Motley Fool Australia

Motley Fool Australia

Since 1993, millions of investors have trusted The Motley Fool for simple, down-to-earth investing research.

Transcript: Tom & David Gardner on the Foolish way to invest in today’s market

David Kuo from Motley Fool UK talks to Tom and David Gardner, co-founders of The Motley Fool.

You can listen to or download this podcast here.

Australian readers can see Tom and David Gardner introduce Motley Fool Share Advisor.

David:

This is Money Talk, the weekly investing podcast from The Motley Fool. I am David Kuo, and today we have not one, but two Gardner brothers. Yes, we are spoilt to bits, because Tom and David, the founders of The Motley Fool, are with us to give us their take on investing in today’s environment. So welcome Tom, welcome David Gardner.

Tom:

Thank you very much, David.

David G:

Great to be here.

David:

Okay Tom, now I’d like to start by asking you about investing in today’s climate. Why should people invest, when there is so much uncertainty around?

Tom:

Well, it’s natural. It’s a natural tendency to be afraid at times like this, when there’s so much uncertainty in Europe, but obviously in each decade there’s some different great concern that shows up on the stage for investors. It’s only natural to shy away. The interesting thing is that the stock market is an auction market, so in fact when other people are nervous about buying, that’s when you want to step in and look very carefully at the merchandise, and listen closely to the auctioneer, and start seriously considering making actually larger investments during that period of time. So it’s very contrary to think that way, but the greatest investors certainly of our lifetime, certainly of American history, maybe right up alongside Ben Franklin, Warren Buffett has said, “Be fearful when others are greedy, and greed when others are fearful”. Buffett said that the single greatest thing he did as an investor in his lifetime was to learn how to manage his temperament, and to go contrary to the essence of the day. So when there is uncertainty, you actually should be excited.

When there is no uncertainty, when it feels like free money is being made, whether that’s in flipping houses, as happened across the US a couple of years ago, or it’s in buying internet stocks, you can’t miss internet stocks in the late 1990s — that’s the time when you want to be actually either be pulling your money off the table, or we are just more inclined to continue holding, but not get so enthusiastic that you’re piling money in at those times. So uncertainty should actually be your friend as an investor, which can be obviously difficult to embrace, when you’re starting as an investor.

David:

Okay, now the same question to you, David, but with a slight twist. How can people find shares that can possibly withstand the shocks that are being caused by the kind of economic upheaval we’re seeing?

David G:

Well I think, David, that it’s important for each of us as investors looking for shares to understand our own timeframe, and I think the way that I’ve succeeded finding shares that have been rewarding for me, and for my services and our Motley Fool investors here in the US in particular, is by making sure that my own timeframe is a little bit longer than Wall Street, that of the professional world, the City’s timeframe, because I do find that, if you’re trying to play the City game, you’re probably going to lose if you’re not in the City. For most of us at the Motley Fool here in the US, we’re not in the City at all. We’re trying to make the best decisions we can, with the savings that we’ve racked up over the course of our lives, whether we’re 24 years old, or 64 years old, and we want to invest that money well.

So the good news for all of us as investors, and I don’t care if we’re talking about the City or Wall Street, which side of the pond, the good news is that individual investors like us, by looking for shares that will do well over a three- or five-year period, all of a sudden you find that you are fishing at a different pond than the rest of the professional investment community, and in fact it’s a stock pond, in my opinion, and very few other fishermen have their poles in that particular pond. So I will continue to advocate, on both sides of the pond, that we do fish in this stock pond (I think I’m mixing metaphors – I apologise for that; you shouldn’t do that, it can blow up a podcast). But I think that it’s very important for us to take advantage of our timeframe, and if you’re looking beyond a minute or a day or a week, you are in fact advantaging yourself. So I find it easier to look for shares when I’m thinking three-year intervals.

David:

Okay, so one thing that won’t be lost on our listeners is that the two of you are advisors on the US Motley Fool Stock Advisor newsletter.  So Tom, how would you describe your style of investing, as opposed to David’s style of investing?

