Quotes About Analysis

Managements must look at every unexpected success with the questions: (1) What would it mean to us if we exploited it? (2) Where could it lead us? (3) What would we have to do to convert it into an opportunity? And (4) How do we go about it? This means, first, that managements need to set aside specific time in which to discuss unexpected successes; and second, that someone should always be designated to analyse an unexpected success and to think through how it could be exploited.

Doing philosophy is largely a matter of trying to put things together, trying to get the pieces of very large puzzles to make some sense

System 2 thinking tries to follow proper rules of reasoning

Postmodernism is part of a recent tradition in the humanities that opposes the idea that language should be analyzed as a system used to represent, or stand for; objects and situations in the world. This anti-representationalist view of language influenced a lot of literary theory, as well as other humanistic disciplines, in the latter part of the twentieth century. Postmodernism is a spectacular outgrowth of that line of thought.

First, it gets children into the habit of explaining successes and failures in terms of strategy use.

THE BATTLE OF THE SOMME will always be controversial.

The study of econometrics revolves around how to generate a good or the preferred estimator in a given estimating situation p.5

Philosophy makes literature clear, literature makes philosophy real.

To undo a contradiction, make a distinction.

Markets look a lot less efficient from the banks of the Hudson than from the banks of the Charles.

The Commanding General is well aware that the forecasts are no good. However, he needs them for planning purposes.

Investing without research is like playing stud poker and never looking at the cards. For some reason the whole business

If you're considering a stock on the strength of some specific product that a company makes, the first thing to find out is: What effect will the success of the product have on the company's bottom line?

Actually Wall Street thinks just as the Greeks did. The early Greeks used to sit around for days and debate how many teeth a horse has. They thought they could figure it out by just sitting there, instead of checking the horse. A lot of investors sit around and debate whether a stock is going up, as if the financial muse will give them the answer, instead of checking the company.

and magazines and listen to the same economists.

Never invest in any company before you've done the homework on the company's earnings prospects, financial condition, competitive position, plans for expansion, and so forth.

By putting your stocks into categories you'll have a better idea of what to expect from them.

Consider the size of a company if you expect it to profit from a specific product.

The lesson here is: don't spend a lot of time poring over the past performance charts. That's not to say you shouldn't pick a fund with a good long-term record. But it's better to stick with a steady and consistent performer than to move in and out of funds, trying to catch the waves. Another major issue is what happens to a

If you can follow only one bit of data, follow the earnings - assuming the company in question has earnings.

To my mind, the stock price is the least useful information you can track, and it's the most widely tracked.

I would suggest that the fundamental "information problem" faced by managers is not too little information but too much information. What we most need are ways to know what is important and what is not important, what variables to focus on and which to pay less attention to—and we need ways to do this that can help groups or teams develop shared understanding.

The best insights about problems to be addressed often come from the worm's-eye view.

There is a heuristic "rule of thumb" in modeling dynamical systems: do not attempt to encompass in your model more than two hierarchical levels.