Further Proof That College Is A Waste Of Time And Money

Modest upbringing. Zero excuses.

 

This week saw the retirement of the kind of American whom Horatio Alger, Jr. used to write books about. Today, that same American could get blamed for everything from childhood obesity to animal cruelty to profiteering off the backs of the downtrodden to increasing income disparity. Here at Control Your Cash, we’ve chosen to find him remarkable. And a shining example of what do to after high school.

Jim Skinner was one of America’s foremost CEOs. The 67-year old spent 8 years as McDonald’s’ chief executive officer.

Big deal. He took the reins of a company that was already a titan. Any business school graduate could do that.

First, it’s not easy to take over a company that’s supposed to thrive. The downside of such a position vastly outweighs the upside, and if you don’t believe that ask John Sculley (Apple CEO, 1983-1993), Roger Enrico (PepsiCo CEO, 1996-2001), or Antonio Perez (Eastman Kodak CEO, 2005-whenever this bankruptcy finally goes through.) Heck, even Apple’s current CEO Tim Cook is 0-for-1 in presiding over groundbreaking product launches since Steve Jobs’s death. (If there’s an appreciable difference between the resolutions of the iPad 2 and its successor, we can’t see it.)

Phil Jackson coached a record 11 NBA championship teams, and was similarly disregarded for the allegedly failsafe situations he was placed in. If you think it’s easy to coach capricious superstars such as Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant – guys who take sadistic pleasure in exposing and exploiting the weaknesses of their teammates, never mind their opponents – go ask the coaches who were placed in even better situations, the coaches who replaced Jackson himself. The complete list includes Tim Floyd, who finished his career more games under .500 than any coach in NBA history; Rudy Tomjanovich, who lasted barely half a season before quitting; and Mike Brown, who’s presiding over open mutiny as we speak.

Don Thompson, Skinner’s replacement, will need all the help he can get.*

Skinner never graduated from college. He spent 2 years taking night courses at something called Roosevelt University, a private school in Chicago. Its most famous living alumni are former Black Panther Bobby Rush and the guy who plays keyboards for Chicago, the band.

Skinner wasn’t on a regular college schedule, seeing as he had enlisted in the Navy as a teenager. His Navy tenure lasted a decade, and included stints in Vietnam. He saw combat. And returned home at 27 to…flip burgers.

Restaurant management trainee. The kind of job that lots of people scoff at, down to and including many of the baristas and sales associates who make less money per hour than fast-food restaurant managers do. We’re guessing the discipline and responsibility Skinner learned in the Navy meant more to the bosses he answered to on the way up than did anything he learned during his brief tertiary education.

As Skinner himself put it, concerning succeeding generations of management trainees:

They know they have to perform. You don’t get a bye because you walked in off the street and went to Harvard. (New York Times)

Skinner expanded the product line, keeping busybody interest groups and irresponsible parents happy with apples and milk. He slowed down the company’s fanatical growth, concentrating more on expanding profits at the existing stores than colonizing new territories. (Ray Kroc famously said he was in the real estate business, not the food business. Perhaps, but that real estate needs to cash flow.) Skinner even managed to fuse “gourmet coffee” with “McDonald’s” in the public consciousness without anyone laughing.

McDonald’s’ stock price was less than $30 when Skinner took over. Today it’s flirting with $100, and its financial statements are almost perfect: fat profit margins, relatively little debt, growing retained earnings, and tons and tons of treasury stock.

Including everything, Skinner earns about $10 million a year. He still sits on the boards of Walgreens and of Illinois Tool Works. And he owes it all to not spending 4 extra years stagnating in a classroom.

Some of our slower readers will doubtless take the headline literally. Fortunately we no longer have to read their ignorant comments (or anyone else’s, ignorant or otherwise.) Sure, college is great if you use it for its sole purpose – leveraging those 4 (or however many) years so you can make even more money in the subsequent years. Getting a humanities degree isn’t going to do it.

How gauche and philistine of you. College is about expanding one’s horizons, learning for learning’s sake, maturing in an unfamiliar environment, etc.

1. Bullcrap. For most students, college is about getting drunk, sleeping in late, terrorizing the weaker kids in the dorm, wearing togas, vomiting, asking for extensions, making awkward sexual advances, drinking some more, smoking pot, staying up way too late, drinking, vomiting again; and for the exceptionally unattractive and underworked kids, protesting everything from nuclear power plants to U.S. involvement on Johnston Atoll.

2. Fine. It’s all those things you mentioned. You’re right and we’re wrong. College still costs money, in case you thought the millions of people who complain about and default on their loans are just doing so for show. An investment needs some hope of return. Otherwise it’s just an expense.

You’re saving for your own kid’s college tuition right now, aren’t you? Or bankrolling a kid who’s already there, taking English and psychology classes. The Navy doesn’t just give you a better education than Yale’s women, gender, and sexuality program does, it’s also free. Trade school isn’t free, but it’s a lot closer to free than it is to college tuition.