Tom:

Well, I’ve been investing for 20 years now, and one thing I’ll say is that my approach has changed throughout that 20 years. It started with a core set of beliefs, and those were really passed on to me by our father, when we were taught the subject in our adolescence, but also really learning from Dave in my early twenties, and just embracing the idea that first of all you’re investing in a business. So the actual movement of the stock price isn’t even secondary. It just doesn’t show up on your radar as a serious consideration for you to get thrilled, or feel disgusted, in any given few months, or even year period, as you’re looking at a business. I mean, the businesses that you’ll be investing in have usually at least hundreds, but more often thousands, of employees, and they’re making big decisions for the long term. They’re not trying to optimise the result of their company over a 90-day period, or even a one-year period. The best-run businesses are trying to figure out how to do things great over the next decade.

Obviously, there are truly great companies, like a company in the US named Costco, where the CEO said, “I make every decision, and I evaluate what I think it’ll mean for our company 25 to 50 years from now”. Now, I may not be great at evaluating it, but at least I’m thinking that way. So I think the first thing is that we believe in investing in businesses. The only thing I’ll add now is that I have really embraced the stakeholder model of investing. That takes you down sort of a different path than the traditional stock analyst, when we think of the traditional stock analyst, who’s running spreadsheets, numbers, looking at earnings and kind of very rigorously focused on what the profits look like, and what the balance sheet looks like. Those things all matter to me, but increasingly I’m spending a lot more time looking at the culture of the organisation — what is it like to work there? Who’s the leader of that business? How much are they serving their customer? What has been the performance of their business over a long period for time for shareholders, for customers, for employees, and is the world better off because this organisation exists?

I’ll just give one example along those lines, and that is that increasingly now I go to a website, Glassdoor.com, it’s a website where employees, past and present, can review what it was like to work at the organisation, and I now, as a routine part of all of my investment analysis, always drop by that site, and Google and look around to try and figure out what people are saying about that organisation as a workplace, because if you’re going to invest over the long term, you want to know that the fuel of that company, the creative energy of the people that are going to work every day, feels great about the work that it’s doing. So a single statistic that I love to try and assess is whether or not employees are staying at that organisation longer than they are at the competing companies in that industry. So that’s just a different view, it’s a more people-centric view of investing, certainly than I had 20 years ago when I started.

David:

Okay, so what about you, David? Is there any way of describing your style of investing, as opposed to Tom’s style of investing?

David G:

Well, I think for one thing, in our ongoing competition at Motley Fool Stock Advisor, I’m badly, badly beating Tom’s own returns. So the first thing I …

Tom:

You’ve got such a short-term view! We are a multi-decade company.

David G:

Now that we’ve arrived at our tenth anniversary of this service, it’s worth knowing just how far ahead the performance of my own stocks are above my brother’s. I’m having some fun with that, of course, but I would like to point out that Tom, with his own picks in Motley Fool Stock Advisor, is well, well ahead of the stock market’s average return. So he is beating up on his benchmark in a way that he does not deserve to hear his older brother demeaning his own performance, because the fact is, Tom’s performance has been exceptional, and is well ahead of what you would have got in index funds, index trackers, or typically from your broker.

Tom:

At this point, that just sounds so patronising – keep going!

David G:

And I think the reason that I have achieved such remarkable returns over my brother is that maybe some of what Tom just said, I grasped fairly early on. Tom talked about changing and evolving his approach over time, and I’ve done the same thing, and I agree – I think all of us should be able to answer that question, as Tom did, which is that I’ve changed my approach over time. Without allowing the wind to take you where it will in a given day or week, I think that we should be evolving continuously over time.

