The Caveman’s Battle for Free Speech

“Treat all economic questions from the viewpoint of the consumer, for the  interests of the consumer are the interests of the human race.” –Bastiat

Regulators Stifling Free Speech

Steve Cooksey was a grotesque, obese, junk food scarfing lout who was a diabetic. He decided to go forward by leaping back in time to the days of our pre-historic Paleolithic anscestors and live like a caveman. He soon was eating only vegetables, meat and a few fruits. He exercised like a caveman–running barefoot, jumping and climbing. He went from flab to fab and he no longer took insulin or medication for his diabetes.  He was healthy again.

Soon he was sharing his lessons with friends. But regulators in North Carolina said he could not give advice without a dietician’s license to practice. Cease and desist!

Should the caveman have the rights to free speech or should the dinosaur-like regulators stifle the free exchange of thought?

Go here and click on the humourous video: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/05/ijcaveman-blogger-fight-for-free-speech.html

Can the government throw you in jail for offering advice on the Internet about what food people should buy at the grocery store?

 ”That is exactly the claim made by the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition. In December 2011, diabetic blogger Steve Cooksey started a Dear Abby-style advice column on his popular blog (www.diabetes-warrior.net) to answer reader questions. One month later, the State Board informed Steve that he could not give readers advice on diet, whether for free or for compensation, because doing so constituted the unlicensed, and thus criminal, practice of dietetics. The State Board also told Steve that his private emails and telephone calls with readers and friends were illegal, as was his paid life-coaching service. The State Board went through Steve’s writings with a red pen, indicating what he may and may not say without a government-issued license.”
“But the First Amendment does not allow the government to ban people from sharing ordinary advice about diet, or scrub the Internet—from blogs to Facebook to Twitter—of speech the government does not like. North Carolina can no more force Steve to become a licensed dietitian than it could require Dear Abby to become a licensed psychologist.”

The other side of the story

http://www.ncbdn.org/file_a_complaint/recent_press_inquiry/

And reactions…..

Everytime I read a case taken up by the Institute for Justice – my first reaction used to be – “Naah … cannot be true” – because it is so incredible. Today, my reaction is one of intense sadness – on what we have become as a nation – conceived in liberty and to allow people to pursue their happiness. The word “tyranny” is often abused – but fits.
Given the fact that most Americans now see little trouble with bureaucrats regulating how much water must flow through your shower head or limit the volume of water in your tank I doubt that the US is anywhere as free as the cheerleaders claim it to be.

At 5/29/2012 10:26 AM,   Kensaid…

Larry G,
Your link doesn’t prove that this is “trumped up propaganda”.  In fact, it shows just how insidiously creative government bureaucrats are at side stepping the constitution and stepping on the rights of citizens. 
The whole purpose of licensing is to raise barriers to entry.  This particular license is also to silence any dissent from the government approved diet.  The best way to keep people from knowing the fraud that passes as nutritional advice from government is to silence those who disagree with it and are able to provide proof that the officially approved diet is at the heart of much the diet caused health problems in the country.

Valuing a Cyclical Company: Cypress Semiconductor (CY)

Government

Ludwig von Mises:

“Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning. Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.” (Mises, Human Action, Chapter XXVII, Part 2)

Murray Rothbard:

“The State is a group of people who have managed to acquire a virtual monopoly of the use of violence throughout a given territorial area. In particular, it has acquired a monopoly of aggressive violence, for States generally recognize the right of individuals to use violence (though not against States, of course) in self-defense. The State then uses this monopoly to wield power over the inhabitants of the area and to enjoy the material fruits of that power. The State, then, is the only organization in society that regularly and openly obtains its monetary revenues by the use of aggressive violence; all other individuals and organizations (except if delegated that right by the State) can obtain wealth only by peaceful production and by voluntary exchange of their respective products. This use of violence to obtain its revenue (called “taxation“) is the keystone of State power. Upon this base the State erects a further structure of power over the individuals in its territory, regulating them, penalizing critics, subsidizing favorites, etc. The State also takes care to arrogate to itself the compulsory monopoly of various critical services needed by society, thus keeping the people in dependence upon the State for key services, keeping control of the vital command posts in society and also fostering among the public the myth that only the State can supply these goods and services. Thus the State is careful to monopolize police and judicial service, the ownership of roads and streets, the supply of money, and the postal service, and effectively to monopolize or control education, public utilities, transportation, and radio and television.” (Rothbard, War, Peace, and the State)

This writer believes government is necessary to protect–through legitimate force–the individual rights and freedoms of its citizens. The rule of law and property rights are essential. The problem occurs when government goes beyond this boundary.

