot-com, showing pattern where kernel of truth (horses → cars, transistors revolutionize, internet transforms) leads to frenzy where 99% of businesses fail despite transformative technology being real.
Mohnish's vivid story of February 2000 Harvard MBA dinner where students were so certain of dot-com riches they barely showed up, told experienced investors they were dinosaurs and would be 5x wealthier in 6 months. By 2001, MBAs were politely passing resumes again. Perfect snapshot of bubble mentality.
Mohnish sees crypto as latest bubble in historical pattern. With total value over $3 trillion and new coins created every hour, he believes the entire $3 trillion will disappear to nothing, hurting many people despite being small relative to $500 trillion global wealth.
Mohnish disagrees with Charlie that current bubble is bigger than dot-com. Current bubble limited to crypto and maybe 20 stocks like GameStop, AMC, Tesla. Microsoft at 35x not obvious bubble despite high multiple - low rates justify 50x for exceptional subscription businesses. Key distinction: not obvious vs. obviously overpriced.
Mohnish explains auto industry economics using Fiat Chrysler case study. Of 5 million cars/year, only Ram trucks and Jeeps mattered - rest had sub-$1000 margins. Truck business with $10K margins on 1M units = $10B operating income, justifying $100-400B valuation at 20-40x multiple.
Mohnish outlines Tesla bull case: already at 1M cars/year with Elon nowhere near done. Possible endpoint: 5-10M cars/year with couple million at $10K margins (similar to Ram/F-150 economics). Plus Elon's unpredictability - will add businesses we can't imagine. Makes valuation very difficult.
Mohnish illustrates bubble psychology with New Orleans doctor who had all money in Tesla, believing SpaceX and Hyperloop value was inside Tesla stock. Shows how people don't examine details - just conflate 'everything Elon is everything Tesla' despite SpaceX being separate private company.
Charlie told Mohnish that SpaceX is worth more than Tesla intrinsically. SpaceX is private but running circles around Boeing (can't put 3 people to space station after decades in space business) and NASA. A startup does routinely what established aerospace companies can't. Shows Elon's execution but separate from Tesla valuation.
Mohnish puts both Microsoft and Tesla in 'too hard pile' rather than obviously overpriced. Can build credible cases making trillion valuation look too high or too low. Space opens massive possibilities (Bezos: visit Earth like Yellowstone). Uncertainty makes it entertainment not investment.
Paul challenges 'too hard pile' designation with math: even assuming 30% revenue growth for 10 years, Tesla still trades at 30x P/E in year 10, meaning breakeven if all projections hit. To Paul that's overpriced, not too hard. Mohnish counters that Elon's unpredictability makes it truly too hard despite the math.
Mohnish highlights US as big winner from Elon: never spent on his education, he wasn't born here, but US got all the fruits. Praises immigration story as fantastic value proposition for America.
Mohnish gives Tesla serious credit: Model S came out ~2012, and 10 years later legacy automakers still haven't matched it because they're bad at software. The gap persists - always looks like others are coming but they're always behind. This software advantage is real and durable.
Mohnish acknowledges it's not inconceivable Tesla could end up with 50%+ share of electric vehicle market in very long run with most of auto industry electric and 1-2 companies dominating. But warns that's a lot of what-ifs stacked up - not an investment thesis.
Mohnish explains critical investing concept: no called strikes. Being wrong on Tesla or Bitcoin doesn't matter if you never invest. He's wrong on lots of things (would reject most Sequoia VC deals). What matters is strong conviction on what you DO own. Only swing at complete no-brainers. Tesla and Bitcoin aren't no-brainers.
Paul explains Buffett's baseball analogy: in baseball you get 3 strikes, in investing you can have 3 million strikes and still be at the plate. Only swing when you have obvious value: $20M company generating $30-40M free cash flow, $800M real estate net of debt. Wait for no-brainers.
Mohnish reveals extreme concentration: $750M across all funds, by fifth position you're at 70-80% of assets. Means top 5 holdings represent vast majority of portfolio. Ultimate expression of 'no called strikes' philosophy - only swing at best ideas.
Paul references Dhandho Investor's core concept of asymmetric bets (heads I win big, tails I don't lose much) and notes young investors don't focus on downside risk. Sets up question about mindset for new investors to adopt.
Mohnish identifies core psychological challenge: watching your idiot neighbor and his 17-year-old son get wealthy in bubbles is psychologically difficult. That's what fuels bubbles. References Ron Insana's Trend Watching book showing bubbles happen all the time across geographies - euphoria and pessimism are human nature.
Mohnish explains difficulty of value investing: humans struggle to defer gratification. Owning Tesla/Bitcoin lets you be part of tribe, wrap stories around kernel of truth. Echo chambers (message boards) multiply these signals whether correct or not. Same amplification distortion as political process. Creates market distortions.
Mohnish reveals value investor secret: bubbles are necessary for value investing to work. When things go crazy in some areas (crypto, Tesla), other areas get ignored. That's the only way patient value investors make money. Wouldn't be able to do the craft without bubbles.
Paul references Guy Spier's book about analyst who understood value but sold because couldn't stand the heat. Relates to his brother (graduated college 2011) who's never seen real bear market. Knows valuations don't make sense but believes market never goes down. New market participants lack context.
Paul notes the gap between what people say they can tolerate (50% loss) and reality. During actual pullbacks, same people send furious texts asking if it's going to zero, panicking about Alibaba falling. Shows difference between theoretical risk tolerance and emotional reality.
Mohnish cites John Galbraith's observation that financial memory is about 4 years, though market participant turnover suggests 17 years. Current market participants weren't around for dot-com bubble, view it as dinosaur age historic event. Meme stock phenomena is new wrinkle they've never seen.
Mohnish uses GameStop to illustrate why he's against shorting despite it being 'most obvious candidate.' Meme frenzy took out shorts causing serious pain even though business is useless - leased space selling downloadable video games. Only sensible move: issue stock at high price. Proves shorting makes no sense.
Mohnish gives AMC slightly more credit than GameStop - at least people might return to theaters and he personally likes going. But expects secular decline in theater traffic post-COVID. People will still go but not like before. COVID has permanently changed behaviors.
Mohnish sarcastically outlines only rational GameStop strategy: issue stock at elevated price (only way to justify valuation). If really gaming system, put all proceeds into Bitcoin to extend bubble. Finds it sad because average people will ultimately be hurt, not Wall Street.
Mohnish's concern: average people will be hurt by bubble, not Wall Street. They'll blame rich Wall Street but it's average folks getting in late. Example: 17-year-old caddy told him to get Bitcoin/Tesla/Palantir. Friends joke caddy knows more than Mohnish. Classic bubble top signal.
Paul makes strong distinction: if Microsoft at 1/10th price wouldn't be too hard, then current price is overpriced pile not too hard. He understands business, just not valuation. Mohnish agrees you can have both piles. Bitcoin truly too hard at any price - no understanding of use case or fundamentals.
Paul makes vivid point about valuation sensitivity: would 'rob and steal' to buy Microsoft at $30/share (vs current ~$300+), showing he understands business perfectly at right price. Bitcoin he wouldn't understand at any price. Illustrates difference between 'too hard' and 'overpriced.'
29 topics covered
3 speakers
26 concepts discussed
Want to explore more videos? Browse our searchable library.