I’ll just say that I have also embraced the stakeholder model Tom was talking about, and thought about, I’m investing in people, not in brand names or widgets. I’m really buying the management team and the culture that that management team is creating, and I’m looking for companies that are highly innovative, highly creative, often disruptive, and that truly make the world a better place, in my mind. So I can look up and down my list of stock that I’ve picked over the course of time at Motley Fool Stock Advisor. I’m happy to say we’ve had Amazon.com for a very long time, with a very low cost basis in that one. A company like Apple has naturally found its way into my scorecard multiple times over time.

Those are just a couple of well-known names. I’m not going to go too inside, in our country we’d say, “inside baseball” — I’m not going to talk too much cricket here, and get into the weeds of all the different companies, but those are a couple of exemplars of the style of investing that I have, and I guess to close my shaggy dog answer, I would say that, in addition to having those kinds of disruptive, innovative companies, it’s partly that I’m holding them for long periods of time that explains the outperformance. I couldn’t, if I were changing my mind every few months about Apple, there’s no way that I would beat the market, and he’s my brother, as badly as I have.

David:

This brings me to a very …

Tom:

We’re going to go full circle, thankfully.

David:

Exactly! Now, this brings me to a very interesting point. We have a newsletter here called The Collective, and people email into The Collective, and they say, there are so many different styles of investing out there, and you just exemplify two different styles of investing. It’s really confusing for investors, Tom. So what is your response to that, if people say ‘what style of investing should I follow?’

Tom:

Well, I guess my analogy is, there’s so many different cuisines, and so many different ways of cooking each dish. So naturally, if you think at the outset as an investor in your early years, that you’re going to need to master the complexity of all these different cuisines, and if you don’t, you’re going to fail, you’re going to feel completely overwhelmed. There are entire culinary schools dedicated just to French cooking, or just to pastry cooking. So I would say, if you can, delight in the fact that there’s so much complexity out there, that there are so many varieties, because what it has meant for us over the last nearly 20 years of running The Motley Fool is that it’s so endlessly fascinating. It’s such a wonderful subject that unfortunately doesn’t get taught, even studying an organisation, not even the investment in the organisation, studying organisations at the high-school level and university, to really understand, how do these things grow and change, adapt, succeed and fail? So to me, as an investor, I would say, if it’s possible, delight in the fact that there are all these different cuisines and there’s so many different pathways you can go down, but you need to start somewhere pretty simple and pretty clear. I mean, I do love the Einstein quote: “Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.” I would say that you should always be embracing the fact that there is a little more complexity to every investment decision you’re making, there’s a little more you can learn, but you need to get your boat out there in the water, and learn. You need to learn by doing. I think very many people who may have an interest in investing feel like they should sit on the sidelines, and make sure they don’t make any mistakes.

But the way to really learn in life is to get out there, set yourself up to be able to make mistakes that won’t damage you. Everybody, in my opinion, because everybody in the UK, we have a service office in the Australia, everybody in Australia should be getting started with a few hundred dollars, a few hundred pounds – just get a stock, get a second stock, and begin to learn and draw some conclusions. The beauty of The Motley Fool is that you can just, as they’re doing in The Collective, you can ask questions at every point, and you’ll be able to learn from people, some of whom will have been doing this for decades; others of whom will be starting just like you. But if it’s possible at the outset to look at the complexity of a subject and say, this is going to be fascinating — I’m going to learn so much about the world. Odds are I’m going to make money — if the market on average goes up around 9% a year, that’s better than keeping your money in a bank, and unfortunately it appears like it may be safer to keep your money in equities than in the bank, but I think it’s a big learning adventure. You’re never going to master every cuisine as a chef. You just need to go out and follow your own passion and interests, ask questions and learn as you go. I think what you’ll find at The Motley Fool are, there are a lot of people who have learned how to be successful investors, and who can help you up that learning curve faster.

David:

You’re making me very hungry, with all these analogies about food, Tom! But the thing is, we will be launching over here in the UK a service as well, which will have two very different styles. Now, the problem, David, is that people will be saying, which one do I go for, especially if I like southern-fried chicken mainly, and I don’t really like to try anything else? Should they actually experiment with a different style of investing?

