Thursday, June 30, 2011

Carrera profesional: lo que nadie te dijo al graduarte.


Si tu, como yo, formas parte de ese afortunado 3% de la población mexicana que cuenta con un título universitario, seguramente entenderás el por qué de escribir este artículo y quizás quieras compartir con nosotros tu experiencia.

Cada año, miles de jóvenes inician en México sus estudios universitarios. La promesa de un mejor empleo, la oportunidad de desarrollar nuevas habilidades y destrezas, el hambre de aprender, y muchas otras aspiraciones, impulsan decididamente nuestra convicción por estudiar y convertirnos en profesionistas.

¡Y vaya que la motivación es necesaria! La vida de los estudiantes universitarios, en México y en el resto del mundo, no es nada fácil. Las muchas responsabilidades académicas, familiares y sociales saturan nuestra agenda. Sin importar condición social, los jóvenes estudiantes se ven obligados a dividir su tiempo entre las clases, los amigos, los proyectos e incluso la práctica de algún deporte, las actividades extracurriculares y hasta el trabajo. En esos años donde la energía y el entusiasmo parecen sobrarnos, afloran también muchas dudas sobre nuestro futuro, sobre nuestras convicciones, deseos y sueños.

Lo más difícil de todo esto es que en el proceso de estudiar nos vemos “forzados” a definir los roles y los alcances que deseamos tener como individuos en sociedad. ¿Ser abogado como mi padre? ¿administrador? ¿doctor? ¿mercadólogo? ¿ingeniero? ¿economista? y ¿qué quiero hacer con mi vida? Al final, con la poca experiencia de nuestros “veintitantos” años de edad, tomamos una de las decisiones más importantes: elegir nuestra profesión.

Quizás estés satisfecho con lo que estudiaste, quizás no. Nadie dijo que no podrías equivocarte y tampoco eres infalible. Pero, hay muchas otras cosas –además de la elección de carrera- que muchos de los universitarios recién graduados ignoran y que todas, ó al menos la gran mayoría de las escuelas, fallan en comunicar con tiempo a sus alumnos. Por ejemplo, las universidades fallan en preparar a sus alumnos para afrontar la ansiedad y el estrés de los primeros años de vida laboral. Los maestros ignoran en sus temarios la imperante necesidad de desarrollar habilidades políticas e incluso sociales en sus alumnos a fin de que éstos estén preparados para afrontar los retos y la carga emocional que todo trabajo conlleva.

Y es que, al graduarnos nos sentimos preparados para afrontar el mundo –y hasta cierto punto lo estamos- pero pasamos por alto los retos y el desgaste con el que la competencia laboral nos esperan. No se trata de sentirnos desesperanzados, la realidad es que los graduados de universidades están bien preparados para el afrontar sus retos, pero esto no quiere decir que no podamos estar mejor preparados.

Nadie te dijo al terminar la universidad que en el mundo de hoy no basta con tener un título universitario y buenas credenciales académicas. La competencia es tan feroz, que es importante que cuentes con al menos un poco de experiencia profesional. Las estadísticas varían de un lugar a otro, pero menos del 10% de los jóvenes recién graduados que aplican a un trabajo, cuentan con algo de experiencia laboral. Tristemente, las empresas se inclinan a contratar a quienes cuentan con experiencia pues esto les da una mayor referencia sobre el candidato y reduce, significativamente, cualquier curva de aprendizaje. ¡Qué importante es trabajar mientras se estudia!

Por otro lado, nadie te dijo que la etapa de mayor estrés en la vida de cualquier ser humano es entre los 25 y los 30 años. Estudios de Universidades en EUA (Duke, UCLA y Berkeley) han comprobado que durante éste periodo de nuestras vidas, los seres humanos nos sometemos a importantes cambios profesionales, personales y familiares que nos generan gran estrés y ansiedad. Que diferente sería esto si las universidades y los propios estudiantes, estuviéramos conscientes de esto y trabajáramos -desde nuestros primeros años universitarios- en desarrollar habilidades y destrezas que nos fortalecieran mentalmente.

