शैडोइंग अभ्यास: Warren Buffett & Charlie Munger: Diversification - वीडियो के साथ अंग्रेजी बोलना सीखें

अभ्यास मोड चुनें

हर मोड पूरी स्क्रीन का अभ्यास कक्ष खोलता है।

82 वाक्य

यदि वाक्य बहुत छोटे या लंबे हों, तो समायोजित करने के लिए Edit पर क्लिक करें।

My name is Mark Hake.

I'm from Scottsdale, Arizona, and I am very interested in your policies on diversification and also how you concentrate your investments.

And I've studied your annual reports going back a good number of years, and there's been years where you had a lot of stocks in your marketable,

equitable securities portfolio, and there was one year where you only had three in 1987.

So I have two questions.

Given the number of stocks that you have in the portfolio now, what does that imply about your view of the market in terms of is it fairly valued,

that kind of idea?

And second of all, it seems that whenever you take a new investment, you never take less than about 5 %

and never more than about 10 % of the total portfolio with that new position.

And I wanted to see if I'm correct about that.

Yeah, well, on the second point, that really isn't correct.

We have positions which you don't even see because we only listed the ones above $600 million in the last report, and obviously those are all smaller positions.

Sometimes that's because they're smaller companies and we couldn't get that much money in.

Sometimes it's because the prices moved up after we bought them.

Sometimes it's because we may be selling the position down even.

But so we have no – there's nothing magic.

We like to put a lot of money in things that we feel strongly about.

And that gets back to the diversification question.

We think diversification, as practice generally, makes very little sense for anyone that knows what they're doing.

Diversification is a protection against ignorance.

I mean, if you want to make sure that nothing bad happens to you relative to the market, you own everything.

There's nothing wrong with that.

I mean, that is a perfectly sound approach for somebody who does not feel they know how to analyze businesses.

If you know how to analyze businesses and value businesses, it's crazy to own 50 stocks or 40 stocks or 30 stocks probably.

Because there aren't that many wonderful businesses that are understandable to a single human being in all likelihood.

And to have some super wonderful business and then put money in number 30

or 35 on your list of attractiveness and forego putting more money into number one just strikes Charlie and me as madness.

And it's conventional practice, and it may, you know, if all you have to achieve is average,

it may preserve your job.

But it's a confession, in our view, that you don't really understand the businesses that you own.

On a personal portfolio basis, I own one stock.

But it's a business I know.

And it leaves me very comfortable.

So, do I need to own 28 stocks in order to have proper diversification?

It would be nonsense.

And within Berkshire, I could pick out three of our businesses,

and I would be very happy if they were the only businesses we owned and I had all my money in Berkshire.

Now, I love the fact that we can find more than that and that we keep adding to it.

But three wonderful businesses is more than you need in this life to do very well.

And the average person isn't going to run into that.

I mean, if you look at how the fortunes were built in this country, they weren't built out of a portfolio of 50 companies.

They were built by someone who identified with a wonderful business.

Coca -Cola is a great example.

A lot of fortunes have been built on that.

And there aren't 50 Coca -Colas.

There aren't 20.

If there were, it would be fine.

We could all go out and diversify like crazy among

that group and get results that would be equal to owning the really wonderful one.

But you're not going to find it.

And the truth is you don't need it.

I mean,

if you have a really wonderful business is very well protected against the vicissitudes of the economy over time and competition.

I mean, you know, we're talking about businesses that are resistant to effective competition,

and three of those will be better than 100 average businesses.

And they'll be safer, incidentally.

I mean,

there is less risk in owning three easy -to -identify wonderful businesses than there is in owning 50 well -known big businesses.

And it's amazing what has been taught over the years in finance classes about that.

But I can assure you that I would rather pick...

If I had to bet the next 30 years on the fortunes of my family

that would be dependent upon the income from a given group of businesses, I would rather pick three businesses from those we own than own a diversified group of 50.

Charlie?