David G:

I think the important thing for the service is that it clearly articulates its respective styles, so that, square one, I can get there and understand the purpose of each of them. I would say that that’s always a challenge, period, because there are lots of different styles out there, David, as you know. There are hybrids of hybrids. So it’s going to be important for your service, any service, to clearly articulate for new members exactly what it is pursuing. Then your question also asks, should I do something that stretches me a little bit, or that is a different flavour than I was expecting, or should I stick with same old, we might say? I guess my answer is, it largely comes down to degree of engagement and energy that each of us brings to a service from The Motley Fool. A lot of our members just want the facts, and tell me what I should do — I don’t have a lot of time, I’m a busy professional. I’m not trying to make a hobby of this. For those people, I would say, go with the one that seems aimed at you, that, as it’s articulated, seems to be speaking to you, and just stay there. You don’t have to spend a lot of time being effective as an investor, and obviously if we’re doing our job at The Motley Fool, then we’re making the best use of your time and keeping things convenient.

On the other hand, if you are somebody who really loves the subject of investing, or you, like Tom and I do, love business — we enjoy being entrepreneurs every bit as much as we do being investors — if you can’t get enough of this, then I certainly suggest that you spend some extra time looking at that other approach, that doesn’t naturally fit with you at the outset, but rather that you can learn a lot from. Tom earlier talked about his progress as an investor. The only way you progress, as an investor, I think, is if you’re open to new ideas and new viewpoints.

David:

Now, one thing that we’ve been doing here is that we’ve been having a little bit of banter about different investing styles. Now, when we launched this new service, there will be a kind of duelling Fool element to it, in which analysts will be arguing with each other about this share being better, or that share being better, or your tip wasn’t particularly good. Do you think, in your experience, Tom, that investors enjoy watching analysts argue amongst themselves, like bickering schoolkids?

Tom:

I think there is a mix to that experience. Obviously, it feels more comfortable, particularly for someone who’s starting, to feel like there’s a parent there saying, no — we don’t do it that way in this house, do we? And then every child … maybe not every child, certainly the two children that you’re interviewing today, learn to go to dad, and if we hear no, run over to mum and see if we can getting a yes on having a friend over to stay with us that night. So over time, you don’t mind seeing the conflict between the different people. You realise this is the beauty of life. There’s no one absolutely correct way. If there was, we’d all be doing it. We would have all been doing it forever, and we’d all be wealthy beyond belief, and actually we’d all be pretty miserable, because there’s no grey out there. So there’s a lot of grey areas in investing, and at different points in time, you’re going to disagree with everyone around you as an investor on different subjects.

To me, I think the most important thing is to ask yourself, what are my foundational principles? What am I sticking to? And if you look throughout history, you will see that the people that make the wealthiest persons in every country around the world, the people who make those lists, are entrepreneurs who started businesses. So you want to align yourself with entrepreneurs who start great businesses. That’s what you want to do as an investor. You don’t want to side with the City and Wall Street, that make their money by encouraging people to trade actively — that’s how they generate the capital, that’s one of the core ways they do, and that’s not a way to make great money as an investor. Look at the list, and ask yourself if you can find anyone who’s a day trader, or an active trader of stocks. The real wealth is being created by business owners, and you want to be a business owner yourself as an investor, and the various conflicts that arises around those principles, those foundational principles, should be interesting to you. What you should do is really try and evaluate who you are learning from most, and whether you agree with them, and where you do and don’t. So like any subject, the deeper you go into it, the more you learn, the more you realise you have to learn. Hopefully you’ll find at The Motley Fool a core component to every debate, which is that we’re trying to learn together, and trying to figure out some things that, if we were left to our own, we wouldn’t be able to see. So hopefully you can dive in and enjoy the debate. You’ll certainly be able to see it between two brothers on the US site, if you ever want to click over.

David:

Now, that leads me to a very interesting point, David, and that is, some people say, why bother? Why bother with picking my own shares, when I can just go and buy myself a mutual fund, or a unit trust? What would be your response to that?