De cualquier forma, no te sientas solo ¡es normal sentirte estresado y ansioso en tus primeros trabajos! Con el tiempo tendrás las cosas más claras. Trabaja duro y sé constante.

Si pudiera darte algún consejo, quisiera compartirte lo siguiente:

1. Trabaja mientras estudias. Busca un trabajo de medio tiempo o algún internship de verano. No pierdas la valiosa oportunidad de ganar experiencia profesional mientras estudias, puede hacer toda la diferencia cuando busques tu primer empleo de tiempo completo.
2. No tengas miedo y no te impacientes. La transición de ser estudiante a ser profesionista de tiempo completo es siempre compleja, lo importante es que tengas paciencia, trabajes duro y comiences a establecerte metas a corto, mediano y largo plazo. La oportunidad que estás esperando llegará y tienes que estar preparado para tomarla.
3. Nunca dejes de aprender. Una de las habilidades más importantes para desarrollar una carrera profesional exitosa, es tu capacidad para aprender. Para muchos, salir de la universidad puede significar el final del aprendizaje ¡todo lo contrario! Mantente siempre actualizado, regresa a la escuela para estudiar un postgrado y nunca pierdas actualidad de tu profesión.

Nadie nos enseña a manejar nuestra carrera profesional, pero podemos y debemos buscar ayuda de quienes ya han pasado por nuestra situación. Nadie nos dijo que nuestra incorporación al mundo laboral sería tan compleja, pero nunca es demasiado tarde para tomar las riendas de nuestra carrera y de nuestra vida.

¿Cuál fue tu experiencia como graduado?

Thursday, June 9, 2011

Cena con Warren Buffett



La puja por cenar y pasar unas horas en Nueva York con el tercer hombre más rico del mundo según Forbes, el multimillonario inversor Warren Buffett, alcanzó hoy los dos millones de dólares en la página de subastas por internet eBay tan solo un día después de haber comenzado.


La subasta, que comenzó el domingo por la tarde y terminará este viernes, es organizada cada año por el presidente y consejero delegado de Berkshire Hathaway para recaudar fondos en favor de la organización benéfica Glide, con sede en San Francisco (California), y que destina el dinero logrado en favor de alimentación y ayuda a personas indigentes.


El año pasado esta puja terminó con un precio de martillo de 2,6 millones de dólares, y si normalmente en los primeros días de la subasta las ofertas rondan los 200.000 dólares, este año esa cifra se ha elevado en menos de 48 horas -y con tan solo 6 ofertas por el momento- hasta 2.000.111 dólares.


La desorbitada cifra demuestra la euforia que despierta entre muchos la posibilidad de pasar unas horas junto al tercer hombre más rico del mundo, que según Forbes tiene una fortuna de unos 50.000 millones de dólares, y que es además conocido como el "Oráculo de Omaha" por sus certeras previsiones y su habilidad para detectar las más rentables inversiones.


El mayor postor de esta puja tendrá la oportunidad de cenar en un exclusivo restaurante de carnes de Manhattan junto a Buffett, previsiblemente la semana que viene, en la que podrán charlar de cualquier tema con la excepción de las inversiones que tiene en mente realizar el presidente de Berkshire Hathaway.


El millonario inversor de 80 años comenzó a organizar esta cena en 2000, cuando su mujer le presentó al reverendo Cecil Williams, fundador de Glide, y con ella reafirma su labor filantrópica, que le ha llevado a afirmar que más del 99 % de su patrimonio irá a parar a causas filantrópicas a lo largo de su vida o cuando muera.


© EFE 2011. Está expresamente prohibida la redistribución y la redifusión de todo o parte de los contenidos de los servicios de Efe, sin previo y expreso consentimiento de la Agencia EFE S.A.