Valuing A Cyclical Company

A few readers have asked about how to value a cyclical company.  Rather than give my view, perhaps listening to how an entrepreneur of a cyclical company views the price and value of his company.

I think you will gain if you read all the materials.

TJ Rodgers Letters to Shareholders about the Stock Price of Cypress: CS on a Cyclical Business or Thinking About Cypress Stock

Also, view the Value-Line to see the company’s history: CY_VL

An industry perspective circa 2002 is presented here: download_t_j__rodgers__cdc_2002_keynote_presentation

Questions and thoughts are encouraged.

A Reader’s Question on Buying FaceBook (FB) Shares

“Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.” Thomas Gray.

A Reader laments

“My broker bought FaceBook for me, and now I am sucking gas and losing money! What should I do and whom should I sue? Please advise.

My reply: Well, we all make mistakes like the time I asked a psychic for a stock tip or when I bought Cramer’s recommendations the day after the stock price rallied. But I was 8 years old.

Perhaps this Death Therapy would help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_bxkVFK3Wc

Or–on a more serious note–you might have a psychological issue with a gambling addiction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZfemmJ7gx0&feature=related and a shrink explains further: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0K5o9xIceU

BEFORE you invest you must be able to answer two questions:

Is this a good business and a good price–a price with a  margin of safety–to pay for the business?  I don’t dismiss Facebook out of hand. I would read the comprehensive S-1:You can find Facebook’s S-1 here to understand Facebook and other media/advertising businesses. Certainly if I owned a newspaper or Google, I would wish to understand Facebook as a business. But the price of $105 billion compared to revenues and profits with all the surrounding publicity leaves me cold with several questions:

  1. What do I know about Facebook that no one else does? I don’t even use Facebook.
  2. How much speculative growth am I paying for? A lot.
  3. Who is on the other side from me on this investment? Mark Zuckerberg, an insider. No edge here.

Finally, looking at popular IPOs for ideas is usually a waste.  Look at busted IPOs a few years later when investors, who have overpaid, sell their shares. The business may be perfectly fine with low debt due to the high-priced equity raise, but the main crime was investment bankers overpricing their merchandise (no surprise).

Whom to blame?

You want to sue your broker? The person to blame is staring back at you in the mirror. Did the broker torture you to buy Facebook shares like in the Spanish Inquisition http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSe38dzJYkY

The investors’ Creed

Instead of saying, “This is my rifle……Say, This is my investment. I will always be rational in trying to solve the two investment questions: good price and good business. I will write down my reasons for buying and what I will do in case I miscalculate or misjudge the business and/or price.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgd2F2QNfEE&feature=related

Facebook Articles

A value investor discusses Facebook both as a business and as an investment: http://www.gurufocus.com/news/177739/can-a-value-investor-buy-facebook-fb

Another analyst discusses what Facebook should trade for: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/facebooks-stock-should-trade-for-1380-2012-05-25?link=MW_story_popular

Well, then, what should be the price of Facebook’s stock?

Rather than endlessly rehashing the events that have taken place over the past week, it is this question that investors should be asking. Surprisingly, however, few are doing so.

And yet, courtesy of a just-released study, calculating a fair price for Facebook’s stock isn’t as difficult as it might otherwise seem.

The study is entitled “Post-IPO Employment and Revenue Growth for U.S. IPOs, June 1996–2010.” Its authors are Jay Ritter, a finance professor at the University of Florida, and two researchers at the University of California, Davis: Martin Kenney, a professor in the Department of Human and Community Development, and Donald Patton, a research associate in that same department. ( Click here to read a copy of their study. )

The researchers found that the revenue of the average company going public in the period analyzed in the study grew by 212% over the five years after its IPO (excluding spinoffs and buyouts). Assuming Facebook’s revenue grows just as fast, and given that the company’s latest-year revenue was $3.71 billion, its annual revenue in five years’ time will be $11.58 billion.