Everyone talks about the benefits of college and dismisses the costs, even though the latter are tangible and the former are not. Jim Skinner knew from an early age to cut through the nonsense. How many of the rest of us are smart enough to do so?

*We kid. Thompson will be fine, even though he went to college. Why? He has an electrical engineering degree (from Purdue.)

This article is featured in:

**The Best of Money Blog Carnival #150-The Easter Edition**

IPOs for Beginners

 

You mean a site where people give their opinions about restaurants is worth billions? Sure, sounds good to me.

This article appears in drastically different form on Investopedia.  

“IPOs for beginners”. As a concept, that’s similar to “International Space Station repair for beginners.” No less an authority than Benjamin Graham, author of the definitive investing guide The Intelligent Investor and mentor of Warren Buffett, believed that initial public offerings were way beyond the neophyte investor’s level. He was largely right, but why?

Who wouldn’t want to be among the first to enjoy a promising new stock, one that no one else at the cocktail party had the privilege of investing in as early as you did? IPOs are tempting, if you’re the kind of person who loves shiny new toys and the general feeling of exclusivity that accompanies them. But at least you can physically show off your iPad 3 or PlayStation Vita and receive tangible oohs and aahs. That’s considerably different than telling everyone you meet that you hopped aboard the Groupon bandwagon when the rest of the world was still showing their IDs at the ticket counter. There’s little that’s conspicuous about a particular new entry in an online brokerage account.

Graham thought IPOs were only for seasoned investors for several reasons, one of them being that the previous private owners are often looking to cash out much of their holdings. The underwriters set the price of the typical IPO at a premium specifically to take advantage of a seller’s market. With limited supply, and highly publicized if not unlimited demand, what would you expect to happen to the price of a stock when it’s first offered to the public? (It’s a rhetorical question, and if you really need the answer, you shouldn’t even be considering investing in an IPO.)

Graham died a quarter-century before the original dot-com bust, and everything that’s happened since would only reinforce his position regarding who should invest in an IPO. Almost by definition, most initial public offerings are of companies that haven’t been around a long time. Lately, the companies haven’t even needed healthy records of revenue growth and profit, either. But with a proliferation of aggressive venture capital firms looking to back winners, and the financial media having ever more reach among amateurs looking for an exciting place to put their money, one thing is certain: the next Pets.com or eToys won’t be hurting for investors on its opening trading day.

Last November, Groupon “finally” went public after endless rumors. (“Finally” is in quotes because while most of Groupon’s existence as a private company was spent anticipating the IPO, that existence was only three years. The company was founded in November of 2008.) The company was on top of the collective consciousness as the hottest of all possible IPOs, at least until the day that Facebook goes public. Groupon acknowledged in SEC documents that it was on pace to lose half a billion dollars a year, and investors still kept coming. Once the institutional investors got paid, and GRPN finally became available to the ordinary public, the stock had fallen from its introductory price. A scant 4 months later, Groupon stock has lost almost a third of its value, which is fairly impressive seeing as earnings are about a negative dollar per share. Groupon’s never reached its IPO level after a couple of weeks of trading, and might never again.

Of course, all IPOs aren’t Groupon. VISA went public after decades of renown and profit, but even its IPO wasn’t available to anyone but institutional investors at the start. The same will go for Facebook. The company’s primary stockholders will profit the most – the very day it goes public, in fact. The initial lenders will get on their knees and thank the God of their parents’ choice. After a few more iterations, the most anticipated stock in recent history will trickle down to average investors at a price that could be a bargain, or could be a local maximum. There are more prudent ways to invest.

Take an example of a company whose stock is about as far removed from an IPO as possible – United Technologies. The Hartford-based aircraft engine and elevator conglomerate has been a component of the Dow since before World War II, and probably hasn’t been above the fold in any story in The Wall Street Journal since then. Most people have never heard of United Technologies, and the company brass prefers it that way, thank you very much. Nothing, not even a fire alarm, will clear out a room faster than telling people you recently went long on UTX stock. But an interesting thing about United Technologies’ performance is that you can examine its price movement over almost any arbitrary period,  and the graph will consistently move up and to the right.

Investing should have one solitary, overarching objective – to make money. Getting excited about an IPO for its own sake isn’t investing so much as it is flamboyance. The people who got in on Google’s ground floor, you can count on both hands. It’s tempting to think that you could have been one of them, or that you could be in a similar position when the next IPO comes available, but building wealth doesn’t have to be that capricious. Find an established, undervalued, temporarily wounded stock, and you’re far more likely to turn a long-term profit than someone starry-eyed over the latest company to be listed publicly.

This article is featured in:

**The Carnival of Personal Finance-Invest in Yourself Edition (Editor’s pick)**

**Totally Money Blog Carnival #60**