David G:

I would say, go right ahead, if that feels like a good answer for you. The sad truth in our world is that the vast majority of people have no savings at all. So if you’re somebody who has savings, pinch yourself — good job, keep it up, and if you’re trying to decide the best decisions you can make about those savings, you have options. For a lot of people, unit trusts, index funds, index trackers, are a very fair and fine way to invest. I would highly encourage anybody who wants to do that, to make sure they know how much they’re paying in fees every year. As your mutual fund goes up in value, if you keep paying your 1.5% management fee, just realise how much money you’re going to be paying 15 years from now for your money to be managed for you. So understand, just like we do in every other aspect of our lives often, how much you’re paying for things. A lot of mutual fund investors don’t know the answer to that question, and as I said, you have options. Certainly, we at The Motley Fool highly value the opportunity to invest directly in companies and skip the funds, with their middle men management fees, which are often overpriced. Not only that, but you get a lot better education, and I think you’re going to do better as an investor over time, but certainly the tiny minority of the world ever even considers buying shares directly.  We’re very conscious of that at The Motley Fool. But David, you as much as anyone knows the benefits of doing so, and you have turned many people onto the idea that maybe they should, maybe just start with one share, and I think that that is a good thing to do in this world, and it pays off.

David:

Well, that’s very kind of you, David, but I suppose there is another bone of contention, Tom, over here in the UK is that there are so many share recommendation services here in the UK. They are almost two a penny. So how do people decide what is good, and what is rubbish, as far as share recommendations are concerned?

Tom:

Well, the first thing I want to do is just add to David’s prior answer, and say that I think we completely embrace (I think Dave was saying this) the idea of owning index trackers, and having a few stocks alongside them, and learning as you go in that way. I think everybody — it’s a great idea to have an index tracker in your portfolio. It’s a great tracking device to see how you’re doing against the available, the best available other opportunities in funds out there. So how can you tell who’s good, and who’s not? Once again, when you’re early in your life as an investor, it’s difficult to know and assess, and to figure out – there’s not a great scoring system in finance, like there is for football, or basketball. So that should actually give you a clue, though, as to who to follow, and that is, do they have a good scoring system? Are they transparent about how they’re doing? Are they reporting to you, and all of their clients, that this was not a good year, or this has been a tough quarter, or this investment idea that we had, that we believed in two years ago, we’re actually selling now at a loss, because it didn’t work out as well as we’d planned? So you need to find, as an investor, people who hold themselves accountable. I’m very proud of what we’re doing at The Motley Fool. That could be viewed as a self-serving comment, but I know that David feels even more strongly about this than I do, and that is, let’s make sure we bring to the stage the people who are happy to be tracked. Remember that virtually every broker that you might work with does not provide a past performance track record, and does not allow all of the clients that they’re working with to meet together and talk about it. I mean, if a broker has 100 clients, why can’t those 100 people gather in a discussion group online and say, hey — what are you paying, and what stocks did he recommend for you, or she recommend for you? And how have they done over the lifetime of your — oh, you don’t know? — well, let’s look at it together. So the beauty of the internet is, as a device for transparency, one of the beauties of it. What we’re really focused on at The Motley Fool is to help the world invest better, and one of the most important ways you can do that is to track yourself, and hold yourself accountable. Now ultimately, transparency and incompetence isn’t a great match, but to us, transparency is the very first seed you have to plant to really prove that you are competent, and show the world that you know what you’re doing. The only thing that I would say to anyone who’s thinking about working with The Motley Fool as an investor is just recognise that we track ourselves really over a time horizon of three years. That’s Warren Buffett’s approach to evaluating his own investment managers, and that’s a reasonable time to estimate how well your thesis has played out, in making an investment in a business. So I think you’ve got to look at what the time horizon is of the person who’s throwing share tips at you. You’ve got to see how well they are open about their successes and failures, and you’ve got to see how well they’ve done overall in an aggregate. Unfortunately, I think if you look out across the internet, and across the financial world, you’re going to see very few people that are willing to hold themselves accountable, to allow their customers to talk to each other, and then have actually demonstrated a track record of success.