Since Facebook FB -3.39%   is most often compared to Google GOOG -2.01% , let’s assume that its price-to-sales ratio in five years will be just as high as Google’s is currently: 5.51-to-1. You could argue that this is an overly generous assumption, of course. But it nevertheless means Facebook’s market cap in five years will be just $63.8 billion — 30% less than where it stands today.

Assuming that the total number of its shares stays constant, that works out to a price per share of just $23.26 — in contrast to its recent closing price of $33.03.

Ouch.

Actually, however, the news is even worse: No one is going to invest in Facebook shares today if its price will be 30% lower in five years. So, in order to entice someone to invest in it today, Facebook needs to offer a handsome return. Assuming that its five-year return is equal to the stock market’s long-term average return of 11% annualized, Facebook shares currently would need to be trading at just $13.80.

Double ouch.

Don’t like that answer? Try focusing on earnings rather than sales, and you get only a marginally different result. Assuming its profit margin stays constant (instead of falling as it could very well do as it grows), assuming its P/E ratio in five years will be just as high as Google’s is today, and assuming that its stock will produce a five-year return of 11% annualized, Facebook’s stock today should be just $16.66.

How can Facebook investors wriggle out from underneath the awful picture these calculations paint? By assuming that its revenue and profitability will grow faster than the average IPO between 1996 and 2010 — and not just by a little bit, either, but a whole lot faster.

Of course, it’s always possible that Facebook will be able to pull that off.

More Articles

http://www.minyanville.com/business-news/markets/articles/facebook-ipo-fb-aapl-zuckerberg-chan/5/21/2012/id/41129

The Blame Game

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/24/facebook-ipo-high-frequency-trading_n_1544187.html?ref=business&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D164289

HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY

Kaboom: The Next Bubble to Burst; Videos on Business Cycles

From a Dot-com Bubble to a housing bubble to a government bubble

This link will give you a preview of one chapter of Peter Schiff’s new book: http://lewrockwell.com/schiff/the-real-crash-excerpt1.html

Videos on Business Cycles

Rap Video of Keynes vs. Hayek: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc&feature=fvwrel

Why we have booms and busts by Peter Schiff http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdsUSQwIIik

A History of Booms and Busts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83sX8Ent4vo&feature=related

A Lecture on Austrian Business Cycle Theory by Jorg Guido Hulsmann http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxq_mhdYeBM&feature=related

Free College Educations from the Best Teachers

An educated person is one who has learned that information almost always turns out to be at best incomplete and very often false, misleading, fictitious, mendacious – just dead wrong. –Russell Baker

An education isn’t how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It’s being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don’t. –Anatole France

Data is not information, information is not knowledge, knowledge is not understanding, understanding is not wisdom. –Clifford Stoll

Develop a passion for learning. If you do, you will never cease to grow. –Anthony J. D’Angelo

Free University-Level Courses from Great Teachers

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/05/3-best-websites-to-get-free-college.html

1. Khan Academy

2. Coursera

3. Academic Earth

Mark Cuban on the coming revolution in education

http://blogmaverick.com/2012/05/13/the-coming-meltdown-in-college-education-why-the-economy-wont-get-better-any-time-soon/Soon

This is what I see when I think about higher education in this country today:

Remember the housing meltdown ? Tough to forget isn’t it. The formula for the housing boom and bust was simple. A lot of easy money being lent to buyers who couldn’t afford the money they were borrowing. That money was then spent on homes with the expectation that the price of the home would go up and it could easily be flipped or refinanced at a profit.  Who cares if you couldn’t afford the loan. As long as prices kept on going up, everyone was happy. And prices kept on going up. And as long as pricing kept on going up real estate agents kept on selling homes and finding money for buyers.

Until the easy money stopped.  When easy money stopped, buyers couldn’t sell. They couldn’t refinance.  First sales slowed, then prices started falling and then the housing bubble burst. Housing prices crashed. We know the rest of the story. We are still mired in the consequences.

Can someone please explain to me how what is happening in higher education is any different ?