Friday, April 29, 2011

Berkshire Hathaway Annual Shareholder Meeting Info




If your one of those lucky investors that will take part in Berkshire's 2011 annual meeting, this information might come handy for you:




On the other hand, if you are one of those unlucky investors/fans/disciples/curious that will not participate in what many investors have denominated to be "The Woodstock of Capitalism", but you still want to know what is going on during Berkshire's weekend, these links might come handy for you:







Let the Berkshire Annual Meeting begin!

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Berkshire Hathaway: "Sokol violated standards"

Wall Street Journal

by Erik Holm



The audit committee of the board of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said its investigation of stock purchases by David Sokol showed the former executive violated company policies and concluded he misled senior management about the investments.


Mr. Sokol, who bought shares of a chemicals company shortly before recommending that Berkshire acquire the company outright, may face legal action from the Berkshire board, according to a report prepared by the audit committee and released by Berkshire Wednesday.


The report examines in detail the disclosure Sokol made to Berkshire Chairman Warren Buffett about his investment in the company, Lubrizol Corp. Mr. Buffett had said in a statement announcing Mr. Sokol's resignation in March that Mr. Sokol had disclosed that he owned shares in the company, but Mr. Buffett didn't ask for details about the date and time of his purchase.


Mr. Buffett said in March that Mr. Sokol, 54 years old, bought $10 million in shares of Lubrizol about a week before he suggested it to Mr. Buffett. Prior to his purchases, Mr. Sokol met investment bankers representing Lubrizol and asked them to communicate Berkshire's possible interest in a takeover to the company's management. Berkshire's $9 billion deal to acquire Lubrizol in March boosted the value of Mr. Sokol's stake by $3 million.


Mr. Sokol's "purchases of Lubrizol shares while serving as a representative of Berkshire Hathaway in connection with a possible business combination with Lubrizol violated company policies, including Berkshire Hathaway's Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and its Insider Trading Policies and Procedures," the audit committee wrote in its report.


"His misleadingly incomplete disclosures to Berkshire Hathaway senior management concerning those purchases violated the duty of candor he owed the Company," the committee added.
Mr. Sokol's remarks "did not satisfy the duty of full disclosure inherent in the Berkshire Hathaway policies and mandated by state law," the report concluded.


"His remark to Mr. Buffett in January, revealing only that he owned some Lubrizol stock, did not tell Mr. Buffett what he needed to know. … [I]ts effect was to mislead: it implied that Mr. Sokol owned the stock before he began considering Lubrizol as an acquisition candidate, when the truth was the reverse."


Mr. Sokol had long been considered a leading candidate to replace Mr. Buffett as Berkshire's next chief executive.


Mr. Sokol has said the disclosure of the purchases and his resignation were unrelated, that he wasn't a decision maker on the Lubrizol purchase and that he did nothing wrong.
He couldn't immediately be reached on Wednesday.

Wednesday, March 30, 2011

David Sokol resigns to Berkshire Hathaway


Wall Street Journal

By Serena NG and Erik Holm


David Sokol, widely seen as the leading contender to succeed billionaire Warren Buffett at the helm of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., resigned unexpectedly amid surprising revelations about his personal stock trading.

In an unusual and personal announcement, Mr. Buffett said the resignation followed revelations that Mr. Sokol had purchased shares of a company that Berkshire recently bought, Lubrizol Corp., at the initial suggestion of Mr. Sokol.


Mr. Buffett said Mr. Sokol, 54 years old, had bought roughly $10 million in shares of the chemicals maker in January, before Berkshire reached a $9 billion deal to acquire the company. Berkshire's purchase price of $135 per share meant that Mr. Sokol's stake rose $3 million in value.

Mr. Buffett said he and Mr. Sokol didn't feel the Lubrizol purchases were "in any way unlawful." The Securities and Exchange Commission declined to comment.

The Berkshire chairman and chief executive said the purchases weren't a factor in Mr. Sokol's decision to leave. He said Mr. Sokol, in a March 28 resignation letter, cited his desire to spend more time on his family's investments.