Yeah, what he's saying is that much of what is taught in modern corporate finance courses is twaddle.

Do you want to elaborate on that, Charlie?

You cannot believe this stuff.

I mean, it's a modern portfolio theory, and, yeah, it's...

It has no utility.

I mean, it will tell you how to do average, but, you know, I think anybody can figure out how to do average in fifth grade.

I mean, it's just not that difficult.

It's elaborate, and, you know, there's lots of little Greek letters and all kinds of things to make you feel that you're in the big leagues, but there is no value added.

I have great difficulty with it because I am something of a student of dementia, and I have...

I can ordinarily classify dementia on some theory structure of models, but the modern portfolio theory,

it involves a type of dementia I just can't even classify.

Something very strange is going on.

If you find three wonderful businesses in your life, you'll get very rich.

and and if you understand them bad things aren't going to happen to

that those three i mean

that that's the characteristic of it by the way maybe that's the reason there's

so much dementia

if you believe what warren said you could teach the whole course in about a week yeah

and the high priest wouldn't have any edge over the lay people and that that never sells well Right.

ऐप डाउनलोड करें

धाराप्रवाह बोलने के लिए ज़रूरी सब कुछ

AI उच्चारण स्कोरहर वाक्य का स्कोर

IPA अभ्यासहर ध्वनि में महारत

शब्दावलीअपना शब्द भंडार बनाएँ

शब्द गेमखेलते हुए सीखें

QR स्कैन करें

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

FOR YOU

अनुशंसित वीडियो

321 वाक्य

Exclusive Interview: Jeffrey Sachs on China’s Global Role: Growth, Balance, and Cooperation

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

196 वाक्य

Psychology of Polymaths: Why Having Multiple Interests Is an Unfair Advantage

Business EnglishUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

इस पाठ की शब्दावली और बोलने के सुझाव

इस वीडियो में शैडोइंग के लिए 82 वाक्य और 1039 शब्द हैं। बोला गया हिस्सा 7:12 लंबा है। वक्ता लगभग 144 शब्द प्रति मिनट की स्थिर गति से बोलता है, जो शैडोइंग के लिए आरामदायक है। 86% शब्द अंग्रेज़ी के 3,000 सबसे आम शब्दों में से हैं; बाकी शब्द अभ्यास से पहले देख लेना अच्छा रहेगा।

इस वीडियो की मुख्य शब्दावली

वीडियो के 13 सीखने लायक शब्द, उच्चारण और अर्थ के साथ:

शब्द	उच्चारण	अर्थ
dementia संज्ञा	/dɪˈmɛnʃə/	मनोभ्रंश
elaborate क्रिया	/ɪˈlæb.ə.ɹeɪt/	विस्तृत
analyze क्रिया	/ˈæn.əˌlaɪz/	विश्लेषण करना
relative संज्ञा	/ˈɹɛl.ə.tɪv/	रिश्तेदार, नातेदार
difficulty संज्ञा	/ˈdɪfɪkəlti/	कठिनाई, मुसीबत
priest संज्ञा	/ˈpɹiːst/	याजक, पादरी
dependent विशेषण	/dɪˈpɛndənt/	आश्रित, निर्भर
conventional विशेषण	/kənˈvɛnʃənl̩/	पारंपरिक, परंपरागत
leaf संज्ञा	/lif/	पत्ता, पत्ती
nonsense संज्ञा	/ˈnɒn.səns/	बकवास
ignorance संज्ञा	/ˈɪɡ.nɚ.əns/	अज्ञान, अविद्या
madness संज्ञा	/ˈmæd.nəs/	पागलपन
confession संज्ञा	/kənˈfɛʃən/	इक़रार, संस्वीकृति

वीडियो में आने वाली फ़्रेज़ल वर्ब

शब्द	अर्थ
go out क्रिया	बाहर निकलना, निकलना
pick out क्रिया	बाछना

इस वीडियो का व्याकरण

वक्ता जिन संरचनाओं का सबसे अधिक प्रयोग करता है, वीडियो के असली शब्दों के साथ:

संरचना	वीडियो में
शर्त वाले वाक्य if + उपवाक्य, will/would + क्रिया — शर्त और उसका नतीजा	If there were, it would be
Passive voice be + past participle — ज़ोर इस पर कि क्या होता है, न कि कौन करता है	were built · have been built · has been taught
Present perfect have/has + past participle — बीता हुआ काम जिसका असर अभी भी है	I've studied · have been built · has been taught
Relative clauses who / which + उपवाक्य — व्यक्ति या वस्तु के बारे में अतिरिक्त जानकारी	somebody who does · someone who identified

ध्यान देने योग्य उच्चारण

वक्ता 23 बार संक्षिप्त रूपों का प्रयोग करता है, जैसे aren't, don't, I'm। इन्हें वैसे ही छोटा बोलें जैसा आप सुनते हैं।

“sh” और “zh” की ध्वनियाँ: dementia /dɪˈmɛnʃə/, conventional /kənˈvɛnʃənl̩/, assure /əˈʃʊɹ/, confession /kənˈfɛʃən/, diversification /daɪˌvɜːsɪfɪˈkeɪʃən/
लंबे शब्द — बलाघात सही रखें: portfolio /pɔːtˈfəʊ.liˌəʊ/, elaborate /ɪˈlæb.ə.ɹeɪt/, difficulty /ˈdɪfɪkəlti/, utility /juːˈtɪlɪti/, characteristic /ˌkæɹ(ə)ktəˈɹɪstɪk/

इस वीडियो से अभ्यास कैसे करें

पहले बिना बोले पूरा वीडियो एक बार सुनें और जो शब्द नहीं आते उन्हें लिख लें।
सामान्य गति पर एक-एक वाक्य की शैडोइंग करें और हर वाक्य तब तक दोहराएँ जब तक आपकी लय वक्ता से न मिल जाए।
अपनी आवाज़ रिकॉर्ड करें और मूल से तुलना करें, ख़ासकर dementia, elaborate, analyze जैसे शब्दों पर ध्यान दें।

शैडोइंग तकनीक क्या है?

शैडोइंग (Shadowing) एक विज्ञान-समर्थित भाषा सीखने की तकनीक है जो मूल रूप से पेशेवर दुभाषिया प्रशिक्षण के लिए विकसित की गई थी। विधि सरल लेकिन शक्तिशाली है: आप मूल अंग्रेज़ी ऑडियो सुनते हैं और तुरंत इसे ज़ोर से दोहराते हैं — जैसे वक्ता की छाया 1-2 सेकंड की देरी से। शोध से पता चलता है कि यह उच्चारण सटीकता, स्वर, लय, जुड़ी हुई ध्वनियाँ, सुनने की समझ और बोलने की प्रवाहशीलता में काफ़ी सुधार करता है।

शैडोइंग तकनीक: पूरी चरण-दर-चरण गाइड पढ़ें →

शैडोइंग अभ्यास: Warren Buffett & Charlie Munger: Diversification - वीडियो के साथ अंग्रेजी बोलना सीखें

अभ्यास मोड चुनें

ऐप डाउनलोड करें

Watch CNBC's full interview with Berkshire Hathaway Chair Warren Buffett

Quick Study: How Venture Capitalists Make Decisions

No, Really — Is A.I. a Bubble? | The Ezra Klein Show

Warren Buffett: How To Analyze a BALANCE SHEET

Jack Ma: Love is Important In Business | Davos 2018

How The Economic Machine Works by Ray Dalio

"Focusing is about saying no" - Steve Jobs (WWDC'97)

How Long Can the Fed Hold On?

$15 Trillion Money-Making Machine | How BlackRock Became Too Powerful to Ignore

Mark Zuckerberg: “Alex, are you sure this is going to work?”