Its far too easy to borrow money for college.  Did you know that there is more outstanding debt for student loans than there is for Auto Loans or Credit Card loans ? The point of the numbers is that getting a student loan is easy. Too easy.

As an employer I want the best prepared and qualified employees. I could care less if the source of their education was accredited by a bunch of old men and women who think they know what is best for the world. I want people who can do the job. I want the best and brightest. Not a piece of paper.

The competition from new forms of education is starting to appear. Particularly in the tech world. Online and physical classrooms are popping up everywhere. They respond to needs in the market. THey work with local businesses to tailor the education to corporate needs. In essence assuring those who excel that they will get a job. All for far far less money than traditional schools.

Update:

Let me add some clarification here based on some of the comments. I include the Online For Profit Mills that live off of the government delivering student loans as part of traditional education. Phoenix, Strayer, etc, they are not the new generation of Branded Education I am referring to. They are a big part of creating the bubble. i should have gone into more depth here. I will save it for another post.

As far as the purpose of college, I am a huge believer that you go to college to learn how to learn. However, if that goal is subverted because traditional universities, public and private, charge so much to make that happen, I believe that system will collapse and there will be better alternatives created.

Online video classrooms with lively discussions don’t need a traditional campus to teach kids how to learn. Discussion groups built around Khan Academy like classes don’t require a traditional campus to teach kids how to learn. I’ve seen better discussions and interactions on twitter than in some of the traditional classrooms I have visited. The opportunities for online interactive video classrooms is going to grow quickly and will be far more cost-effective than traditional universities. Hooray for http://academy.mises.org/ as one example.

Leave the for profit online schools that create more employment for debt collectors than their students out of the equation and we still have an enormous bubble in Higher Education that is having a horrible impact not just on the economic life of their students, but on the economy as a whole as well

The Higher Education Industry is very analogous to the Newspaper industry. By the time they realize they need to change their business model it will be too late. Higher Education’s legacy infrastructure, employee costs /structures and debt costs will keep them from being able to re calibrate to a new generation of competitors.

Saving Money

For those that want to fork over $100,000s to go to a typical university over four years, you should start saving now. This blog will help: http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/05/five-money-saving-websites.html

The Economy

http://blog.yardeni.com/

http://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/2012/05/slow-progress-but-not-recession-and.html

The underlying problems of Greece–a Welfare State and Rigid Wages

http://cafehayek.com/2012/05/greece-malpass-and-hayek.html

http://www.mises.org/daily/6052/The-Systemic-Siesta

Turning $100 to $15,000 + over 25 years

Yesterday http://wp.me/p1PgpH-MW

I asked what we could do with $100 if held for 25 years. The best performing stock since 1987 is Fastenal (FAST), a nuts and bolts distributor. The high and low for FAST after its IPO in 1987 was 38 to 20 cents. FAST traded at 20 cents after the 1987 crash but let’s say we take a rough mid-point of 30 cents per share. NOT INCLUDING DIVIDENDS, you would have compounded your funds at a 22.2% rate or turned your $100 into $15,000 so far.

Look at the beautiful financials on the above compounding machine: FAST_VL and FAST_MORN. Read the President’s Letters to Shareholders: President’s Letters: http://investor.fastenal.com/letters.cfm. Read the past four letters in sequence 2008 – 2011. Are you clear about what the company does, its goals, strategies and how its management allocates capital?

What’s the point except for hindsight bias and to make us jealous. I was aware of Fastenal during the 2009 crisis but had always dismissed investing in Fastenal due to its “high” P/E multiple. Yet, during 2009, the company kept investing in its operations while the price dropped to 13xs to 14xs normalized non-growth cash flow per share. What would stop the company from growing or taking continuing market share due to its competitive advantages of scale, low-cost, and reach?  I missed this opportunity in 2009.  Investing is simple, but not easy.

Don’t YOU make the same error. Study great companies so you have an awareness of what greatness is and be ready when opportunity knocks on your door.

Lessons?

But what can you use now to help you find such companies? Buffett once said that compounding was the eighth wonder of the world.   http://www.buffettsecrets.com/compound-interest.htm

Companies that can earn high returns on capital while also redeploying capital back into their businesses while continuing to earn high rates are indeed special. Buffett said he understood the chewing gum market (Wrigley) or the soda market (Coke) better than Microsoft (MSFT).  Look for businesses doing extraordinary thing in prosaic industries where the need and demand won’t change much while the company can strengthen its competitive advantages through scale and customer captivity.