The revelations throw into question Mr. Buffett's carefully crafted succession plan, one of America's most widely watched boardroom dramas. Berkshire has said it has identified four executives at the company who could replace him. Mr. Sokol has long been considered high on that short list.

The incident is also a potential black eye for Mr. Buffett, 80, who emphasizes character and integrity in his manager choices and who himself is known for his ethics. Shares of the conglomerate, one of the nation's biggest companies, declined in after-hours trading. The development comes amid questions about trading by senior members of corporate America.


This month, regulators alleged that Rajat Gupta, one of the nation's most widely respected corporate directors, shared inside information with hedge-fund king Raj Rajaratnam, an allegation both men deny.

Mr. Buffett said he had been aware Mr. Sokol owned stock in Lubrizol, but only found out about the timing and size of the trades on March 19—a few days after Berkshire agreed to buy Lubrizol at a 28% premium to its share price before the deal. In an interview Wednesday evening, Mr. Sokol said his resignation "had absolutely nothing to do" with Lubrizol, and said the company elected to disclose his trades before they appeared in a proxy statement in the coming weeks.

"This was 100% my decision," Mr. Sokol said. He said he had contemplated leaving Berkshire for the past three years and had told Mr. Buffett that he wanted to hand over management of the companies he ran "when the timing was right."


Mr. Sokol was chairman of Berkshire utility subsidiary MidAmerican Energy Holding Co. and chief executive of its fractional jet business NetJets Inc. He had identified Lubrizol as a potential acquisition for Berkshire late last year and took the early lead on the deal, which Mr. Buffett eventually closed, according to a recent company filing on the deal.

In his initial conversation with Mr. Buffett about the company, Mr. Sokol mentioned he owned stock in Lubrizol, Mr. Buffett said Wednesday. "It was a passing remark and I did not ask him about the date of his purchase or the extent of his holdings," he wrote.

Mr. Sokol brought the idea for buying Lubrizol to Mr. Buffett in mid-January. Just days earlier, on Jan. 5, 6 and 7, he bought 96,060 shares in the company. This followed trades of 2,300 Lubrizol shares Mr. Sokol had bought and sold in December, according to Mr. Buffett's announcement. Mr. Buffett said he learned of the extent of the stock purchases shortly before beginning a trip to Asia on March 19.

On Lubrizol, Mr. Sokol said he "had no inside information and no knowledge if Warren would be interested or not in the company" at the time he bought the shares and when he brought the company to Mr. Buffett's attention.


"There's nothing in there that's embarrassing," Mr. Sokol said, though he acknowledged "it would look bad 60 days later" if his stake in Lubrizol was disclosed in public filings and Berkshire hadn't said anything about it. "We wanted it all out." He said the analysis he did on Lubrizol was "done off public information."


Mr. Buffett, he said, didn't ask him about the stake he held and found out about its details only when Mr. Sokol submitted the information to Berkshire's general counsel, who was helping to prepare regulatory filings for the deal.

"I have been a CEO for 27 years in two companies, and my interest is in growing companies," he said, adding his goal is to build an entity of his own that's similar to Berkshire.


Securities lawyers debated whether Mr. Sokol's dealings could fall into a gray legal area. In broad terms, insider trading laws prohibit individuals from trading on shares based on material non-public information in violation of some duty of trust.

One key question, lawyers say, is whether Mr. Sokol knew that he would pitch a Lubrizol deal to Mr. Buffett, or even that he might do so, at the time he bought Lubrizol shares. If Mr. Sokol did know at that time, that could suggest he had material information at the time he bought the shares, because Mr. Sokol is a trusted Buffett lieutenant, lawyers said.

However, it could be harder to show that Mr. Sokol violated any duty to Berkshire Hathaway, because he told Mr. Buffett that he owned Lubrizol shares, the lawyers said. Scrutiny could more likely focus on whether Mr. Buffett made a mistake by not learning more about Mr. Sokol's Lubrizol stake when weighing a decision to pursue a deal.

