被误读的巴菲特

本人以为这篇的作者是典型误解巴菲特的人。投资是简单但不容易的事情，作者把投资想复杂了。巴菲特不是什么股神，他的东西每一个人都可以学，当然可能只有很少人能学会。事实上，我发现只有很少人会去真正认真地学，所以能学会的人很少就很容易理解了。比如文章中说巴菲特反对金融衍生品却自己又用金融衍生品的问题。…

Source: http://nteswjq.blog.163.com/blog/static/126998120102111232747/

Buffett misread

> By Duan Yongping · his NetEase blog (nteswjq.blog.163.com, now closed; read from web archives) · 2010-03-01 · [Original link](http://nteswjq.blog.163.com/blog/static/126998120102111232747/) ([archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20110719201912/http://nteswjq.blog.163.com:80/blog/static/126998120102111232747/))

http://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/usstock/comment/20100225/03187452705.shtml

I think the author of this piece is a typical example of someone who misunderstands Buffett.

Investing is simple but not easy; the author has made investing complicated.

Buffett is no stock god. Everyone can learn his stuff, though of course perhaps only a few people can actually learn it. In fact, I've found that only a few people really study it seriously, so it's easy to understand why so few learn it.

Take the article's point that Buffett opposes financial derivatives yet uses them himself. I think the author actually doesn't know that the derivatives Buffett opposes and the ones he uses are completely different things. I use a lot of financial derivatives myself, the same way Buffett does, so I understand fairly well what he is saying. It's hard to explain in one sentence, but an easy-to-understand example can illustrate it. Many people use derivatives like going to a casino as a gambler, hoping to make money fast. Buffett uses derivatives like opening a casino in Macau: in the long run it's a sure profit. Not everyone who opens a casino makes money, but those who know how to run one do. Maybe the casino example isn't quite apt, but the principle really is the same.