Articles on Fastenal

http://blogs.hbr.org/taylor/2012/04/to_win_big_it_helps_to_be_a_l.html

To Win Big, It Helps to Be a Little “Nuts”

Wednesday April 18, 2012 |

Here’s a simple question for all you students of business success and stock-market returns: What has been the best-performing stock in the United States since the “Black Monday” crash of 1987? If you said Apple or Microsoft or Walmart or Berkshire Hathaway, you’d get credit for a reasonable answer. But you’d be wrong. The best-performing stock in the United States over the last 25 years is a company that most of you, I’d be willing to guess, have never heard of — a company called Fastenal, based in the quiet town of Winona, Minnesota (population: 28,000), located on the banks of the Mississippi River 30 miles northwest of La Crosse, Wisconsin.

In what glamorous, high-margin, cutting-edge business has Fastenal made its mark? Not software, healthcare, or aerospace. Fastenal is the country’s dominant distributor of nuts and bolts. That’s right…If you’ve got the proverbial screw loose, if you’re a major construction company or a small contractor or individual homeowner desperate for an exotic nut or bolt to complete a job, Fastenal is where you turn.

According to a recent article in Bloomberg BusinessWeek, the company has more than 11,000 sales people in 2,600 stores along with an online catalogue that extends for 10,700 pages. It also has more than 5,500 “fully customized and automated Fastenal stores” on job sites and at customer locations — essentially, vending machines for nuts and bolts. The result of this overwhelming reach is truly overwhelming business performance. According to BusinessWeek, the company’s share price is up 38,565 percent since October 1987. Microsoft, by contrast, is up less than 10,000 percent over that same period (still not bad!), and Apple is up by 5,500 percent.

What’s the lesson to draw from Fastenal’s growth and prosperity? I suppose you could wax rhapsodic about the virtues of low-tech components in a high-tech age, and remind yourself that not every growth company is based in Silicon Valley or some other Internet hotspot. But the real lesson is more universal than that. The Fastenal story reminds all of us of the power of making big bets and staking out an “extreme” position in the market — in this case, offering a wider variety of products through more channels at a greater number of physical and virtual locations than anyone else in the business.

Fastenal has thrived because it has carved out a truly one-of-a-kind presence in its field. As its founder, Bob Kierlin, told BusinessWeek, “It was the craziest thing to ask people to invest in a company selling nuts and bolts” — especially one that aspired to sell anything to anyone virtually anywhere. But as it turns out, if you want to win big, it helps to be a little, ahem, nuts.

That’s a lesson I’ve learned over and over as I’ve studied hugely successful companies in brutally tough industries. It’s just not good anymore to be “pretty good” at everything. The most successful companies figure out how to become the most of something in their field — the most elegant, the most simple, the most exclusive, the most affordable, the most seamless global, the most intensely local. For decades, so many organizations and their leaders got comfortable with strategies and practices that kept them in the “middle of the road” — that’s, in theory, where the customers were, that’s what felt safe and secure. But today, with so much change, so much pressure, so many new ways to do just about everything, the middle of the road has become the road to nowhere.

Just to be clear, being the “most of something” doesn’t have to mean being the biggest or most dominant player in your field. It means being the most deeply committed to a one-of-a-kind strategy and a distinctive presence in a world in which most companies and their leaders are content with doing business more or less like everyone else. As Jim Hightower, the colorful Texas populist, is fond of saying, “There’s nothing in the middle of the road but yellow stripes and dead armadillos.” To which we might add companies and their leaders struggling to stand out from the crowd, even as they play by the same old rules in a crowded marketplace.

One of my favorite bankers in the world, Vernon Hill, who created the one-of-a-kind Commerce Back several decades ago (which he sold to Canada’s TD Bank for a cool $8.5 billion), and is now creating the truly unique Metro Bank in London (the first new bank launched in London in 138 years), has a simple reason for why he strives to become the most of something among banks — in his case, not the biggest, but the most colorful, the most entertaining, the most intensely focused on service and convenience. “Every great company,” he likes to say, “has redefined the business that it’s in. Even though I was trained as a banker, I don’t think like a banker. I do things that conventional bankers think are nutty.”