David:

Okay, that’s wonderful. Now, I just have one more question to the both of you, and it concerns a company called Eastman Kodak. Now, Eastman Kodak has filed for bankruptcy protection today.  My question to you, David, is, if we wind the clock back 20 years to 1992, and look at Eastman Kodak, do you think it was one of those companies that was destined to go bankrupt 20 years hence?

David G:

Well, it’s a great story, and it’s a very fine question, David. Trying to be always intellectually honest, I don’t think that I was predicting that back then, and I don’t think I would have.

Tom:

You don’t think?

David G:

Well, I mean … since everything I’ve done over the last 20 years is on the internet, maybe I was saying it, and somebody can find a link of my predicting it. I allow for the possibility that I did predict it. But I want to say that I think the lesson to take away from that experience is that companies that get used to their own business models, and their own place in the marketplace, and are not ready to shift and evolve with what I would call the increasing pace of new technologies, that’s going to happen to a lot of them. It has in the past, and I think it’s going to accelerate. So the companies that I am going to continue to invest in, I’m happy to say that Eastman Kodak was on The Motley Fool Stock Advisor’s scorecard, but the companies that I’m going to continue to invest in, and I think beat the market and beat the index trackers, are going to be the companies that are driving the change, not trying to prevent it. I think it’s ironic, as everyone knows, that Eastman Kodak sowed the seeds of its own demise by essentially developing digital photography; it just didn’t really transition its business to take advantage of that. That’s just one example from one industry, but more broadly, and just flying 10,000 feet higher and looking down at our world, I’m going to continue focusing on the management teams that understand they need to sometimes shoot themselves, or their existing business model, in the foot in order to grow and prosper in the next era, and Eastman Kodak is a classic example of a company that simply did not.

David:

Now you see, one of the most amazing things about Eastman Kodak is that it built the first-ever digital camera back in 1974, and it just didn’t do anything with it. So I suppose my question to you, Tom, is, for anybody that has investments in Eastman Kodak and have virtually lost all their money, what should they be doing now?

Tom:

I hate to say — prepare wallpaper for your next child’s bedroom with the shares that you have. Tell the broker to send those shares to you, and you’ve got a historic document. You actually do have an important document in your life as an investor. Our mistakes are the greatest way that we learn. I don’t mean we shouldn’t learn from our successors — there are great things to learn from the smartest decisions we make in life and as investors, but there really is a rich amount of data: insight assumptions, challenges, thoughts, conclusions — there’s a really rich trove of information that you can take from each of your mistakes as an investor. Remember that, in order to succeed as an investor, you’ve got to be right about six out of ten times. That makes you a great investor. If you get up between six and seven, you are so hall-of-fame ready. You are one of the greatest investors that’s out there. So that means that even the greatest are going to have three mistakes out of ten. I think the really wonderful investors are willing to continue to hold if they believe, and in the face of that, are willing to go back and learn from it, if they were proven wrong. The real problem is for the person who simply trades out of it and moves on. That increases the likelihood that you will repeat that mistake, and you will endlessly be out there saying, well, I’ve got the traditional, strong, solid, conservative, well-run business that’s mentioned in the financial magazines all the time. I’ve got the Eastman Kodak of this industry, and you’ll continue to invest that way, instead of looking very closely at that investment, and the assumptions you’ve made, and saying, wow – they were completely disrupted. How can I make sure to either be very much on the lookout for disruptions in any investment that I’m making, or how do you find the disruptors? – because gosh, they’ve probably made a lot of money over the last decade. They’ve taken the business away from Eastman Kodak. It isn’t like the industry has simply vanished. Photography is actually more popular now than ever before. But who took those spoils, and how — and what can I learn about it?

