# Taking Off with Cost-Free-Ness

In Buddhism, …

…there’s a saying to the effect, …

…that as the sun rises, …

…the radiance of others stars, …

… to the observer’s eye, …

… pales, …

…into insignificance.

We’re not going to leave an observation like that hanging.

We’re going to extrude it.

When we make a well-managed underlying cost-free, …

…what are the implications, …

… on existing holdings, …

…which are not cost-free yet?

Well, over a large period of time, …

…their comparative impact on the folio…

…will start paling, … into insignificance.

Let’s say we hold x value of cost-free-ness in an underlying.

Rest of the folio’s value is y, with y = let’s say 30x.

Here’s one way go looking at it.

What’s the maximum loss you can incur on your y?

Not going to happen, but it’s 30x.

What’s the maximum gain that can occur on your cost-free holding?

Uncapped. Yeah.

At 15% per annum compounded, which is reasonable to expect for a well-managed company with many other tick-marks, if you hold your cost-free holding for 25 years, it’s value would be ~ 33x (= 1.15^25).

So, what have you done?

You’ve paled your other portion of the folio into “insignificance”, with just one created pocket of cost-free-ness.

Do ponder, what the implications would be, if you were to create a). 10 such pockets, or b). 20, or c). 50, or perhaps even d). 100 such pockets of cost-free-ness?

Can you even imagine where you would then be in 25 years?

a). With 10x of cost-free-ness, you would be at ~ 329x.

b). With 20x of cost-free-ness, you would be at ~ 658x.

c). With 50x of cost-free-ness, you would be at ~ 1645x.

d). With 100x of cost-free-ness, you would be at ~ 3292x.

Now substitute the value of x here.

Arbitrarily, let’s take x = 1.

One rupee.

One thousand.

One lakh.

One million.

One Cr.

Take what suits you.

See where you started from, and see where you’ve then come.

For example, starting with 1L of cost-free-ness, we land up at ~ 16.5 Cr in 25 years for 50 pockets.

Let’s say I have a target of creating 1 million worth of cost-free-ness in 50 pockets.

Where do I stand in 25 years?

At ~ 165 Cr (50 *1Million *1.15^25).

Alone the after tax dividend emerging from this stream would be > 2.5 Cr per annum.

Any takers?

🙂 (Happy Cost-free-ness!)

# Supremacy of Cost-Free-Ness makes itself felt in Equity alone

The impact of cost-free-ness stretches across all asset-classes…

… that are long-term-holdable.

Equity, Gold, Real-Estate, etc., …

… with perhaps bonds being a question mark with regard to applicability.

Why is cost-free-ness not that valid a concept for short-term-holds?

That’s because multibagger appreciation of a short-term-hold is not realistically expectable.

Then, with gold and real-estate, there are certain nuances, which need to be mentioned.

Gold doesn’t adjust itself for inflation. The 100-year appreciation in Gold is 1% per annum compounded, adjusted for inflation. We can make some Gold cost-free, and then hold the cost-free Gold for the long-term. However, to expect it to burgeon into a multibagger is too much. There’s no human capital behind Gold, no intelligently thinking minds. Also, Gold is commodity-cyclic in nature. Forget about all these technical arguments. Sheer 100-year History has taught us not to think in multibagger terms with regard to Gold. Let’s say we held it for the touted 100 years. Well, then, 1 x 1.01 ^ 100 = 2.70. We’re then holding a 2.7 bagger after 100 years. Safety risk too. Naehhh, not interested.

What’s the deal with real-estate? No human capital behind it, again. Thus, the asset-class doesn’t auto-adjust for inflation. Also, we’re not taking any cash-component into consideration. What does that make real-estate behave like, in the long-term, in a regime like now? Perhaps like a glorified fixed-deposit. Or, even, perhaps, like a high single-digit yielding bond. Now minus inflation. Hmmm, after the math, real-estate becomes an asset-class that yields 2-3% per annum compounded, adjusted for inflation, let’s say 2.5%. Minus the half percent for its management (which is a hassle, btw). Well, then, 1 x 1.02 ^ 100 = 7.24. We’re left holding a 7-bagger after 100 years. With hassle in the equation, 100 years is too much effort for a 7-bagger. Not interested either.

Now let’s look at Equity. Human capital is behind it. Equity is hassle-free with regard to its management. Equity auto-adjusts for inflation. All Equity that ever existed, including companies that have gone bust, has shown a return of 6% per annum compounded, adjusted for inflation. Taking companies out that don’t exist anymore, Equity has given a return of 11% per annum compounded, adjusted for inflation, over the long-term. Intelligently chosen Equity, with proper due diligence, is extremely capable of giving a return in the range of 15% per annum compounded, adjusted for inflation, in the long-term. Let’s do the numbers. 1 x 1.06 ^ 100 = 339.30; 1 x 1.11 ^ 100 = 34,064.28; 1 x 1.15 ^ 100 = 11,74,313.45.

These numbers don’t need crunching.

It’s pretty clear, that the supremacy of cost-free-ness makes itself felt in long-term held, cost-free Equity.

I wish for you happy, long-term cost-free-ness!

🙂

# Cost-Free-Ness doesn’t come for Free

Yes.

You read that right.

If you thought I was revealing some kind of holy grail secrets here, which you could copy-paste for yourself without having to do anything else, do please allow me to fine-tune your thinking.

First-up, true, cost-free-ness is a holy grail of sorts, I do feel.

However, it’s hot to handle.

As discussed previously, our greed comes in the way. We don’t unlearn our greed just by reading a blog-post.

Then, when I speak about cost-free-ness, I stand upon the shoulders of giants. I have always maintained that in all my writing. One struggles, and comes upon…

…gems.

Others have struggled and stumbled upon these gems before, similarly. Some have documented their experiences for us to learn from.

That’s the way of life. One builds upon the edifice that one’s peers have left standing.

As long as one gives freely of oneself, life moves on comfortable trajectories, and the Universe rushes to protect and encourage such giving.

Lastly, you’ll also have to struggle when you go about establishing cost-free-ness for yourself.

Make good causes, so that difficult Karma doesn’t spoil your party by forcing you to liquidate your cost-free-ness, in order for you to have to finance your way out of such Karma.

Then, complete market rewiring required by the brain takes about a decade and a half of putting one’s money on the line. That’s been my my experience. One needs to rewire one’s mentality to be able to create cost-free-ness in any market situation. Like I said, it’s going to cost you.

This freebie material here is just to get you started on your path.

Besides, I do owe a debt towards all the free material I myself use on the internet, so this is my giveback in lieu of that.

I wish for you happy, lucrative and cost-free investing!

🙂

# However, Cost-Free-Ness does afford us full Freedom of Focus

Markets crashing?

Is one cost-free?

Yes?

No worries.

Markets can crash.

Technically speaking, one’s money is not on the line anymore.

This makes crashing markets a good thing for one.

Why?

Because of the lucrative entries coming up ahead, that’s why.

Is one able to focus?

You bet.

Somehow, magically, one’s focus is not on one’s existing Equity in the markets. Anymore.

Why?

Because it’s cost-free.

Earlier, falling markets would hamper full focus, which was supposed to be on fresh and lucrative entries coming one’s way.

With great difficulty, and lots of practice, one did manage to shift one’s gaze though, in the end.

Now, with complete cost-free-ness in the picture, focus is a breeze.

Yeah, one is fully focused on entry levels that might crop up in the stocks one is looking to enter into.

Without appropriate entry levels, one’s funds aren’t going to move. Period.

For that, one needs focus.

And it’s there.