What goes for nutty bankers goes for retailers selling nuts and bolts. If you want to win big, you have to stand for something special — whether that’s the widest selection and most comprehensive reach, or the most focused offerings and most memorable service. There are countless ways to design the kind of unique profile and strategic presence that Fastenal has in its business and Vernon Hill has in his business. All it requires is a commitment to originality, a willingness to challenge convention and break from standard operating procedure, that remains all-too-rare in business today, precisely because it can look a little “nutty” to the powers-that-be.

If you do business the same way everyone else in your field does business, why would you expect to do any better? So ask yourself: What are you the most of in your business — and how do you become even more of that?

BusinessWeek

According to a recent article in Bloomberg BusinessWeek:

There’s no shame in not knowing the top-performing stock since the crash of ’87. It’s neither Apple (AAPL) nor Microsoft (MSFT), and deprived of the obvious candidates, most people draw a blank. That includes Bob Kierlin. When told that the answer is actually Kierlin’s own company, Winona (Minn.)-based hardware supplier Fastenal (FAST), the 72-year-old founder responds with typical Midwestern understatement: “Oh, wow. Gee. Well, thanks. That’s great news.”

Kierlin, 72, surely knows how well his stock has done: He owns 13.6 million shares, now worth almost $700 million. In the past quarter-century, Fastenal is the biggest gainer among about 400 stocks in the Russell 1000 index that have been trading for at least 25 years, surging 38,565 percent, not including dividends, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Adjusting for splits, the stock has gone from 13¢ on Oct. 19, 1987, to $50.85. It gained 60 percent over the past year.

Fastenal edged out UnitedHealth Group (UNH), whose stock gained 37,178 percent and far outstripped Microsoft’s 9,906 percent, Apple’s 5,542 percent, and the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index’s 506 percent. Not bad for a company that literally sells nuts and bolts. “I can understand the disbelief,” says Jonathan Chou, a vice president at mutual fund company T. Rowe Price Group (TROW), which started buying Fastenal stock many years ago and now owns a 12 percent stake in the company.

Chou attributes Fastenal’s success to its stranglehold on the fastener-supply business: There is simply no other distributor that offers so many products in so many locations. The company has 2,600 stores that serve retail and wholesale customers, while its biggest rival, W.W. Grainger (GWW), has 450. Fastenal’s 11,000-plus sales force is technically sophisticated and responsive to customers, Chou says. The company also boasts the kind of scale that allows it to buy hundreds of thousands of items at low-cost from suppliers around the globe.

Fastenal’s website lists 17 categories of fasteners spanning 10,701 pages. Click on bolts, and you’ll see 18 subcategories across 2,471 pages. The breadth of offerings is an almost insurmountable barrier to competitors. “It would be very difficult to replicate this type of product assortment,” says Chou. “The economic moat in this business grows as Fastenal grows.”

While Fastenal’s products may be mundane, companies can’t live without them. “What Fastenal stocks and sells is essential,” says Morningstar (MORN) analyst Basili Alukos. “If you don’t have enough or the right kind, your plant will shut down. Factories are willing to pay a huge convenience premium to a single distributor that can make sure their supply is safe.”

Kierlin says that the idea for a store that offered a vast variety of nuts and bolts—threaded fasteners, as they’re known in the trade—came from his childhood. His father’s auto parts shop was across the street from Winona’s main hardware store. Customers, Kierlin says, kept bouncing between the stores to order hex-cap screws, axle nuts, and cotter pins. In 1967, one year after he returned from a stint with the Peace Corps in Venezuela, that memory inspired him. “Here I’m thinking,” he recalls, “why can’t you have a store that sells everything?”

Originally he thought to sell the fasteners in cigarette pack-size boxes from vending machines placed around town. When he found that no machine could hold enough boxes, Kierlin resolved to raise money to start a conventional store. “It was the craziest thing to ask people to invest in a company selling nuts and bolts,” he says. Even so, Kierlin persuaded four high school friends to chip in a total of $30,000 to found Fastenal. “We didn’t have a lawyer,” he says. “We tried to do it on the cheap.” One of his pals vetoed Kierlin’s preferred name—Lightning Bolts.