Buffett’s Secret Deal Recipe


Dealpolitik: Exposing Warren Buffett’s Secret Deal Recipe

By Ronald Barusch


If KKR or TPG had called Lubrizol with a “Let’s Make a Deal” phone call, the board would have immediately formed an independent committee and hired independent financial advisors before pursuing it. If one of Lubrizol’s competitors had made the same call, it would likely have received a very strong message that the company is not for sale and they should go away. We used to characterize that kind of a message as “[expletive deleted] you; stronger message to follow.”

But when Berkshire called, according to the background section of Lubrizol’s preliminary proxy statement, everyone seemed to slobber all over himself to play the game the Berkshire way. No independent committee was created. The board even hired as a financial advisor the banker who brought Lubrizol to Berkshire’s attention. And a strange courtship began. How come? We will come back to that question in a moment.

First, let’s look at how strange this dance seems to be. If a rich guy called you saying he wanted to buy your house, what would be the first thing you would ask? I would ask “how much?” Well, apparently that kind of common sense doesn’t apply when Berkshire comes knocking at your door. Between December 17, when Lubrizol’s CEO first learned of Berkshire’s interest, and February 8, when the CEO met with Warren Buffett himself, no one asked Berkshire the simple question “how much?”

During that period, there were four formal and informal board meetings. During at least two of those meetings the board “engaged in an extensive and thorough discussion about Berkshire Hathaway’s possible interest.” No one seems to have wanted to ask Berkshire the big question. The board even asked management and its financial advisors to assess “the value that might be achieved through negotiations with Berkshire Hathaway.” But Berkshire was not asked the “how much?” question until the CEO met with Buffett on February 8.

There is little question that Berkshire received more favored treatment that another bidder would have. To some extent, that is understandable. Berkshire has an impressive balance sheet. But the favoritism toward Berkshire seems much deeper rooted than that. In the preliminary proxy statement it is signaled in code words that describe a meeting in mid-January between the CEO and David Sokol of Berkshire. The two of them “generally discussed the corporate cultures and philosophies” of both companies.

And in a meeting 10 days later when Sokol provided reassurance by saying Berkshire “would want Mr. Hambrick to continue to run the business.” The preliminary proxy repeatedly assures us that no employment terms were discussed. But of course they did not need to be. The Berkshire “culture” of retaining and rewarding existing management is well known and was obviously affirmed.

And, of course management does not have to completely rely on history and the soothing words of Berkshire executives. They have generous golden parachutes that will compensate executives with an aggregate of $100 million if they leave Lubrizol for “good reason” within three years of the Berkshire deal. That’s on top of the equity-based cash outs they will receive at the closing. More importantly, they know that, because of the “culture,” the bulk of those golden-parachute payments likely will be rolled into new employment agreements to compensate them nicely them for staying.

But of course no one wants to admit that Berkshire received favored status because of the “culture” issue. That is because it leads to this question: how does a deal with Berkshire differ from a leveraged buyout sponsored by a private equity fund?

Leveraged buyouts, which are frequently criticized because of the inherent self-interest of management, require much more procedural protections than the Lubrizol board decided would be appropriate for a Berkshire transaction. They typically involve independent committees, independent advisers, executive sessions and negotiations largely conducted by the committee. It is true that leverage is not a part of the Berkshire transaction and that distinguishes it from an LBO. But that is not why the procedural protections are invoked. The board needs those procedures because management may have a conflicting interest. And that is true whether management has a formal agreement with the private equity firm or not.

In that regard, as a practical matter, the possible conflicts for management are no different in a transaction with Berkshire than they would be in one with KKR. Berkshire and Buffett have just done a better job in perfecting a “brand.”

The Lubrizol board and its advisers seemed to have missed this issue entirely. In what may be a new world record, the proxy statement indicates that the lawyers advised the board at six separate board meetings of its fiduciary duties.