There’s a wonderful book entitled The Logic of Failure. I think everyone should read that book, just because you learn to embrace and love your mistakes in life, in a world where we’re taught again and again to shy away from them, or not make them in the first place, or that we should be humiliated if we blew it on something. But instead, we should look at it, and go: “Gosh, I blew it there. I made a mistake and this is what I’ve learnt from it.” So if I were an Eastman Kodak investor, and I’ve had some terrible investments over 20 years, the ones that I go back and look at and try and learn from are the ones that cause my greatest next success.

David:

Well, that’s very very sort of reassuring words, Tom, that just one failure doesn’t actually make you a bad investor, does it?

Tom:

Absolutely not, and I think, gosh — one other principle that I have in investing which I didn’t mention before, but it’s just, I don’t think you should have three stocks or five stocks. My feeling is, in the first decade of your investment career, you should be getting your portfolio up to 40 stocks, because you want to learn from as many situations as possible, and you want to set yourself up that, if anyone of them goes bankrupt, or any four of them go down 60% over your investment period, that’s not going to shake the foundation of your overall portfolio. I know it may sound like a lot to follow with 40 stocks, but you don’t have to be on top. In order to be a fan of a sport, you don’t have to watch every minute of every game. Some fans go to a few games a year, and just take a look at the standings every couple of weeks, and they don’t change their team, just because they had a bad season. So to me, I think having a stock portfolio with enough stocks so that, if a few go down, you’re not going to be shaken away from investing, is a great way to get started.

David:

Would you agree with that, David, in the spirit of duelling Fools, to have 40 stocks in your portfolio?

David G:

I’m more than happy to get new members to The Motley Fool from zero to 15 as fast as possible, so I don’t think, I appreciate Tom’s point, and I think it’s a great point. I think I myself have about 35 as an investor, and that’s about all I want. But I think the real point is, go much more above two or three, which is, I think, what most people do, and it’s a real mistake they make. Tom makes such a good point. Every investment you make is a lesson. If you’re only going to bet on two stocks, two shares or three shares, then you really sap your own chance of learning.

Tom:

This has been my approach to dating.

David G:

And Tom remains a single man!

Tom:

The ultimate mistake!

David:

Well, it’s my approach to eating, which is why I like tapas, so you can actually have lots of things on the table all at the same time.

David G:

Indeed!

David:

Okay, well I want to thank you both for joining me on Money Talk. I know you’re both very busy people. The thing is, I have just one more thing to do, which is to sum up today’s podcast with a quote, and the quote comes from the first Prime Minister of India, Nehru, who said: “Life is like a game of cards — the hand you are dealt is determinism; the way you play, it is free will”, and I think what he’s saying is that we are all dealt a hand of cards; how you want to play it, it’s your decision.

David G:

Love that quote!

Tom:

David, thank you for your work in The Collective.

David:

You’re very kind – thank you for plugging The Collective, Tom.

Tom:

It’s a brand that the world needs to know.

David:

Okay, well thank you very much for joining me today on Money Talk. This has been Money Talk, I have been David Kuo, and my guests have been Tom and David Gardner, the founders of The Motley Fool. Until next week everyone, have a great week!

More viewing

Tom and David Gardner introduce Motley Fool Share Advisor to Australia.

This article originally published on Fool UK.

The One ASX Pick You MUST Add to Your Portfolio

Top Motley Fool analysts just identified their #1 ASX pick for 2014, a small-cap stock that could be poised for big gains (and offers a fat, fully franked dividend!).

Discover all the details now, including the name and code, in this FREE investment report, "The Motley Fool’s Top Stock for 2014."

By clicking this button, you agree that we may contact you to keep you informed about services we think might interest you. You can unsubscribe at any time. Please read our Privacy Policy. The Motley Fool Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 146 988 052) holds an Australia Financial Service License: 400691. Please refer to our Financial Services Guide (FSG) for more information.

See all posts by Motley Fool Staff
The Motley Fool