Fastenal’s first delivery vehicle was a banged-up Cadillac Coupe de Ville that always veered to the right. The company’s first office desk was a wooden rolltop Kierlin bought for $25 from a laundry that had gone out of business. The original shop had 1,000 square feet on one floor, plus a similarly sized basement (rent was $50 a month) and was lined with kegs that each held 5,000 nuts or screws. When that store filled up, Kierlin rented seven residential garages around Winona and bought 30,000 surplus cardboard toothpaste cartons to hold hardware. “Had you visited our stores in that era,” says Kierlin, “you would have thought we were selling toothpaste rather than fasteners.”

By 1987, Fastenal had 45 stores, mostly in small and midsize towns, and the owners decided to take it public. The stock started trading in August 1987, two months before the market crashed. While the company’s shares fell about 20 percent in the rout, it made up most of that loss by the end of the year. Fastenal had 250 employees at its initial public offering and allocated 100,000 of the offering’s 1 million shares to its employees. Kierlin and his partners also earmarked proceeds to set up an educational foundation for their alma mater, Cotter High School. The company estimates that it provides about $100 million a year to Winona (population 28,000) in employee compensation and dividends paid to local shareholders.

Today, Fastenal has a market value of $15 billion. Net income grew to $358 million in 2011 from $6.4 million in 1990; revenue climbed to $2.77 billion from $52 million. It has stores in all 50 states and has also moved into Mexico, Canada, Central America, Asia, and Europe, often by setting up facilities near U.S. customers that are expanding in those markets. And it finally rolled out a version of that vending machine Kierlin dreamed up 45 years ago, pitching it as a “fully customized and automated Fastenal store within the customer’s location.” Fastenal installed nearly 5,505 of them last year.

None of this means that Fastenal’s stock will keep scorching the market. Charles Carnevale, chief investment officer of EDMP, a money manager in Lutz, Fla., calculates that Fastenal’s shares now trade at 42 times the previous 12 months’ earnings, more than double the company’s expected earnings growth of 19 percent. He also thinks Fastenal’s dividend yield of 1.3 percent is too low. “Fundamentals,” he says, “don’t compensate for the risk.”

That doesn’t bother Kierlin. He says that for all of its success, Fastenal has less than 3 percent of a $150 billion U.S. market, giving it plenty of room to boost sales. And he’s excited that demand for its vending machines is torrid. Fastenal is growing even faster overseas than it is domestically, he adds, so “the best years are still ahead.”

The bottom line: Launched with $30,000, Fastenal has grown into an industry giant with 2,600 stores and a $15 billion market value–over a 5,000 to 1 return so far.

http://investor.fastenal.com/

So What Can You Do With $100?

“And right here let me say one thing:  After spending many years in Wall Street and after making and losing millions of dollars I want to tell you this:  It never was my thinking that made the big money for me.  It always was my sitting.  Got that?  My sitting tight!  It is no trick at all to be right on the market.  You always find lots of early bulls in bull markets and early bears in bear markets.  I’ve known many men who were right at exactly the right time, and began buying and selling stocks when prices were at the very level which should show the greatest profit.  And their experience invariably matched mine – that is, they made no real money out of it.  Men who can both be right and sit tight are uncommon.  I found it one of the hardest things to learn.  But it is only after a stock operator has firmly grasped this that he can make big money.  It is literally true that millions come easier to a trader after he knows how to trade than hundreds did in the days of his ignorance.”  — Jesse Livermore http://www.gold-eagle.com/gold_digest_03/hamilton110303.html

What would you say?

If I said to you RIGHT after the October Stock Market Crash of 1987 when the market fell by more than 500 points in one day: http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Black_Monday_%281987%29 give me $100 to put into a growing company with a profitable, understandable and focused business, excellent management and prospects, but I will pay 20 times owner earnings for it, would you think about it? But what if I said, “The catch is that you must not sell a single share for 25 years or until 2013. Also, during this time there will be massive stock market booms and busts, a huge credit crisis, wars and uncertainty, There will be periods of 50% to 60% declines in the stock market.  Can you sit tight?

Stay tuned to what happened and is happening….