It is amazing that the potential conflict of management was either not identified or ignored. It may well be that the price is adequate and Berkshire may be composed of good people. Nevertheless, the independent directors should have done more to take control of the process.

(Note: the author owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway.)

Friday, March 18, 2011

Why Warren Buffett Just Spent $10 Billion


The Wall Street Journal

by Brett Arends


In other news on the markets this week, Warren Buffett quietly made an acquisition. A big one. Even by his standards.


The 80-year old investor put down $9.7 billion, or about a quarter of Berkshire Hathaway's entire cash pile, to buy Lubrizol Corporation, a specialty chemicals company based in Wickliffe, Ohio.


What does this mean for you? Warren Buffett's investment moves are usually worth a closer look, even if you're not one of his stockholders. After all, he's one of the most successful stock pickers ever. And it's never too late to practice your swing, even if your own stock portfolio is closer to $20,000 than, say, $20 billion.


A look through the company's financials reveals nine reasons Warren Buffett loves Lubrizol.


1. It has a lucrative niche.
Lubrizol's main business is making additives for fuel, which make engines run better and last longer. They are a small part of the cost of the fuel, but they are valuable to the end users and they are lucrative. Lubrizol's gross margins last year were a thumping 33%, up from 25% five years ago. The company's return on equity is 34%.


2. It has a wide moat.
Lubrizol has little trouble defending its business from competition. It has been around for 82 years – even longer than Mr. Buffett – and has built up a strong franchise. It is the market leader in the industry. And the fuel additives industry is technically advanced. Lubrizol owns a remarkable 1,600 patents and has 6,900 employees worldwide.


3. It's in a dull industry.
Nobody goes into the fuel additives business for the glamour. Venture capitalists are not throwing money after new fuel additives start-ups. Companies in the sector do not typically give away their products for free to gain market share, "eyeballs," "mind share" or the like. Indeed some of the existing players have been getting out – making life better for those who are left.

4. It has pricing power.
Mr. Buffett recently said "the single most important decision in evaluating a business is pricing power. If you've got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you've got a very good business." At a time of rising raw material costs, that's especially important. Lubrizol fits the bill. The company's own raw materials jumped 10% last year, but it was able to pass those costs on to its customers.


5. It's stable.
Sales fell 9% in 2009, but gross profits actually rose, from $1.1 billion to $1.5 billion. And the company says less than half of its revenues rely on boom-and-bust cyclical industries, such as construction and industrial production. Lubrizol had $2.7 billion in total liabilities at the end of last year – and $2.5 billion in cash and other current assets. Dividends have risen steadily, from $1.04 per share five years ago to $1.39 last year.


6. It benefits from overseas growth.
Two-thirds of last year's revenues came from outside the U.S.A. The company has 40% of its plant and equipment overseas. And that's rising. Last fall Lubrizol broke ground on a new factory in southern China, that will begin production in 2013. The company is a big beneficiary from economic growth in emerging markets. In countries like China, India and Brazil, hundreds of millions of people are moving into the middle class, buying cars, and driving them more. Every drive needs fuel, and every gallon of gas needs additives.


7. It has low unionization.
Just 4% of Lubrizol's U.S. employees are members of a union (although some overseas workers are also members of collective bargaining agreements). That's good for profits. Mr. Buffett may be a Democrat at nights and on weekends, but when he's at the office he's all business.
8. The stock was reasonably priced.
Even a great company can be a bad investment if you pay too much for it. In the case of Lubrizol, Mr. Buffett is paying $135 a share. That's less than 13 times last year's earnings, and 12 times forecasts for 2011. If you find a good company at a good price, who cares what "the market" is doing?


9. He likes the management.
Lubrizol chief executive James Hambrick has been with the company since 1973, when he started there as a co-operative education student. He's been CEO for seven years. "Lubrizol is exactly the sort of company with which we love to partner – the global leader in several market applications run by a talented CEO, James Hambrick," Mr. Buffett said when he announced the deal. "Our only instruction to James – just keep doing for us what you have done so successfully for your shareholders."